The Latest FIFA thoughts

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Unofficial Newcastle United Football Club BBS : One Thread

Fast on the back of their other suggestions this week, I noticed in one of the papers this morning that FIFA are suggesting that they will have no problem with clubs installing Astro Turf in place of their pitch.

They have suggested that as there have been so many improvements in the manufacture and type of AT, it would now be considered as a suitable surface for playing first class matches on.

While it might alleviate the problem we talked about a couple of weeks back about the sun not getting to the surface enough because of the high stands, what would everyone reckon to SJP being done that way.......

Also, while sanctioned as acceptable by FIFA, how would UEFA and the FA react to it....when Luton and QPR had their 'plastic' - they didn't like it. It was the one and only time that QPR qualified for Europe, and they had to play their 'home' matches at Highbury, and if memory serves, they werre both told that if they were drawn at home in the FA Cup, they would have to play at another pitch.

Anybody got any views on it....or is it another one of FIFA's pie in the sky non starters.

-- Anonymous, March 26, 2000

Answers

How much would it cost to put astro truf down do you reckon?

And I hope they have improved the standard to reduce the burns you get from them.

Also would astro turf be classed as an unfair advantage against those who don't have it installed. I remember that other teams didn'tlike going to QPR and Luton.

And one final point the idea of watering the corners before kick off goes right out the window. ;o)

-- Anonymous, March 26, 2000


There was a blurb on Soccer Central (Canadian version) a few weeks ago, on the "new" atrtificial turf. It didn't look too bad, a lot more "give" than the older versions. However, the ball still bounces way too much, and still skips badly. Carpet burns are still a problem. But none the less it seems a 100% improvement over the plastic grass we have at most of our stadia over here.

Personally, having played on the old stuff, give me grass every time. Seems only the North Americans like the plastic stuff.

-- Anonymous, March 26, 2000


If push comes to shove I prefer grass to astro turf.

Played netball and hockey on astro turf and it hurts more that concrete sometimes.

-- Anonymous, March 26, 2000


Sorry Jay....that one needs the immediate reply.....when did you last smoke Astro Turf to know which you prefer.

I know...its an old one.....but there you go....so am I.

-- Anonymous, March 26, 2000


Ohh yeah you are showing your age there mate.

Thats bad ;o)

-- Anonymous, March 26, 2000



Can't say I've followed the debate that closely in the States, but I seem to recall hearing the Giants Stadium(one of the last NFL stadiums, I think, using astroturf) is going back to natural grass because of complaints from players. Too many injuries, and often worse than on grass. I'm not sure how much influence MLS has on the decision, but nobody liked playing soccer on the astroturf surface.

-- Anonymous, March 26, 2000

I don't know about the new type of artificial turf, but Astroturf and similar varieties is notorious for its association with knee and head injuries. And that's in the NFL, with all players wearing helmets, and many knee-braces.

The knee injuries seem to come from the very high coefficient of friction, which can often keep the weight-bearing foot rigidly planted whilst the body's momentum keeps on twisting the knee - result, busted ligaments, both cruciates and laterals. The head injuries come from the extra rigidity of artificial turf - next time you see an (American) footballer landing flat on artificial turf, look out for how many times his head bounces on the ground - it's ususally at least three.

Not a move to rush into in my view.

Speaking of football (as opposed to sarker), the "I've never smoked Astroturf" line should properly be attributed to Joe Namath circa 1969, the year the famously, er, laid back Jets beat the clean cut Indianapolis Colts in Superbowl 2 (or was it 3).

-- Anonymous, March 27, 2000


The new artificial surface is supposed to be ground-breaking regarding injuries and bounce/drag on the ball. I think a number of clubs have installed it on training pitches - this is obviously the best way to really test it out. Far far too early to go the whole hog and re-lay St James'. Let Preston, Luton and QPR try it out first.

-- Anonymous, March 27, 2000

Moderation questions? read the FAQ