"It's nice to have a consistent field," is a typical response I hear from coaches and grounds crew. They all point out how their old field would tear up pretty easily and while some still prefer to play on grass, given the choice they love the consistency that a synthetic field offers. Ironically, in the same conversation, some team members point to the new field as if it was put in place to cultivate their own, unique style of play. Even with traditional natural grass, some sports and parks governing bodies have submitted proposals to fix the worn playing fields with artificial turf. And as practices and games continue over next few months and years, a true determination of trust will play out in the court of public opinion.
From a practical point of view, some players and coaches feel the ball stays on this type of synthetic surface longer than grass. Such information can be advantages for adaptive teams with a technical style of play. On the surface, teams will choose to alter their strategies and techniques.
Of course the use of materials has to be considered from a performance, environmental, health and safety point of view. In this ongoing debate, manufacturers are confident that the best materials have been used. However, the most challenging aspect is fundraising for the new field. In the circles, it’s called “keeping donors interested.” But with a steep price tag to install and construct artificial turf, of course expected environmental and safety questions are of concern. This is why the basis for fiscal decisions for local school districts and community boards has to be scientific and factual and the synthetic turf industry needs to help provide answers to these questions and more.