Homepage > Fake turf fails

Fake turf fails

19/04/2013 14:51

In 2012, the first artificial turf pitch was introduced in the Danish Premier League (Superligaen). This has resulted in a hectic debate among fans and players. A survey conducted by the Danish Player Association (Spillerforeningen) during the soccer season, clearly demonstrates that the vast majority of the players do not support the use of artificial turf at the highest level of football. Considering the great progress in turf care and development that has been achieved in recent years, the clubs should carefully evaluate if the economic resources needed for an artificial pitch could be better spent on a traditional, natural turf solution.

Low scores for artificial turf

In 2012, the captains of the Danish Premier League teams voted for a “Pitch of the Year” for the first time. After each match they were asked to rate the pitch from 1 to 5 (with 5 as the best). The result speaks for itself. The only artificial turf pitch in the league failed completely with an average score of only 1!

Another survey among all players in the Danish Player Association shows that 83% of the players think that nature of the game changes when playing on artificial turf. Furthermore, 71% do not believe it is fair when some clubs have access to training on artificial turf while others do not have it to the same extent.

The poor perception of artificial pitches among the Danish players is in line with the results of a similar survey made in Norway. Due to the harsh climate, they have much more experience with playing on artificial turf. 90% of the Norwegian players say that artificial turf is not the best solution when you are aiming high in European soccer. In fact, 73% of the players prefer playing on natural turf.

Great improvements of natural turf solutions

When natural turf pitches are compared with artificial turf it is often the picture of a muddy grass pitch destroyed by winter and play late in the season that is used as the major benefit. Due to immense progress in research and development of natural turf grass this is, however, no longer a correct way to demonstrate the differences. New knowledge of optimal turf care and drainage makes an enormous difference. Furthermore, new grass varieties with increased wear tolerance and improved ability to grow under cold and unfavorable conditions brings the natural grass pitches to the highest standards, successfully offsetting the perceived benefits of artificial turf.

4TURF and AXCELLA – are new unique ryegrasses. AXCELLA was introduced at the world championship in soccer in South Africa, 2010. Here it ensured pitches of very high quality. 4TURF has a unique durability and is very resistant to winter diseases. Research and development of normal perennial ryegrass has also shown significant progress. Studying the official list of Dutch turf grass reveals that the improvement in wear tolerance during the past 30 years has resulted in 117 extra playing hours pr season!

All together, this raise the question whether money could be better spent on natural turf pitches than on artificial turf pitches. 96% of the Danish Premier League players in the survey answered that they would prefer that the resources are spent on improving the quality on natural turf pitches.

Environment and climate

What about the environmental impact of production and maintenance of artificial turf? Calculations show that for every artificial turf pitch, one natural turf pitch would have to be constructed in order to compensate for the increased CO2-emission from the artificial turf. Surprisingly, research shows that one hectare of turf grass is removing more CO2 from the atmosphere than one hectare of forest!

An increasing public concern relates to the consideration of any harmful compounds in artificial turf? – This is an area where little information is presently available. In California, however, a simple analysis was made some years ago. Drain water from 5 artificial pitches and 5 natural turf pitches were analyzed. The test showed that the amount of cadmium in drain water from artificial turf pitches exceeded the allowed limits. The analysis also included a test with living daphnia. The results were very clear: all daphnia died after 36 hours in the drain water from the artificial pitches. For comparison, none of the daphnia died from the control group in drain water from a natural grass pitches.

Natural turf – the economical solution

The price per playing hour is also very relevant to consider, when comparing artificial turf with natural turf. When taking all costs into the equation, the price per playing hour on a natural turf pitch is between 37 and 58 Euros. On an artificial turf pitch the price per playing hour is between 62 and 74 Euros. These figures are based on a survey regarding the actual operational costs from Dutch and German pitches.

Facts - Axcella: