With FIFA engrossed in scandal over large-scale claims of corruption, football’s governing body would have hoped that the Women’s World Cup in Canada might have brought with it some positive press.
Instead, their decision to play all 52 matches on artificial turf has created its own wave of negativity and criticism. The 6 venues selected for Canada 2015 all have artificial pitches rather than natural grass.
Critics of the move claim that the synthetic pitches bring an increased risk of serious injury as well as creating unnatural and sometimes unpredictable ball movement.
The issue has been taken very seriously and in the lead-up to the tournament a number of players, including USA striker Abby Wambach, filed a lawsuit demanding that the matches be played on natural grass. Earlier this year the lawsuit was dropped.
It’s the first time that a competition of such magnitude has been played on a synthetic surface. Much of the outrage at FIFA’s decision has been fuelled by feelings of gender discrimination, as many believe such a change would not be implemented in the men’s game.
The artificial surfaces do however have their obvious advantages. With no wear and tear, the pitches are available to be re-used multiple times in short succession, perfect for the tournament format.
In Canada this has meant the schedulers have been able to play back-to-back fixtures in the same stadium, arguably increasing the crowd numbers. It has also meant there is less need for numerous stadiums, limiting travel for the players and fans.
Chief Stadia Officer for the tournament, Don Hardman was quick to defend FIFA’s decision. He explained: “We had to take into account usage, the stadiums we wanted to use, community use and in Canada, the weather is a big factor”.
Still, the general consensus amongst the players competing at the Women’s World Cup seems to be a universal dislike of the artificial surfaces.
US star Wambach has openly voiced her dissatisfaction at the controversial decision. “It’s a kind of nightmare,” the forward claimed. She went on to say the surface “affects everything” and can leave painful “turf burns” on the player’s legs and arms.
But what about the risk of serious injury? As Ryan Hill, a sports physiotherapist from Vancouver, explains: “Statistical evidence doesn’t prove beyond doubt that artificial turf is worse than grass, but anecdotally the players say it is.”
