Internationals on Field Turf? Not Happening!

[The Ref]

Did I say all that.

[trueviking]

why would the pitch have to be 'crap' if it was real grass?....it is a stadium in a city of 5 million people in one of the richest countries in the world....why should we assume that it is impossible to maintain at least an average quality pitch...this isnt central america, its toronto...it isnt that difficult to maintain a field in a relatively low use stadium...commonwealth and swanguard do it...varsity did it....every high school in the country does it....why not our 'national soccer stadium'?

it doesnt matter if plastic provides a better surface (in your opinion)...if nobody is willing to play on it then it could be the best surface in the world but it would be worthless....an average grass field is better than the best plastic one.

[redhat]

Why field turf rather than grass?

It's very clear: cost. Even in a rich country & rich city (Toronto)

the costs are huge. I couldn't understand it myself initially,

until I found out the costs.

And as to why Brazil wouldn't play here, it's also the cost.

At the Pan Am Games in '99, no South American team was present as

they all wanted to be paid big $$$ (except for Uruguay, which sent its

U20 "B" team).

Besides, field turf isn't the old astro turf. As much as I like

real grass, I disliked the cow pasture field at Varsity Stadium in

October/November (WCQ 2001).

[Guest Jeffery S.]

Everyone agrees that a beautiful grass field is unbeatable.

It is not easy to maintain depending on weather conditions. But in the end if you have to replant or resod you can do so, you can adjust the grass to the weather and wear conditions as you learn about them (often it takes them a few years to figure out the organism). You can upgrade, and all of this is relatively inexpensive.

Take Field Turf or Fifa equivalent. It is much more expensive to start with. It should have a decent mid-term life. But it is also susceptible to being considered outdated a few years down the line, as quality if upgraded, meaning a new installation at the same cost, maybe close to a decade from now, maybe sooner.

Field Turf gives you the advantage of being able to regularly practice in your own field, with its dimensions, sightlines, light, which should be an advantage for the team, as opposed to not being able to practise on the main pitch to not wear it down.

If you want to bring in a major side and make money, Field Turf will not take away from that, as experience shows us that the stadium proposed for TO is too small to be profit-making on the big games. It is conceived to be mostly -over half, up to 70%, in there somewhere- full for the normal games. The exception day you want a Brazil friendly, need to sell 60,000 seats to pay the costs and make some, you'll do the same thing that is done when inviting Liverpool play Inter, for example. Go elsewhere.

With time, more and more nations will adjust to playing on artificial surfaces, so that is not a problem. More and more youth already do at the pro level, top flight players see it playing lower division sides in cup matches, they train on it themselves. For all its drawbacks in terms of the ideal situation of grass, it is an acceptable solution, especially for TO, and will become increasingly so as the years go by and FIFA continues to push it.

[dbailey62]

quote:Originally posted by redhat

Why field turf rather than grass?

It's very clear: cost. Even in a rich country & rich city (Toronto)

the costs are huge. I couldn't understand it myself initially,

until I found out the costs.

And as to why Brazil wouldn't play here, it's also the cost.

At the Pan Am Games in '99, no South American team was present as

they all wanted to be paid big $$$ (except for Uruguay, which sent its

U20 "B" team).

Besides, field turf isn't the old astro turf. As much as I like

real grass, I disliked the cow pasture field at Varsity Stadium in

October/November (WCQ 2001).

The Varsity Stadium field was paradise compared to the Centennial Park field back in the CSL days. It was unbelievable. Pedro Kozak coached the team for a time and tried to implement a South American style of play with the team and I really enjoyed it BUT the field was a huge issue with little 10 foot (3 metres for you younguns) passes taking all sorts of weird hops.

They'd string ten or twelve passes together in a really nice build up only to have the damned ball hit an odd spot and take a weird bounce and the ball was lost!

Talk about demoralizing!

db

[dbailey62]

quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S.

Everyone agrees that a beautiful grass field is unbeatable.

It is not easy to maintain depending on weather conditions. But in the end if you have to replant or resod you can do so, you can adjust the grass to the weather and wear conditions as you learn about them (often it takes them a few years to figure out the organism). You can upgrade, and all of this is relatively inexpensive.

Take Field Turf or Fifa equivalent. It is much more expensive to start with. It should have a decent mid-term life. But it is also susceptible to being considered outdated a few years down the line, as quality if upgraded, meaning a new installation at the same cost, maybe close to a decade from now, maybe sooner.

Field Turf gives you the advantage of being able to regularly practice in your own field, with its dimensions, sightlines, light, which should be an advantage for the team, as opposed to not being able to practise on the main pitch to not wear it down.

If you want to bring in a major side and make money, Field Turf will not take away from that, as experience shows us that the stadium proposed for TO is too small to be profit-making on the big games. It is conceived to be mostly -over half, up to 70%, in there somewhere- full for the normal games. The exception day you want a Brazil friendly, need to sell 60,000 seats to pay the costs and make some, you'll do the same thing that is done when inviting Liverpool play Inter, for example. Go elsewhere.

With time, more and more nations will adjust to playing on artificial surfaces, so that is not a problem. More and more youth already do at the pro level, top flight players see it playing lower division sides in cup matches, they train on it themselves. For all its drawbacks in terms of the ideal situation of grass, it is an acceptable solution, especially for TO, and will become increasingly so as the years go by and FIFA continues to push it.

Agreed on all points ... and as you say, the big games can be played elsewhere such as Skydome ... and as you say, the technology of these artificial surfaces is always improving.

Yes, it is a compromise and in many respects an inconvenient one but it is a necessary one (IMO anyway).

db

[trueviking]

so...the answer is...put in a field that nobody will play on and then if someone wants to come here to play, we can go somewhere else....i dont get the logic...why bother at all?

even as an MLS stadium toronto will be one of the only plastic venues...what an embarasment...typical half assed canadian solution....toronto continually wants to be a city regarded as world class...their soccer team will be the only one playing on a second rate pitch, and it will be mentioned every time another team comes in.....truly embarassing.

until any other country actually agrees to play on it...the argument that the rest of the world will eventually fall in line does not hold water....we are pinning our hopes on something that may never be a reality....maybe for third tier nations, but i can easily forsee that no european nation will ever accept it...i am not only talking about attracting brazil....even second tier countries will not play on it....when i am proven wrong i will change my opinion, but for the decade that field turf has been around, it has not been accepted by anyone.

redhat...yes field turf isnt astroturf...but if nobody will play on it (and they do not) then what is the difference?

this stadium will be a an embarassment with field turf....and it will never be the national stadium if every time another country comes, we have to play elsewhere because they wil not play on plastic.

thankfully the guys in montreal are not as stupid and there will actually be a place for the national team to play at in the east.

[Guest Jeffery S.]

quote:Originally posted by trueviking

so...the answer is...put in a field that nobody will play on and then if someone wants to come here to play, we can go somewhere else....i dont get the logic...why bother at all?

even as an MLS stadium toronto will be one of the only plastic venues...what an embarasment...typical half assed canadian solution....toronto continually wants to be a city regarded as world class...their soccer team will be the only one playing on a second rate pitch, and it will be mentioned every time another team comes in.....truly embarassing.

until any other country actually agrees to play on it...the argument that the rest of the world will eventually fall in line does not hold water....we are pinning our hopes on something that may never be a reality....maybe for third tier nations, but i can easily forsee that no european nation will ever accept it...i am not only talking about attracting brazil....even second tier countries will not play on it....when i am proven wrong i will change my opinion, but for the decade that field turf has been around, it has not been accepted by anyone.

redhat...yes field turf isnt astroturf...but if nobody will play on it (and they do not) then what is the difference?

this stadium will be a an embarassment with field turf....and it will never be the national stadium if every time another country comes, we have to play elsewhere because they wil not play on plastic.

thankfully the guys in montreal are not as stupid and there will actually be a place for the national team to play at in the east.

The second and third rate countries you say will be reluctant to playing on it: do those include the finalists of the 2007 FIFA World Junior Championship? Don't you think that if folks the world over see good football, future stars, and nice crowds at that event, whether on grass at Commonwealth or on artificial at TO, they'll focus on those factors and not the plastic vs. organic debate?

Are you aware that Cesc Fabregas won best U-17 player at the Finland event two summers ago, and that most if not all that tournament was played on artificial FIFA approved surfaces?

Finally, to those knocking astroturf. The recent evolution of it, as used as a standard surface for international field hockey, is not bad for football at all. It is not conventional, but it is quite acceptable. I know this as my local team, Poble Sec, plays on a new field hockey specific astroturf pitch and there are no significant complaints at all (though it is more a mesh than a grass imitation, and so sliding is a bit different as you don't really move through it on a slide tackle, you skim it).

[trueviking]

again...junior, shmunior...i am talking about the grown up team.....as i have said...i am sure you and your local team love it, but this stadium is supposedly for international and professional soccer matches....not your local team....until a senior team comes to canada to play on plastic...which they have never done before, it doesnt matter what your personal opinion is about the surface....right now international players at the senior level do not play on it and that is what matters.

i doubt any european senior team will watch the U17 on plastic and suddenly change their opinion about the surface....if the final is played on plastic, it will probably be the centre of attention....a further spotlight on our bush league operation.

didnt the CSA indicate a while back that there would be grass installed for the tourney in 2007 and then it would be replaced later with plastic?

[G-Man]

quote:Originally posted by trueviking

again...junior, shmunior...i am talking about the grown up team.....as i have said...i am sure you and your local team love it, but this stadium is supposedly for international and professional soccer matches....not your local team....until a senior team comes to canada to play on plastic...which they have never done before, it doesnt matter what your personal opinion is about the surface....right now international players at the senior level do not play on it and that is what matters.

i doubt any european senior team will watch the U17 on plastic and suddenly change their opinion about the surface....if the final is played on plastic, it will probably be the centre of attention....a further spotlight on our bush league operation.

didnt the CSA indicate a while back that there would be grass installed for the tourney in 2007 and then it would be replaced later with plastic?

Agree. I wonder if Wembley is going plastic? All that rain...

Our National Team Stadium, if that what Pogey park is suposed to be, should be first rate and first world (even if our team isn't). I would welcome a ton of local Fieldturf™ pitches right across Canada for club play and in high use situations (like 2 games a night), but for less than 25 dates (pogey park) a year it should be grass.

There is no justification for it. It's not like we're going to be hosting games in Toronto in December or January. (unless it's under a dome...)

Ahh the dreaded skydome..seems like a gem compared to the concrete and plastic bowl that Pogey Park is at this point.

[Steve B]

Although I agree that the synthetic pitch at exhibition will almost ensure that top national teams and G14 sides won't play on it, I find the whole natural vs. synthetic argument a bit silly. Consider that today's top "natural" pitches are often the product of undersoil heating, artificial light sources, pumps that suck air through the pitch or water out of it and conveyor systems that wheel complete pitches in and out of covered stadiums to get natural light. I've even read that they are developing "bio-sugars" (whatever that is) that will help grass grow without photosynthesis.

What's natural about that? Field turf will be better then nothing. The only worry is they haven't had time to fully study whether the incidence of injury is higher on synthetics than on natural turfs.

[The Ref]

And there is the question of the cost of fire insurance that the manufacturers kindly omit. Field turf is flamable while grass is not. Grass will always grow a-new after a lot of use. The platic leaves on the field turf get flatten out and lose their molecular structure after continued use as I have seen in turf indoor facilities.

[hottoddy7]

Um... Grass isn't flammable?

[Richard]

Don't think I have ever heard of a FieldTurf pitch bursting into flames?

[Guest Jeffery S.]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

Don't think I have ever heard of a FieldTurf pitch bursting into flames?

If we are going to get into such arguments I would just like to say that I am 100% sure that a wet grass pitch would be a more likely place for migratory birds to land on than an artificial surface, which means that grass carries a higher risk of propogating bird flu. Imagine the ball boys bending down to pick up the ball and catching that deadly ailment?

If nobody wants to counter with a silly argument against artificial surfaces I'll come up with one in a day or two...

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by Jeffrey S.

If we are going to get into such arguments I would just like to say that I am 100% sure that a wet grass pitch would be a more likely place for migratory birds to land on than an artificial surface, which means that grass carries a higher risk of propogating bird flu. Imagine the ball boys bending down to pick up the ball and catching that deadly ailment?

If nobody wants to counter with a silly argument against artificial surfaces I'll come up with one in a day or two...

Sure, what the hell: Artificial surfaces emit gasses that have been linked to respiratory illness and nostril cancer AND the toxic "grass stain" one might suffer on an artificial surface has been know to cause leg cancer, eczema and a herpes-like skin disorder informally known as THE STAIN.

[Cheeta]

(Further proof that if you give some people an inch they'll take a mile).

And don't forget that most harmfull of effects caused by slide tackling on FieldTurf, static electricity.

While wrecking havoc on even the best groomed locks only the most vain of footballers would consider this effect anything but trivial when compared to the possible consiquences under anything but clear skys.

It's this running about a field carrying an electric charge with you during the rainy season which is, in point of fact, the principal complaint players from the latic tropics have with the artificial surface and NOT the actual play of the ball on the fake field itself. It's curious that The Blue Angel has an entirely different meaning for Central American footballers than the more recognised teenage boy novelty involving bodily gasses and disposable Bic lighters.

"Well, Jose. We're just entering injury time and another scoreless draw looks sure. Not a result Che Revolutionary will enjoy as it guarentees they'll be relegated for next season."

"True enough, Raul. This weather certainly hasn't helped with what's been a sour and physical match..."

"ONE MINUTE, JOSE! Chinchilla has just weighted a perfect-o through pass to Emilio to beat the Bandito's off side trap! Emilio is going in on goal all alone. Revolutionary's leading scoring with the ball at his feet.."

ZZZZyyyytkk. CRACK!!!

"Oooooohhh!"

"Emilio has just been vaporized by a flash of lightning! Oh My God! That's the 2nd one on these grounds in as many weeks!"

"Balls rolled out for a goal kick, Raul."

"And there's the final whistle, Jose. What a finish! All of Revolutionary's hopes go down in a bright blue flash in what many will certainly call an Act of God. Poor Revolutionary. Poor Emilio. There'll be a strange face in heaven tonight, Jose."

"I'm sure that's going to beat the Revolutionary dressing room after today's display."

"So that concludes tonights broadcast folks. Che Revolutionary go down to relegation by devine intervention. We've seen it before, Jose."

"Right you are, Raul. El Angel Azul. The Blue Angel strikes again."

[G-Man]

At the end of the day. A National Stadium should be grass. It costs less than 200K a year to maintain a grass field that wouldn't be used more than 25 times. But Pokey Park isn't being built as a soccer stadium. It's being built for a private company in order to maximize profits. So add 15-20 concerts, a winter bubble and a motor cross event- grass simply wouldn't cut it.

There isn't a valid agurment why the Toronto MLS/Motorcross/bubble Park shouldn't be a grass facitlity.

[loyola]

As I've said earlier, Costa Rica national stadium (Saprissa) is a field turf and they doesn't seem to have problems getting good teams to play there.

[G-Man]

quote:Originally posted by loyola

As I've said earlier, Costa Rica national stadium (Saprissa) is a field turf and they doesn't seem to have problems getting good teams to play there.

Good teams? like who?

I checked FIFA web site and it seems that beside CONCACAF games, no other country has ever played Costa Rica on Saprissa's Fieldturf�.

That most of their exibition games are held in America on grass pitches.So based on Costa Rica's experience don't expect a flood of good teams playing at Pogey Park, unless it's a WC qualifier.

So hello CUBA!

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by Cheeta

(Further proof that if you give some people an inch they'll take a mile).

And don't forget that most harmfull of effects caused by slide tackling on FieldTurf, static electricity.

While wrecking havoc on even the best groomed locks only the most vain of footballers would consider this effect anything but trivial when compared to the possible consiquences under anything but clear skys.

It's this running about a field carrying an electric charge with you during the rainy season which is, in point of fact, the principal complaint players from the latic tropics have with the artificial surface and NOT the actual play of the ball on the fake field itself. It's curious that The Blue Angel has an entirely different meaning for Central American footballers than the more recognised teenage boy novelty involving bodily gasses and disposable Bic lighters.

"Well, Jose. We're just entering injury time and another scoreless draw looks sure. Not a result Che Revolutionary will enjoy as it guarentees they'll be relegated for next season."

"True enough, Raul. This weather certainly hasn't helped with what's been a sour and physical match..."

"ONE MINUTE, JOSE! Chinchilla has just weighted a perfect-o through pass to Emilio to beat the Bandito's off side trap! Emilio is going in on goal all alone. Revolutionary's leading scoring with the ball at his feet.."

ZZZZyyyytkk. CRACK!!!

"Oooooohhh!"

"Emilio has just been vaporized by a flash of lightning! Oh My God! That's the 2nd one on these grounds in as many weeks!"

"Balls rolled out for a goal kick, Raul."

"And there's the final whistle, Jose. What a finish! All of Revolutionary's hopes go down in a bright blue flash in what many will certainly call an Act of God. Poor Revolutionary. Poor Emilio. There'll be a strange face in heaven tonight, Jose."

"I'm sure that's going to beat the Revolutionary dressing room after today's display."

"So that concludes tonights broadcast folks. Che Revolutionary go down to relegation by devine intervention. We've seen it before, Jose."

"Right you are, Raul. El Angel Azul. The Blue Angel strikes again."

Man, how could I forget about the static electricity, which is commonly known around these parts as the STAT. I was once the unhappy recipient of what many consider the Perfect Storm of artificial turf slide-tackling injuries: I got the STAIN and the STAT in league semi-finals, which is like adding electric injury to insult. Nobody is proud of a STAIN. Try explaining it to your pals: Yeah, I got a plastic stain from slide tackling on artificial turf.

I'd much rather have an El Angel Azul enema!

[The Ref]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

Don't think I have ever heard of a FieldTurf pitch bursting into flames?

I haven't either, but wouldn't you want to insure such a high cost investment. Any of those crazy fans throwing some flares, smoke bombs or fireworks could set the bloody thing on fire.

[The Ref]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

Don't think I have ever heard of a FieldTurf pitch bursting into flames?

I haven't either, but wouldn't you want to insure such a high cost investment. Any of those crazy fans throwing some flares, smoke bombs or fireworks could set the bloody thing on fire.

[Massive Attack]

Glasgow Rangers and Dynamo Zagreb didn't seem to have any problems playing on fake turf at the SkyDome last summer.

[Massive Attack]

Glasgow Rangers and Dynamo Zagreb didn't seem to have any problems playing on fake turf at the SkyDome last summer.