TFC considering Grassmaster pitch !!

[JB_Tito]

Toronto FC to spend Edu cash on new pitch

Speculation is mounting that a good portion of the transfer fee for US international Maurice Edu paid to MLS and Toronto FC will be used to bring a world class Desso DD Grassmaster pitch to BMO field.

Grassmaster is a natural grass pitch that has been reinforced with artificial grass fibers. Both the Emirates and Anfield feature state of the art Grassmaster pitches and as ever TFC looks to make their footballing experience as close to an English one as possible.

http://www.tribalfootball.com/?q=node/199903

It's used by: Arsenal, Liverpool, Aston Villa, the Spurs, West Ham, Norwich City, Feyenoord and Real Madrid, amongst others.

More info what DD Grassmaster is you can find here:

What is Desso Grassmaster?

the roots of the natural grass grow around the injected artificial grass resulting in a stronger pitch

Desso GrassMaster is a sports field of 100% natural grass reinforced with Desso synthetic grass fibres. The unique element of this patented reinforced natural grass system is the 20 million artificial grass fibres injected 20 cm deep into the pitch. During the growing process, the roots of the natural grass entwine with the synthetic grass fibres and anchor the turf into a stable and even field. In this way the natural grass fibres are well protected against tackles and sliding. Moreover, it ensures better drainage of the pitch. Despite the fact that 3% of the pitch is made up of synthetic grass fibres, Desso GrassMaster gives players the feeling of playing on a 100% natural grass pitch.

The needles of a computer-operated Desso GrassMaster machine inject 20 million Desso synthetic grass fibres into the natural grass

Expressed in figures: Desso GrassMaster comprises 100% natural grass and 20 million individual artificial grass fibres, or 40 000 km artificial fibres, in a single field (the circumference of the globe). Desso GrassMaster has the playing capacity of 3 standard natural grass pitches and over 250 Desso GrassMaster pitches have been installed worldwide

Top clubs like Arsenal FC, Feyenoord, Denver Broncos, Tottenham Hotspur FC and RSC Anderlecht are certainly convinced of the benefits. Desso GrassMaster is authorized both by FIFA and UEFA for top competitions.

http://www.dessosports.com/en/desso-grassmaster.html

[VPjr]

this would be great.

would it survive a winter under a bubble though?

[JB_Tito]

quote:Originally posted by VPjr

this would be great.

would it survive a winter under a bubble though?

You and your questions?Let us dream for now,we can deal with bubble later on

[The Beaver]

I have world class Desso DD Assmaster all over my body, and it works like a dandy. Nobody can tell I am actually bald, and my as.s stays warm all winter.

[Massive Attack]

So let me get this straight, all the grass snobs hate fake grass? But a hybrid of fake and real is okay? If the grass-only people are so adamant why would they accept this compromise?

Also, do we know these teams that are alluded to actually use it in their match day stadiums or on the training pitch? There is a big difference.

Plus tribalfootball is a crappy source. Its as bad as goal.com or MLS Rumours.

Edit: It looks like Grassmaster is used in real stadiums. But I won't get excited about this just yet.

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by VPjr

this would be great.

would it survive a winter under a bubble though?

No.

[JB_Tito]

quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack

So let me get this straight, all the grass snobs hate fake grass? But a hybrid of fake and real is okay? If the grass-only people are so adamant why would they accept this compromise?

Also, do we know these teams that are alluded to actually use it in their match day stadiums or on the training pitch? There is a big difference.

Plus tribalfootball is a crappy source. Its as bad as goal.com or MLS Rumours.

Edit: It looks like Grassmaster is used in real stadiums. But I won't get excited about this just yet.

Of course why should be satisfied with this grass,it not that we are so good as Arsenal, Liverpool, Aston Villa, the Spurs, West Ham, Norwich City, Feyenoord and Real Madrid,amongst others that have exactly same grass.

We should go for grass like in Montreal because it REAL grass.

[nolando]

quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack

So let me get this straight, all the grass snobs hate fake grass? But a hybrid of fake and real is okay? If the grass-only people are so adamant why would they accept this compromise?

Also, do we know these teams that are alluded to actually use it in their match day stadiums or on the training pitch? There is a big difference.

Plus tribalfootball is a crappy source. Its as bad as goal.com or MLS Rumours.

Edit: It looks like Grassmaster is used in real stadiums. But I won't get excited about this just yet.

It's 97% grass, with the 3% being mostly below the surface. It sounds brilliant to me and could very well be the future of football in countries with climates like Canada.

And for the record, the biggest grass snobs of all seem to be the vast majority of international players themselves.

If this innovation meant that we didn't have to have the travesty that was Saputo on Saturday (or Commonwealth when LA were in town) while enjoying full support of national team and club players alike, then this could be truly revolutionary for soccer in this country.

Be a turf snob if you like, but I think we should give this a serious look, regardless of the costs.

[Massive Attack]

If this is 97% grass I'm willing to bet it won't work in a bubble in the winter. Which means the biggest hurdle still hasn't been passed (ie. taking control of the stadium from the City and building them another year-round soccer pitch to replace BMO Field). But if I'm proven wrong I would still be happy.

By the way, Turf = grass and Artificial Turf = fake grass. I hate how all the grass snobs always get that wrong.

Anyways, calling me a turf snob is laughable. I always prefer an immaculately well taken care of grass pitch. But I also realize that a fake pitch like the one at BMO Field is way better than a Stade Saputo with rabbit holes.

[Richard]

I too prefer turf but only if it is well established, superbly maintained and carefully conserved. Saputo against Honduras was a national embarrassment. Even glorious and well established Swangard in Burnaby cannot sustain once weekly gridiron and Whitecaps games without rapid deterioration. I'll take high grade Football Turf any day over crappy turf such as we say against Honduras.

And I can't see a Grassmaster pitch surviving under a bubble. After a month or so all that will be left will be dead turf and a few strands of plastic sticking out of the ground.

[tmcmurph]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

No.

I would have to agree with Richard. Unless you use all those LED grow lights that the cops confiscate from grow-ops at night on the field it won't survive. Ontario hydro could donate off peak electricity

Seriously though just put the bubble up on some other field for the amatuer/recreational players and make BMO "THE" field in Canada. Come on MLSE, show Mr Saputo how it is done! I love the Toronto/Montreal rivalry. As soon as one has something then the other has to top it. In a couple of years we could have 2 first class playing surfaces vying for bragging rights as the best in the country.

[Bxl Boy]

It's 7% grass

And that's the compromise sort of field I often spoken about on this forum

[Whither Canada]

Grassmaster is by no means a guaranteed solution. The Pittsburgh Steelers have it installed at Heinz Field, and last season at least, it wasn't up to the task. I saw a few games from Pittsburgh last year and the grass was brown between the hashmarks and was being torn up quite noticeably during games. An NFLPA survey ranked it 29th out of 31 fields last year.

Seems the problem in Pittsburgh last year was durability. If it gets overused, it has the same problem as pure grass in bouncing back. Combine that with bad weather and you can get a mess. Of course pointy-ball is harder on a surface than real football, but overuse could still become an issue.

Having said that, there are other NFL teams with Grassmaster installed and they seem to be doing OK.

Just sayin'. Don't be blinded by Grassmaster.

[Bill Ault]

From Grassmaster themselves....

GrassMaster pitch is a normal natural grass field. The surface is a 100% natural grass field. The amount of artificial grass fibers added is approximately 3%. The field looks completely natural when used by players and viewed by spectators. Because the field looks like any other natural grass field, many national and international sport federations allow DD GrassMaster for sports on the highest level.

GrassMaster system has numerous components:

1. Medium fine - medium coarse rootzone sand (90/10 sand to organic)

2. Natural sports grass mixture (seed or sod)

3. Polypropylene artificial grass fibers (DD GrassMaster fibers)

GrassMaster field use amounts to approximately 850-900 hours. In comparison, a normal natural grass field can handle only 300 hours per year. On some heavily used pitches in The Netherlands, the DD GrassMaster surface is used for over 700 games per year. This equals about 1,300 hours of use in one year. One hour of use is 25 adult players wearing spikes using the playing surface for one hour.

Again this is company PR so take it with a grain of salt - additionally it certainly would not allow for winter usage. I suspect what TFC may do is use the funds to build a training facility and a place for their Academy to be based out of... just a guess though no inside info.

[tmcmurph]

quote:Originally posted by Whither Canada

Grassmaster is by no means a guaranteed solution. The Pittsburgh Steelers have it installed at Heinz Field, and last season at least, it wasn't up to the task. I saw a few games from Pittsburgh last year and the grass was brown between the hashmarks and was being torn up quite noticeably during games. An NFLPA survey ranked it 29th out of 31 fields last year.

Seems the problem in Pittsburgh last year was durability. If it gets overused, it has the same problem as pure grass in bouncing back. Combine that with bad weather and you can get a mess. Of course pointy-ball is harder on a surface than real football, but overuse could still become an issue.

Having said that, there are other NFL teams with Grassmaster installed and they seem to be doing OK.

Just sayin'. Don't be blinded by Grassmaster.

Never be blinded by marketting but ... being a Steeler fan for as long as I've been a Caps fan I read an interview with Mr Rooney (owner of the Steelers) and he said they were putting it back in again for this year. They had asked the players and all of them had preferred the Grassmaster over Fieldturf etc. He also said the situation last year was a disaster due to scheduling too many games in a short time period combined with cloudbursts and extremely heavy rain the week before the mudbowl game.

Apparently the NFL didn't give them a week off during some college and high school championship games so they played 4 or 5 games in a week on the field in torrential downpours.

[Richard]

^ Well, of course players will prefer Grassmaster over FieldTurf given the choice, the surface is a 100% natural grass and the plastic is used only to help secure the grass roots. Grassmaster may improve the stability of the turf somewhat but it is certainly not equivalent to FieldTurf in terms of availability and durability and suitability for covered or partially stadia, not by a long way.

Once a natural grass pitch is well established and properly maintained as is the case at Swangard for example, I can't see that the Grassmaster system would offer much benefit.

[tmcmurph]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

^ Well, of course players will prefer Grassmaster over FieldTurf given the choice, the surface is a 100% natural grass and the plastic is used only to help secure the grass roots. Grassmaster may improve the stability of the turf somewhat but it is certainly not equivalent to FieldTurf in terms of availability and durability and suitability for covered or partially stadia, not by a long way.

Once a natural grass pitch is well established and properly maintained as is the case at Swangard for example, I can't see that the Grassmaster system would offer much benefit.

3 times more time on the surface is the selling point. When the real grass is worn down the artificial blades shade it making it recover quicker is another statement the company makes.

Even established grass doesn't put down roots 8 inches. With the fibers providing the path they do.

It would be interesting to do a 3 way side by side comparison. Real grass, Fieldturf, Grassmaster at some complex with 3 soccer fields. Real world type use and monitoring of all maintenance and costs.

[nolando]

quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack

By the way, Turf = grass and Artificial Turf = fake grass. I hate how all the grass snobs always get that wrong.

Not true.

Everyone I know in the US and out in Western Canada calls the fake stuff turf. Incidentally, the free dictionary says we're both right. Go figure.

turf (tûrf)

a. A surface layer of earth containing a dense growth of grass and its matted roots; sod.

b. An artificial substitute for such a grassy layer, as on a playing field.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/turf

[Massive Attack]

LOL. Thanks for that Nolando. I'm guessing the 2nd definition is a recent phenomena caused by all the people who have been getting it wrong for years....

[Richard]

quote:Originally posted by tmcmurph

3 times more time on the surface is the selling point. When the real grass is worn down the artificial blades shade it making it recover quicker is another statement the company makes.

Even established grass doesn't put down roots 8 inches. With the fibers providing the path they do.

It would be interesting to do a 3 way side by side comparison. Real grass, Fieldturf, Grassmaster at some complex with 3 soccer fields. Real world type use and monitoring of all maintenance and costs.

"The surface is a 100% natural grass field. The amount of artificial grass fibers added is approximately 3%."

Doesn't seem like there is much plastic at the surface to do any shading. I challenge the company's claims about durability though, when compared with a well maintained 100% natural grass pitch. The plastic fibres may help the new grass a bit but over time the plastic will inevitably become superfluous if the grass is properly nurtured.

[tmcmurph]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

It would be interesting to do a 3 way side by side comparison. Real grass, Fieldturf, Grassmaster at some complex with 3 soccer fields. Real world type use and monitoring of all maintenance and costs.

"The surface is a 100% natural grass field. The amount of artificial grass fibers added is approximately 3%."

Doesn't seem like there is much plastic at the surface to do any shading. I challenge the company's claims about durability though, when compared with a well maintained 100% natural grass pitch. The plastic fibres may help the new grass a bit but over time the plastic will inevitably become superfluous if the grass is properly nurtured.

[Bxl Boy]

I have such of a comparaison in one of my soccer magazines at home but... it would be so much work to find it back !

But I think I wrote some of the key points in a former thread about natural/artificial turf when I spoke about some other solution (that was grassmaster, even I don't think I mentioned the name)