It was obvious that the dimensions of the field in Antigua & Barbuda were very small; our players were over-hitting nearly every cross, clearances were going straight to the opposite keeper, etc. So were the dimensions (length and width) below the legal FIFA standards? Or did they draw them up so that they just met the bare minimum? If they did fall outside of the standards then I think the USSF needs to make a formal complaint to FIFA and/or CONCACAF. Not that it would do us any good now, but the more we can eliminate this type of dishonest gamesmanship in our region the better.
I took a screen shot from a video, and was able to extrapolate that the distance between a goalpost and the corner flag was just a shade less than three times the width of the goal. The width of the goal is 8 yards. That puts the midpoint of the goal about 28 yards from the sideline. Assuming the field is symmetrical, that implies that the field was approximately 56 yards wide. The minimum allowed by FIFA for internationals is 70 yards. My analysis was rather crude but I'd be willing to bet that the field was, in fact, not in accordance with regulations. The real question for discussion would be, should Klinsmann's staff really be out there with a tape measure, or should he just tell his troops to go win the F*ing game?
No reason not to measure. Remember, this is CONCACAF. It's a backwater, 3rd world shitpit of a confederation for the most part. It's built on lies and graft. We need to challenge them.
Phil Schoen mentioned in the broadcast that it met the bare minimum, 70x118 yards I think & that the USSF did bring out the tape measures(tongue0in-cheek, I guess but he implies that the US did measure it before the game.)
It definitely didn't pass the eyeball test, but the commentator said the USSF measured it before the game, so I guess it met the minimum field size, which is surprising considering the the minimum size is raised for international matches. ------------------------------Standard ---------------International match Minimum length:------ 100 yards (90 meters) ----110 yards (100 meters) Minimum width: ---------50 yards (45 meters)----- 70 yards (64 meters) Hard to imagine the field being smaller though.
It looks like the dimensions of the Antigua & Barbuda field were legal. I would say it was the bare minimum of 70 yards which would make sense. For comparison the dimensions of Camp Nou's field are 105x68 m (74 yds). (http://arxiu.fcbarcelona.cat/web/en...orporativa/barca_enxifres/barca_enxifres.html). Meaning the Barça's pitch is/was only 4 yards wider than Antigua's.
I was going to make a point about Gordon having no problem adjusting his cross so everyone should just stfu, but then I remembered that Gordon's home ground is friggin matchbox size.
That field made some of the old postage-stamp MLS fields (Spartan Stadium, Ohio Stadium) look like freaking World Cup fields. And it was worse watching on the shxtty internet feed since you couldn't even really see the sideline.
It seems that the field was legal size, although just barely. Nothing that we could have protested about. However, it still bugs me that this happened in a cricket stadium. Aren't cricket pitches something like 150 yards in diameter? Was there lots more room out there, room that A&B could have used if it had wanted to?
This poster has the width calculated at 68 yards: https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/threads/us-a-b-the-attack-r.1976385/page-5#post-26606116
Agreed. That's my point. If it had been narrow out of necessity, it would have been easier to take than narrow out of extreme gamesmanship. But I suppose that Jamaica and Guatemala had to face the same thing when they played in Antigua, so maybe it's a wash.
I haven't read his post yet, but I'm moving towards the same conclusion after reading this: https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/threads/old-spartan-stadium.1915796/ Screenshot coming up.
Provided marking of the penalty area and the hash was done correctly: the dimensions are supposed to be: 8 yards for the goal line, divided by 2, making it 4. 6 yards for the gk area. 12 yards from gk area to edge of the penalty area. Then from side line to the hash, 10 yards. This would add up to: 32 yards, times two it would be 64 yards. 70 - 64 = 6. Divide six for both sides of the field = 3. This would mean the gap between the hash and the penalty area would have to be 3 yards. Now if you look at the blue line with a height of 26 px, it would cover 1 yard with 8.66 pixels, where it should be somewhere between 17.1px per yard and 10.75px per yard. Meaning the length of the blue line seems highly unlikely to be representing 3 yards. In other words, this field was not 70 yards wide.