As England prepare for a key European Championship qualification match against Slovenia on Saturday, manager Roy Hodgson has called the quality of the surface of the Wembley pitch into question.
He has also criticised the scheduling of an NFL match just six day before his team are due to play.
The managing director of Wembley, Roger Maslin, admitted that the pitch “will not be of the highest standard” when the two teams do battle on Saturday, a week after the Jacksonville Jaguars played the Dallas Cowboys in the last of this season’s three NFL games at Wembley.
Maslin blames a summer pitch renovation – where too much topsoil was added – as the principle reason for the grass visibly cutting up and marking during the NFL game.
The Wembley pitch has come in for criticism after a non-football event before, after the very first NFL International Series game in 2007 when Miami Dolphins and the New York Giants clashed in atrocious weather conditions.
The standard of the pitch was heavily criticised prior to England’s 3-2 defeat to Croatia in a vital European 2008 qualifier, a result which contributed towards England’s failure to qualify for the tournament. That match took place three weeks after the NFL, and the pitch was still in an awful condition after a month of persistent heavy rain.
Although this match was later remembered for England coach Steve McClaren being dubbed ‘the wally with the brolly’, it was just one of a number of embarrassing pitch issues that the new Wembley has faced.
Since the new Wembley was completed in 2007, numerous managers and players have criticised the pitch – Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger described it as “laughable” and a “disaster” after an FA Cup semi-final defeat.
The failure of the pitch to sufficiently ‘bed in’ is in part due to the large number of events that Wembley hosts, ranging from football, rugby union and league, boxing and concerts. There have been 50 live music events since the stadium reopened – and even twice hosting a motor sports ‘Race of Champions’ spectacle. But this frequent leasing of the stadium is essential for the FA to pay off the £798 million (AU$1.46 billion) construction bill.
Experts have said that the Wembley pitch, historically the envy of every groundsman in the country – if not the world – would never reach these heights again due to the sheer number of different events taking place on the turf each season.
The pitch was relaid 10 times in the first three years after the stadium reopened in 2007, and the same experts suggest that constantly relaying the grass – at an estimated cost of about £100,000 (AU$185,000) is the only way to ensure a pristine playing surface at modern, multipurpose stadiums.
Australian football is also impacted by multi-use stadiums. When the Socceroos played Jordan at Docklands in a 2014 World Cup qualifier, just three days after an AFL game, then captain Lucas Neill lamented the fact that football in Australia would always have to compete with AFL and the rugby codes, resulting in a less-than-ideal playing surface.
While a less than perfectly smooth surface is generally acceptable for both rugby codes and AFL, it is not the best for football. After scrubbing out the vast number of promotional and pitch markings, the pitch can end up looking, and playing very poorly.
There are plenty of examples of players and managers voicing concerns over the standard of playing surfaces, but there is some evidence to suggest that Australian stadiums are upping their game.
The PFA (Professional Footballers Australia) introduced a ‘Pitch Rating System’ in 2009-2010 which attempted to quantify the quality of A-League pitches and possibly address the problems some venues were having in preparing satisfactory pitches early in the A-Leagues existence.
In the four seasons I could locate records for, Brisbane’s Lang Park was voted best for the first two years, and Melbourne’s AAMI Park was voted the best pitch the following two seasons. Interestingly, this suggests the multi-sport usage of stadiums didn’t seem to affect the perceived quality of the pitch.
Other Roarers will have a better idea than me, but from my experience, apart from the SFS – which often takes on the unfortunate appearance of a ploughed field – Newcastle’s Hunter Stadium and the occasionally patchy Suncorp Stadium, the quality of pitches used in Australian football appears to be pretty high, particularly bearing in mind the local football team isn’t the primary tenant.
But this is scant consolation for Wembley’s primary tenants.
Roy Hodgson will be hoping that the Wembley groundskeeping team manage to make the field as playable as possible for his team, as they hope to avoid slipping up in what will be captain Wayne Rooney’s 100th appearance for England.
Perhaps when the Wembley debt is finally paid off, the ground can once more live up to its name and again be the envy of football pitches around the world.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
You're probably right Jim, the pitch topic has probably been blown out of all proportion - but with the England football team and the British press, there is no surprise in that!
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
AAMI Park's new pitch has been laid in 10 working days - ready for Sunday's match. This is what a true football pitch should look like - best in the country: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2XgsJUIQAANdtD.jpg
Knoxy
Guest
Fuss, where did AR say that ARF and the rugby codes don't require good quality playing surfaces? How does anything he's said here validate your point?
Roger Susan
Roar Rookie
Good quality? Depends on how good quality is defined isn't it?. Mountain biking would not define a smooth surface as good quality? Extreme example but you get my point. In fact is there a criteria for surface quality for the codes. I'd assume softness, give, evenness and grass length are key.
Jim Ling
Guest
With the Wembley pitch, and respect to Mr Hodgson: BUT the England footie sides don't exactly play a fast flowing, along the ground, pass and move, style do they? For sure they will train and prepare on great surfaces at The FA Centre of Excellance. However if they, England, want to know how to prepare for the surface then they need to find a rugby pitch, get it rolled and then practice on that for a few hours. It is the same for both sides etc. For a manager to get his excuses in early does not strike me as a confidence master stroke unless it was only a comment by Mr. H which has been "exploded" by press.
nickoldschool
Roar Guru
Hi hardcore (and simon), we unsurprisingly have the same clichés. Replace Arsenal by Nantes and Halifax by Douai or whatever smallish club and that's what we had. Maybe I have been brainwashed by the French commentators I listened to over there but I tend to see and agree with their point (to some extent): a/ the smallish/home team is used to playing on this 'potatoes field" (that's what we call a very poor pitch), perhaps not so much the other team b/ as Simon says, the top team is supposed to be more technical with a better passing game, hence the need for a perfect pitch to play 'their' game. A lesser team, with supposedly less skills was seen as not needing a good pitch to develop their game and could even 'benefit' a lucky bounce! I know this was laughable and full of cliches but we did believe this, especially when our teams were playing in Iceland/Russia's frozen pitches, Roumania and other easter euro countries etc. Plus those were the 80s, no internet, only 3 TV channels so if the commentators and coaches were saying that before a trip to those exotic countries, we did believe them and thought 'better be careful'. :) That's football folklore at its best I have to say, still have a distant love for those clichés!
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
I made the observation a few weeks ago that, unlike Football which requires top quality pitches, the carry ball sports (ARF, RL, RU) do not need good quality surfaces ... .. and the AFL ranters went into a fit of apoplexy. Thanks for validating my point.
AR
Guest
1) I don't "hate" any sports. That's your bag. 2) Asking whether synthetic turf is necessary for rugby league and rugy union, is a perfectly legitimate question. If it's not necessary, then it's possible that the owners of the stadium wouldn't spend the money on it. It's all a hypothetical in any event, but at present, as far as I'm aware, soccer is the only sport which needs improved surfacing.
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
"Whether a full-blown upgrade to synthetic turf is viable and/or necessary (for all tenants) is another matter." Huh?? What does that mean? Do you think the upgraded turf would only be for Football & then they'd roll out the old turf for other sports? Your blind hatred for football is making your come up with more bizarre posts than normal.
AR
Guest
"Or, are you suggesting, surface quality is irrelevant to the carry ball sports?" Actually, I think the AFL/cricket grounds probably have the best surfaces in the country...largely perhaps because they're not chewed up by the rugbies. But the problem seems to be primarily a soccer one...and the government tends to respond by paying for it. Whether a full-blown upgrade to synthetic turf is viable and/or necessary (for all tenants) is another matter.
Christo the Daddyo
Guest
Oh I see what you mean. Yeah, fair point.
Christo the Daddyo
Guest
The pitch at Hunter has just been replaced. I'd also describe ANZ Stadium's playing surface as Poor-Good. Depends on what events have been using it as to what it's quality is at any one time.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
Ye that's a real good point Hardcore, I think there are times in winter when Wembley doesn't get any sun at all on the grass due to the size of the stands. This fact was one of the major issues that was bought up time and again when the Millenium Stadium in Cardiff had so many grass troubles early in its life. Due to the roof being retractable, even when it is open the stands are very high and the roof very oppressive, leading a fairly small opening for weather to get in... I have a feeling there was a stadium in Japan for their World Cup that was totally indoors (The Sapporo Dome?) and the pitch could be wheeled out on a bed of air so it could get some natural night and weather onto it? Obviously not so easy to do for an inner city stadium like the Millenium Stadium...
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
Anecdotally, pitches for lower league teams are prepared differently depending on the style those teams employ - for example when Boston were in League 2, they played a long ball style of game, which didn't involved much on the ground passing, and is fairly common in the lower leagues. I know that subsequently, their coach used to ask the groundsmen grow the grass a little longer to stop certain teams being able to pass the ball about. This might just be the opinion of a one eyed Southend United fan though!
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
@AR Stadium resurfacing is a normal asset management expense item. I'd expect most modern stadiums would budgeted for such maintenance every 4-5 years? Landlords undertake regular asset management on their premises to ensure they maximise the return from their asset. The tenant never makes any direct capital contribution; indirectly the costs may be recouped by the landlord increasing the rental. AAMI Park is undertaking its resurfacing right now - after 4 years of high intensity (12 months a year) utilisation. MCG resurfacing was completed a few weeks ago - after 8 years of low intensity (6 months a year) utilisation. I would assume every team that plays on a stadium surface appreciates the improved quality. Or, are you suggesting, surface quality is irrelevant to the carry ball sports?
AR
Guest
"If stadiums are being used for multiple purposes, it’s time for stadium owners to invest in hard-wearing turf that is designed to cope with heavy traffic." There's a few issues here. One, by "stadium owners" I assume you mean governments. It's possible that governments could be lobbied to spend more money on upgrading surfaces. Two, however, successful lobbying is often contingent on the number of represented stakeholders. In this case, it's likely to be just the ALeague club tenants (and not the NRL or Super club tenants). Whether this would justify the spend is debatable. Three, given the special needs of some tenants (ALeague clubs) would they or the FFA be willing to contribute any capital to the upgrades? This is relevant because the upgrades don't affect the needs of the patrons, they affect the mere preferences of the tenants themselves.
HardcorePrawn
Roar Guru
There's the old cliché, so beloved of English football commentators, about how poor pitches are a great leveller in mismatched cup ties: "Obviously you've got to favour Arsenal to win here, but the quality of the pitch is sure to be a great leveller that might just give Halifax the advantage..." It always struck me as odd how a bumpy pitch could be seen to be more beneficial to a lower league team with their less talented players.
George Haida
Roar Rookie
When pitches aren't of good quality fair enough it needs to be improved but when teams and managers complain about it after losing a game i see it as a bit stupid because both teams have the same disadvantages?
HardcorePrawn
Roar Guru
Another thing to take into account is that so many of these larger stadiums have their own micro-climates, and often don't get much in the way of sunshine, rain, or even wind thanks to retractable roofs, high banks of seating etc. I'd imagine that for large parts of the year the Wembley pitch gets little to no natural light. While there are ways and means of artificially providing light to grass I'm sure it can't really replace a bit of proper sunshine on the grass.
Simon Smale
Roar Guru
Hi Fuss, ye I pretty much agree with those rating from watching on TV, although I cannot see past the SFS as being pretty terrible from watching a union game there and seeing Israel Folau score a try and disappear into a tuft of grass so dense it looked like someone had cultivated a bush in the in goal... But something like that is bound to stick in my mind! I read an interview with the curator of AAMI Park, Justin Lang, and he suggested that a lack of traffic on the pitch, as well as the StaLok turf system and the favourable climate (in as such that they can use one type of turf (rye grass) all year round as opposed to having to change seasonally as major factors in the high quality of he pitch there. Interestingly, this StaLok system is very similar to the system used in a lot of big European Stadiums called Desso GrassMaster. Acts on the same principle by binding synthetic and natural fibres together and is used at Stamford Bridge (I think it was installed after the pitch was criticised during the Claudio Ranieri era when they played a game against Charlton in what looked like a sand pit) amongst others such as Old Trafford, Anfield, The Emirates, Croke Park in Dublin, the Amsterdam Arena, Lambeau Field in Green Bay etc. it's also used in Dunedins Forsyth Barr Stadium, but nowhere in Australia. Perhaps not such a great selling point for it is that it's also the surface used at Wembley... So perhaps despite all the technology, huge credit should go to groundsmen like Mr Lang for maintaining such a great surface.