Artificial turf steps out of the shade

Synthetic surfaces are being showcased on ever higher profile football matches. Can they go all the way to the finals?

On 17 October 2007, artificial turf took a major step forwards as England played a competitive international football match in Moscow against Russia, on a synthetic surface. The game took place at the city's 84,754-seat Luzhniki Stadium, home ground to Spartak Moscow and Torpedo Moscow, two of the most famous names in Russian club football.

Shade from stadium roofs and stands can inhibit grass growth,
but this isn’t a problem for Luzhniki Stadium’s artificial turf

The surface, supplied by leading manufacturer FieldTurf Tarkett and approved by world football's governing body, FIFA, was the subject of controversy among the English media – although little of this debate was sparked by anyone involved with the England team.

“FIFA and UEFA have approved the surface and we'll deal with it,” said assistant manager Terry Venables, as England began their preparations for the game. Much of the fuss was pure media furore, but the widespread concern was reflective of the very real scepticism that still exists towards artificial turf.

The fact that European football's governing body UEFA has requested a grass pitch at Luzhniki Stadium for the 2008 UEFA Champions League Final, Europe's showpiece club football match, is another indicator of the current mood of hesitancy to adopt the artificial playing surface for extremely high profile games. The artificial turf will be taken up and replaced with real grass in time for the match, set to take place at the stadium in May.
Opinion has clearly changed since UEFA communications director William Gaillard's assertion in 2005 that “only a cow could tell between real grass and the new generation turf".

"We've asked for the grass pitch to be laid for the Champions League final," said a UEFA spokesman, stating that the association’s preference is for games to take place on grass, once competitions reach the semi-finals stage. “The finals of the [2008] European Championships will also be played on a natural surface – we want to have the real feeling of grass wherever possible. Qualifying games on artificial surfaces are okay, but for the final it is different – it's a one-off match.”

At the very highest level of football, authorities are taking the introduction of artificial turf at a gradual pace. They don't want to rush into anything while people's opinions adjust and the surface becomes more widely accepted. And yet the Russia versus England game demonstrated that the FIFA-recommended 2-Star football surface is already good enough for a high profile international match.

FIFA’s turf consultant Nigel Fletcher is well placed to comment on these developments. “There is a psychological barrier of player perception and coach perception with artificial turf. Only through match experience for both players and coaching staff will the acceptability of this playing surface increase at professional level.”

International turf trial
The turf at Luzhniki Stadium is one of several artificial surfaces at professional clubs around Europe. Six of these, including Luzhniki’s, were installed around five years ago after UEFA decided to trial the latest third-generation artificial turf pitches, with a pilot scheme over a variety of national competitions. The scheme involves using UEFA-certified and FIFA-recommended pitches over a number of years.

Artificial turf has been popular on US sports fields for decades

As well as Luzhniki stadium, the scheme incorporates East End Park in Dunfermline, Scotland; De Polman Stadium in Almelo, Netherlands; Eyravallen Stadium in Orebro, Sweden; Denizli Atatürk Stadium in Denizli, Turkey; and Wals Siezenheim Stadium in Salzburg, Austria.

Each stadium received a subsidy of GBP 137,000 (RMB 2m) from UEFA for taking part in the pilot study. In return, stadium managers had to cooperate with UEFA on research that focused on the interaction between players and the surface. Studies incorporated biomechanical tests, as well as looking at safety and injuries derived from both player-to-player contact and player-to-turf contact.
The surface made particular sense at Luzhniki Stadium, as Moscow is subject to harsh climatic conditions that impact on the hardness of the ground. An integral part of the project was installing a high-tech heating system in conjunction with the turf system, which would allow for extended play during cold weather.

Will artificial turf take over?
Host City put it to Fletcher whether it was FIFA's goal to see synthetic surfaces eventually take over from natural grass. “Artificial turf was never to become a norm; the development and strategy of artificial turf was always to be a suitable alternative, especially in countries where there are micro-climates that make good natural grass difficult. Furthermore, artificial turf can help club and community development and increase playing participation globally. In addition, its installation can help stabilise the finances of the football club, as the game can be played more often on this type of surface,” he says.

Fletcher's organisation is an enthusiastic supporter of artificial turf, and FIFA president Sepp Blatter was known to be keen on some use of artificial surfaces at the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa. But so far no decision has been made on this.

However, the artificial turf industry will view the Russia versus England game as a step in the right direction. It is certainly very good news for FieldTurf Tarkett. As the England team includes some of the most famous names in world football, to have them play on the surface is excellent PR for the industry. Although world-famous midfielder David Beckham has synthetic surfaces installed at his own football academy in London, he voiced his doubts about a FieldTurf surface in the US shortly after joining Los Angeles Galaxy, so for the England team to play a competitive international qualifying match on artificial turf is a welcome boost for FieldTurf.

Turf solves design issues
Natural grass requires direct sunlight and a good supply of air, which means stadiums must be designed to let the elements in. However, outdoor sports venues in cold and wet climates often have an opposing concern – to keep the elements out, for the comfort of players and spectators. And stadiums in residential areas are often required to keep noise inside, which requires architecture that can cause shading issues for turf growth.

Innovative stadium designs can address these considerations to some degree, but a natural grass pitch will always restrict the scope and usage of any structures around and above it. Synthetic surfaces, on the other hand do away with the need for any restriction on stadium design.

“Natural surfaces struggle inside modern stadiums, where spectator sightlines rightly take priority over the condition of the turf,” says Paul Sergeant, who was general manager of Cardiff's Millennium Stadium before relocating to Brisbane, Australia, to take up the helm at the city's multipurpose venue Suncorp Stadium. “Architects have failed dismally, despite millions of dollars been wasted on fancy new roof solutions. All they have done is succeed in making the field look like a giant jigsaw puzzle with shadow lines all over the place.”

Sergeant is of the opinion that artificial turf needs to be more thoroughly put through its paces over a more intense calendar of events before it can be more widely considered. While conceding that there are limitations to using real grass in a busy venue, “as a venue manager you have to ask yourself if you want to be the guinea pig,” he says.

An economic incentive
Another person well-placed to comment on these developments is Hank Steinbrecher, who was secretary general of the US Soccer Federation from 1990 to 2000. Throughout the nineties, football in the US made great strides both on and off the field. Steinbrecher organised two FIFA World Cup competitions during his tenure – the men's in 1994 and the women's in 1999 – and additionally helped establish Major League Soccer, the domestic club competition in the US. He is also employed as a specialist consultant to FieldTurf.

“The most important factor for clubs is economic,” says Steinbrecher. “All clubs, whether they be Premier League or local teams, must look for ways to drive new revenue sources for their operations. Does it make sense to open a stadium for only 30 dates a year? Why not operate the stadium for 300 dates a year? The revenue produced by parking, concessions and merchandising will all help the bottom line. Once clubs understand that natural grass fields will not support 300 venue nights per year they will see the economic advantages of converting to artificial turf.”

Build it and they will come
Ben Veenbrink, former general manager of the Amsterdam Arena Advisory group, who now heads up his own stadium consultancy business, gives a positive prognosis for growth in the artificial turf market. “In my opinion it will not take too long before some major European stadiums will convert to artificial turf, given the problems they have experienced with natural turf.”

An increase in the uptake of synthetic surfaces will hinge on more major venues taking the plunge. “It all depends on one of the big clubs being willing to take the chance so that more Champions League matches are played on artificial turf. Then many will follow. Also, the new generation of players are used to playing in youth teams on artificial surfaces so there will be less resistance from them.”

The semi-finals and finals of the 2007 FIFA Under-20
World Cup in Canada, held at Field, were played on a
FieldTurf synthetic pitch at Toronto’s BMO stadium

Steinbrecher says that the 2007 FIFA Under-20 World Cup in Canada was an important milestone in bringing the artificial turf towards global widespread acceptance. “FieldTurf fields at Montreal’s Olympic Stadium and Toronto’s BMO Field were used for 40 per cent of the matches, including the semi-finals and final at BMO Field. The best news was that there was no news about artificial turf at all. The fields were not an issue in the press. The focus of the media was not on the difference of natural grass versus artificial turf. It was clear that the play was not affected. The media focus was on the quality of play itself.”

The game between England and Russia was another landmark on artificial turf’s journey forwards, he says. “We congratulate UEFA and the Football Union of Russia (RFU) for making this possible.”

This recent revival of interest in synthetic surfaces suggests that the biggest events in world football could one day be taking place on artificial turf. Steinbrecher says: “The more stadiums that convert to artificial turf, the greater the chance that artificial turf will be the surface of choice. FIFA has in fact taken the lead in this endeavour. The 2003 and 2005 Under-17 World Championships in Finland and Peru and the 2007 Under-20 World Cup were all played on some artificial pitches. This trend will only grow.”

As the advantages of artificial turf are demonstrated on ever bigger stages, the current wave of interest in the surface looks set to sustain itself. With the number of landmark games becoming more frequent and more prominent, it is quite possible that future World Cup Finals will be staged on synthetic surfaces.