Get Turf Out of MLS

Excerpted from: http://www.mlssoccer.com/ccl/news/a...ue-landon-donovan-ponders-next-step-mls-teams

“Obviously, the game plan wasn't to let two goals in in the first 10 minutes, and it's a difficult game plan after that,” said forward Rob Friend, whose entrance at halftime enabled the Galaxy to switch to a more effective direct attack. “Give credit to them, they came out flying.


“They know how to play on their pitch, you know? With the artificial grass, they're playing balls in behind us, and the ball was sticking, and they were getting to it first, and we came out sleeping a little bit.”


Tijuana's surface has longer “grass” fibers than the artificial fields in play in MLS – Galaxy coach Bruce Arena thinks it has something to do with NFL usage in Seattle and New England – and, unlike most man-man turf, it cuts down on bounces and slows the ball. The Xolos' exemplary home record is built on their familiarity with the surface.

The Galaxy got just one training session on the turf before the match.


“They know exactly how to play on their turf,” Friend said. “They were playing in behind us, where the balls stuck perfectly, and they were getting to every ball behind us. If going into that we knew how they played, I think we could have had a little bit different game plan.”

 

I do miss the smell of smouldering rubber pellets on gameday.

 

You'd probably be used to the smell, what with the tire fire that your team has been for a while

 

Lambeau Field would beg to differ. They have some of the best grass I've ever seen in some of the worst winter conditions around.

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/...bers_and_city_rene.html#incart_special-report

This is a very interesting read. In sum, (1) MLS purports to have standards for how turf fields play; (2) Portland's failed last year and that's why they replaced it; (3) there is funding in place through 2035 to ensure it is replaced every 2 years (this is incredible to me, and makes me think grass would be cheaper).

Now, are there really standards for turf fields? Even by the end of last year, when Portland's field purportedly failed some test (which was done at the behest of the Timbers, mind you, and likely done so they could bill the city for a replacement as per their contract with the city), it was the best in the league. If MLS really has standards, how the hell is Seattle's pitch meeting those standards? I'm guessing they aren't enforced by the league at all, if they actually exist.

 

Wait, so Donovan is blaming the superior artificial turf they have in TJ that plays more like real grass for the loss now?

 

It can be done. I was thinking of the Washington playoff game a year ago. Hey trust me I hate artificial turf, especially in soccer.

 

If by "best grass" you mean "dead and brown," then you're right. The only reason it's playable versus other cold weather grass stadia is that they can keep it near freezing so it doesn't just turn to mush.

 

Don't they scout?

 

Any comments about the multiple shitty grass fields we saw in action this past week in mls action?

 

Yup. Better fields and better greenskeeping would be nice, but I'll take a mucky natural (or mostly natural) field over field turf any and every day - esp if it's professionally maintained.

 

So you don't care when the ball can't roll evenly along the ground and instead just bounces around?

 

The ball fails to "roll evenly" in either scenario.

 

? While turf might be blamed for crosses skipping across the ground, or failing to slow down like you'd see on a grass field, rolling evenly is not a problem on turf.

 

I don't know what you're talking about, the Dick looked great.

 

Those bounces can be damn entertaining at times.

 

Or failing to slow down too much... as the Galaxy were complaining about in Tijuana.

All the complaints I have seen about artificial surfaces with respect to the behavior of the ball I have seen happen on natural surfaces. The ball bouncing too much? seen it. The ball rolling forever? seen it. Heck, the ball holding up TOO much? yes.

One complaint I haven't seen is about the ball not being able to roll cleanly without bouncing due to an inconsistent surface.

 

Overall I thought they held up well considering that this has been an unusually strong winter... I'll take those fields over artificial turf any day as a player or a spectator.

 

I disagree. You can have different areas of a pitch behave differently either way.

Often a ball on field turf will not roll much the whole game. It sits atop the surface and wants to stumble and bobble. Big bobbles and little bobbles. It's a lot easier to chip or loft a ball cleanly on grass - on turf you use the bobble and lob it.

I think the rub of the ball, basically, is what LA was complaining about. It's really hard to define but amounts to a big deal. Turf can seem alternately too frictionless, and too grippy. But you can get a sticky grass surface too: if its hot and dry, relatively thick grass (not ideal pro quality.) It helps a lot, for example, when the Quakes water Buck Shaw.

 

Agreed. I don't want to pay money to sit outdoors and stare at a big piece of plastic.

 

So you'll pay money to sit outdoors and star at a big patch of dirt and dead grass?

I'd rather watch the game personally, different strokes for different folks I guess...

 

Well you should be staring at the play, not the pitch .... you're doing it wrong to begin with.

 

I know, those tarps at Chivas games are annoying aren't they?

 

Ringing endorsement for TFC's grass coming from DCU players http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/artic...ditions-toronto-bad-any-field-i’ve-ever-playe

 

Fall to spring schedule now!