Exactly the point. Even if FIFA, USSF or anyone else had said anything, once the game started, it was out of their hands. ETA: This was Brian Sciaretta (from NYT's Goal Blog) tweeting before the match on Friday, with a picture of the field: https://twitter.com/BrianSciaretta/status/256947650056835074/photo/1
No. I'm not making the claim that the officials who were there were wrong. But if someone claims that I claim that I can better measure the field's dimensions than the officials that have (presumably) correctly measured the field, than at least I would like to see where I made such allegation (I didn't), and I would like to see a quote+source of where they made the allegations 'cause if it doesn't exist then how could I call their measurements incorrect? So as it stands, there isn't even a source to which I could disagree with. Now I understand your answer to Scotty's question (OP) is simply: the field wasn't illegal. And as evidence you present the fact that 'officials have measured it'. Okay, you completely convinced everyone with some sound evidence. Assume away. As if mistakes or corruption don't exist. Take it to Scotty. But to me it seems his opening post wasn't an allegation, but a question: "So were the dimensions (length and width) below the legal FIFA standards?"
For everyone saying there were FIFA and US Soccer measuring the fields - any quotes that the field passed specs from any of those two?
Because they made that determination after the game started. Once the game starts, it's out of their control. I don't know why they waited till the game started to arrive at that conclusion because the tweet Brian Sciaretta sent out was before the match started. It was already bad. There were about 20 of us there watching them measure the fields. One of the U.S. Soccer Ops guys came over and spoke with us briefly, apologizing for the terrible sightlines (which is common on a cricket field). They didn't mention anything about the field being unplayable and mentioned that while it was a small pitch, that it was their prerogative to have it at the smallest legal dimensions and that the team would work with it.
Probably because they didn't want to make it an excuse. It wasn't the field's fault we played poorly nor did the dimensions play into that. Antigua came to play and we didn't...but we still pulled it out.
Yes, of course that would work. But you can also do it using the picture and technique that SPA2TACUS already posted. He just made a couple of minor mistakes and didn't carry his analysis to it's conclusion. Please indulge me. I measure 5 things along the endline. The 1/4 arc, Touchline to Hash, THE GAP, p-box to 6 yard box and 6 yard box to post. Computed the number of pixels along the endline for each. Now we all know the width of the field is determined by THE GAP. if the gap is 3 yards the field is 72. 2 yards, it's 70, 1 yard it's 68.etc. We also know that we are measuring a straight line that's angled away from us. The pixels further away will have a lower density (pix/yd) than the pixels closer. Knowing that let's look at the Gap assuming a 72, 71, 70 and 69 yard wide field. The 72 yard wide field is impossible. The Gap's pixel density is less than the P-box to 6 yard box density. Can't happen. Similarly, the 69 yard wide field is impossible. The pixel density is greater than the Touch to Hash segment that's closer. Both a 70 and 71 yard wide fields are "valid" widths and assuming the field was lined to a yard increment, the 71 yard wide field best fits the data. You'd expect the Gap's pixels density to be closer to the "P-box to 6" density. since pixel density is growing faster closer to the camera. The field in Antigua was lined to 71 yards wide. Small but legal.
We played them in WCQs in 2005 (Hexagonal), 2008 (Semifinals), and 2009 (Hexagonal) but not in 2004. In 2004 we played Grenada (two legs), Panama, Jamaica, and El Salvador.
It still amazes me no one can access something to go back in time and get a picture? Business opportunity?
Can someone get a picture of the LiveStrong game and compare. It should have only been 3 yards difference but seemed so much wider and played the way the game should be played. Both teams bunkered but the field width had such and important impact on the game.
Do they usually make an announcement that the field has passed specs? Did they make one on Tuesday in Kansas City? Or do they only make an announcement if it doesn't.