Turf Study Confirms “No Major Differences” in Playability of FieldTurf and Natural Grass
Study proves myth wrong and shows similarities between turf and grass for soccer fields.
A recent soccer study was released demonstrating the similar playability of FieldTurf and natural grass fields. The study was conducted by Prozone, an independent consulting firm specializing in soccer performance, and done with the intention of dispelling critics who claim natural grass surfaces provide more stable playing grounds for soccer matches than artificial turf. Prozone installed a player tracking system on 2 fields – one at Luzhniki Stadium (FieldTurf) and the other at Khimki Arena (Natural Grass). Since 2006 Luzhniki has had FieldTurf installed for their pitch, and the results favor the notion that artificial turf is equal to natural grass when it comes to playing soccer.
The test results show that in key playability categories, FieldTurf is similar to natural Grass:
- Distance ran during match: 113.9 km (FieldTurf) vs. 112.1 km (grass)
- Ball touches per player: 2.01 (FieldTurf) vs. 2.06 (grass)
According to the study, a greater percentage of passes are played forward on turf – meaning more offensive and entertaining games are played on it. The fact that the number of tackles per player per game rises only by 0.70 on artificial turf, it illustrates the players are not at a greater risk while playing on this type of surface.
The Prozone study confirms that the FieldTurf surface most replicates natural grass. This is one of the leading reasons why no other company has as many FIFA 1 and 2 Star certifications (180) as FieldTurf. FieldTurf’s technology and system provides a one of a kind product, one that’s meant for sports and soccer. To have the ability to make sudden cuts, control ball speed, and reduce injuries is what’s necessary when playing on a world-class surface. FieldTurf has changed the way the world of soccer perceived artificial turf, and the future of soccer is with FieldTurf.