dbailey62 Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 quote:Originally posted by john tv I was told and totally unconfirmed that the Blue Jays apparently had that turf replaced by natural grass and that because of injuries and complains. Is this true? No. Rogers Centre is Fieldturf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Richard Every major facility in this country at the moment is publicly owned, how many times must people be reminded of that reality? Almost true. Rogers Centre (SkyDome) is owned by Rogers. quote:Originally posted by trueviking the plastic also allows these same amateurs to play under a bubble in the winter. It also allows supporters groups like the U-Sector to play there in the summer, as we did this past Thursday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Soju Right BMO is the only place in the world with field turf and none of us knew about it before 2006. I think this thread like the other turf thread has become confused. Another thread called "I blindly hate artifical playing surfaces and can offer no solutions to the BMO issue but I'm going to keep bringing it up" should be made a sticky and all this crap can go in there. Really???? Russia may play England on artificial pitch in Euro 2008 qualifier July 12, 2007 http://www.sportsline.com/soccer/story/10254323 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soju Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 That was sarcasm georg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 There are professional teams in Russia, Scotland, Austria and Sweden that play league matches on artificial turf. The teams are Spartak Moscow (1st place in Russian Championship, will play Celtic (bad draw for both teams) in 3rd round of Champion's League qualifying on this turf), Torpedo Moscow (usually a Russian Championship team but relegated to the 2nd tier 1st division last year and look to be staying for at least one more year), Red Bull Salzburg (last year's Austrian champions, currently in 2nd place), Ortebro (Poz's former team, playing in the Swedish top tier) and Dunfermline Athletic (playing in the 2nd tier Scottish first division). Additionally as mentioned the Russia-England EURO qualifier will most likely be played on Field Turf at Luzhniki stadium. The Champion's League final will also be played at this stadium but with a natural grass surface. I think everyone agrees that a natural turf field like that at the Schalke stadium that can be properly maintained and rolled in and out of the stadium so it is not damaged by other events is optimum. However, in the real world that is not possible for many clubs. There are probably as many natural grass fields played on by professional first division clubs throughout the world that are worse than the new generation of artificial turf fields as there are superior natural grass fields yet noone complains about natural grass because of this. In a perfect world all teams would play on top quality natural grass fields. Yet this is not a perfect world and many teams can not afford this. In our case a significant portion of the financing of BMO is supported by renting it out to various groups, something which would not be possible with natural grass. At some point I also hope that TFC is making enough money that they can make BMO exclusive to the team and natural grass. We are not near that point though and I am happier to have BMO field with Field Turf than not have it at all. It is a decent stadium (though not top notch) and the turf can always be changed later. I personally am envious of Toronto as the Saputo field from what I can tell from the construction done so far looks to me like a USL/university level stadium despite the natural grass. I would rather have BMO than Saputo stadium regardless of the surface. Incidentally, much of the evidence about the injuries on artificial turf seems to be apocryphal. As a Russian soccer fan, at the moment CSKA Moscow is sufferring a similar injury crises to TFC and I am quite worried about this year's Russian Champion's League campaign because CSKA (automatic group stage) has many injuries and are playing poorly and healthy Spartak who are playing well had the worst draw possible in getting Celtic in the 3rd qualification round. Yet Spartak plays on the Luzhniki field turf while CSKA plays on the grass field of Dinamo Stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Soju That was sarcasm georg Oops, sorry Soju Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georg Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 Cost of duel turfs from Japanese Site: http://www.slate.com/?id=2066392 Japan's World Cup Delusion By David Plotz Posted Friday, May 31, 2002, at 11:00 AM ET ....Japan's stadiums have laser-guided johns, earthquake-proofing, winged roofs, retractable roofs, grand swooshing roofs. The stadium I visited this spring in Sapporo is a ludicrous marvel. It is a domed stadium with artificial turf, but a grass soccer field sits just outside the east wall. On soccer game days, the wall slides open, a bank of seats retracts, and the turf field—floating on an air cushion—is rolled indoors. Then the wall closes, the turf field is rotated 90 degrees, and—voilà—an indoor, grass soccer stadium. This insanity cost $400 million, plus $15,000 every time they move the field..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 6, 2007 Share Posted August 6, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Rudi Almost true. Rogers Centre (SkyDome) is owned by Rogers. It also allows supporters groups like the U-Sector to play there in the summer, as we did this past Thursday! OK, so I missed one but even it has Field Turf, not natural grass! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarnCherry Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Soju Right BMO is the only place in the world with field turf and none of us knew about it before 2006. I think this thread like the other turf thread has become confused. Another thread called "I blindly hate artifical playing surfaces and can offer no solutions to the BMO issue but I'm going to keep bringing it up" should be made a sticky and all this crap can go in there. I don't know if this post is in response to mine since you didn't quote what you were replying to, but my point is that because TFC plays on FieldTurf some TFC supporters will rave about it just because their team plays on it. Personally I don't care if it is FieldTurf or not as long as it's only soccer markings on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niagara Hammer Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 These threads about turf vs grass are very funny. in three weeks when it appears again it will look pretty much the same. JohnTV will not understand why we cant have grass. (may slag the media) Richard will point out that it based on economics. Soju will state that it is still good for amateurs because the gras he plays on is usually crap. A hand full of others will jump down the throat of JohnTV and support Richard. Still some others will support JohnTV and chastise Richard. For the record. It is all about the money. If there was a financial argument for natural grass, than the field will be natural grass. The only people loyal in the sporting world is the fans. Every one else is there for the money. Since the taxpayer owns the stadium through the city of Toronto, the return on investment for grass is crap. Therefor the City of Toronto installed field turf. (end of discussion, nor all the pity or wit can lure the city back to cancel the installation) AS for the injury argument, didn't Toronto just play an extended away stint? Could it be the travel that contributed to the injuries? or was it just bad luck and not a lot of depth due to the salary cap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 So Niagara, after panning everybody else you at least agree with me that it is all about economics :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soju Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 OK fair enough no more grass debates. I'm surprised we've already had two but I guess there's not much else to talk about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niagara Hammer Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 Richard, I was not actually panning. Just making observations, some people here are vary opinionated an are at least consistent in their opinion. I try not to slam/ wind up/ insult/ castigate, anybody [without just cause; -) ] Yes Richard I agree it is all about the money. Money, in fact, is the only reason I go to work everyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john tv Posted August 7, 2007 Author Share Posted August 7, 2007 All I was questioning and relating back to were the observations of both Dwayne and Donavan.It was Lalas who said that the recovery time takes longer. This promted my question and personal observation. I wonder what the upkeep cost would be . It seems that all other soccer fields in Toronto are grass and used constantly while being maintained by the city. As a case in point is Sunnybrook Park which has araound 6 soccer and rugger fields as well as cricket pitches. These fields are well maintained and a joy to play on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarnCherry Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 Well here's an article saying that the Field Turf was a big decision in Beckham not playing in Toronto last Sunday. http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=451332&cc=5901 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Well, he'd better get used to FieldTurf and quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffymac1971 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Krammerhead Well here's an article saying that the Field Turf was a big decision in Beckham not playing in Toronto last Sunday. http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=451332&cc=5901 Hey his probably too posh for Fieldturf!!! Suck!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john tv Posted August 9, 2007 Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 Richard please please give it some thought. I know we live in N.A. but that is the problem that crazy money philosophy. It is wrong when we are talking about the ultimate in pure entertainment. We should demand the best and only the best, F. these money guys. I am sure that maintaing a field of grass aided by almighty god is be far better. If he goes for a leek so be it.I really would like to know how all these TFC players feel about this stuff. Are they being muzzled by the almighty money gods.I realize I may sound like a sh disturber but soccer has to be played at the best facilities including the very best surface. We should not cow tow to these money guys, We already have proven without any doubt that this thing is a huge money maker , so why not the best surface. I hate as hell to believe that we will have the Harold Ballard sample, who cares we are sold out anyway.So Richard, I hope we can sell that stuff to the boys in Vancouver and sent us some legitimate grass,OK Richard, the real stuff only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 John, the game at the international professional level IS all about money, not sport. Artificial turf is reality in North America and elsewhere no matter what you or I or anybody else might think about it. If the best players on the continent and imports of David Beckham's ilk can't learn to play on artificial turf without using it as an excuse, especially when they hurt themselves then there is an even bigger problem than we thought and its not the artificial turf. Some people may make contrary empirical claims but scientific study after scientific study shows time and again there is no material difference in the play or in the incidence or severity of injuries between high grade AT and natural grass and BMO field has the highest grade AT available - better than many installations in the USA no matter what Landon Donovan might have to say about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJB Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I'd say that Field Turf is here to stay, so to me the debate is somewhat moot(note that I say moot). I've played on Field Turf(or equivalent), and compared to a grass field in December in BC, I'll take the Turf any day. When it comes to Turf for our Professional clubs/National Teams, we should start some debate in order to make the Turf better, because it is not leaving BMO Field anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Raging against artificial turf is a fruitless waste of energy especially in North America where money rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Can. in UK Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Money may talk but so do superstar footballers: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070809.BECKHAM09/TPStory/Sports Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john tv Posted August 9, 2007 Author Share Posted August 9, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Richard Raging against artificial turf is a fruitless waste of energy especially in North America where money rules. Maybe soccer can change that very strange world after all. Oops here we go again, but yes I sometimes feel that this money bus is really screwing up a lot of things and should be questioned.It is like the ACC it is all sold out so who really cares. As is with the BMO field, would they care anyway,even though it is a huge money maker.I am fully aware of the hard nosed North American attitude and that is what we are stuck with and as long as the players are muzzled it seems ,I guess we will never know the real truth or the real results we are looking for.Hey they can always blame it on the field. The funny part is that when I walked on that field I could feel that difference. There is something magic about that earth and I did not get that feeling.I asked Dwayne about it and he said that he did not like it at all and concluded that there was cement underneath and that turned him and his feet of. I was surprised by his strong reaction and reading Donavan's observations and the others well, hey we have something to discuss on this board. Over to King Richard,any grass for sale? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 John, if you walked on blindfolded you would not know the difference. Of course we'd all prefer pristine natural grass on all the pitches and so would these overly delicate prima donna soccer players but it is not going to happen, certainly not in your or my lifteime. I suggest we all stop making a fuss about AT and get on with playing and enjoying the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john tv Posted August 10, 2007 Author Share Posted August 10, 2007 Hey Richard you don't know my twinkle toes. They know what real life is all about and certainly having played soccer for 50 years.I remember playing on that plastic stuff and always wondered what other soccer players would think of it. I also remembered being so extremely irritated watching the Blizzard play on that stuff. Every time that ball went to the wings good bye ball. Wingers had one heck os a time etc. If they believe they have solved that problems, these little twinkle toes knew better. I guess we will have to be satisfied with the product these money guys think can afford,while the players know they can play a more entertaining game. That of course is hard to judge from the stands and of course the hype will hide it anyway. But....... the after effects, the injury ratio's,recovery time and results will be influenced and if you can live with that,so be it.I wonder what the technical committee of the Fifa will show in their final report about the tournament as far as the surface,injuries and recovery time is concerned.I also wonder how our Canadian players felt about that stuff and foremost how is that heat factor during the game. I guess money talks and grass walks. That is what King Richard is preaching. I guess I am from the very old school and still have problems as do Dwayne, Donavan and David is concerned while Lalass said the recovery time takes longer and he was the least critical, yet one guy who I believe knows a lot more about the game than anyone else on this board.Agreed King Richard, he knows more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.