The dream is over for the Matildas, but what a great tournament they had. One thing of note was the fact they played their game against Japan on a synthetic pitch, in temperatures reaching 40 degrees.
While both sides were dealing with the heat, reports came from Edmonton that many of the girls had problems with the synthetic pitch, or at least the heat generated by it being transferred through the sole of their boots.
Many returned from training with icepacks on their feet and legs, as they experienced what falling onto a synthetic carpet can do to you.
The introduction of synthetic turf to our game is a practical one, allowing play during all types of weather conditions, but it comes with frailties. I suspect injuries have increased playing on this surface, particularly when factoring in burns from your flesh meeting the ‘turf’ at speed.
Football was not designed to be played on artificial turf and the authorities should get rid of them. You won’t find a creditable league across the world playing their competition on the surface, yet FIFA sanctioned its use at the Women’s World Cup in Canada.
Two English League sides in the late 80s introduced a synthetic pitch and played home games on it. The FA were quick to abolish that caper and made the sides dig it up and revert to grass. With the improvements in turf technology, most teams in most leagues play on what I would call carpets compared to the days when I played, so there’s no reason to change the game as we know it by playing on synthetic turf.
Apart from the obvious danger to players there’s the way the ball performs – its bounce and speed across the turf. Then there’s the fact that attempting to cross a ball and getting your foot under the ball on that surface can be difficult. I see players in the A-League constantly unable to beat the first man from corners or set pieces, perhaps they’ve been training on synthetic pitches?
Turf is also unpredictable on the body. Defenders can apply a slide tackles on grass knowing there’s no danger of your dermis being ripped off your leg. When you stop abruptly on turf there’s give in the ground, which cushions the action and helps with less stress on ankles and limbs. If you fall on synthetic turf there’s plastic and underneath that a bloody great concrete slab, which doesn’t give at all.
As for the Matildas, we’ll never know what could have happened if they had met the Japanese on a real park instead of a plastic one.
oly
Guest
We were very lucky to hold on for as long as we did against Japan. And I seem to remember both teams playing on the same pitch. What a stupid argument.
144
Roar Guru
Possibly - i don't think it would have made that much of a difference for any team
glen
Guest
Would the Japanese have won by more if the game was on normal turf?? Anything is possible.
Simoc
Guest
I did. It went Bang, bang, pause, bang, bang. Everything was hitting the back of the net. Most unusual. USA had a plan that delivered very quickly .
Anthony Ferguson
Guest
In a word - no we wouldn't. The Yanks were always going to win this World Cup cos they were truly up for it and were the best team. We did well though. Aim to keep improving and next time we will get closer.
Wicked Ninja
Guest
"You won’t find a creditable league across the world playing their competition on the surface" Why don't you respect the NPL NSW and NPL Victoria clubs that play on artifical turf? If you feel like telling me that they are "only" semi-professional clubs, ask yourself this question: Who develops Australian players before they get signed by A-League clubs?
Fussball ist unser leben
Roar Guru
Simply awesome display by USA Women's team this morning. I've not been impressed by USA, but they won me over today in the only match that matters every 4 years. Japan were cultured & cute with their midfield passing and switches of play. But, it counts for nought if you allow opponents with room to shoot inside the box. When Japan brought the score to 4-2 they had a big chance to make it 4-3. They fluffed it & within a minute USA were clinical in their execution. Reports suggest this match will be watched by more people in the USA than the final game of the recent NBA finals' playoff. If it happens it will be extraordinary for women's sport.
Batou
Guest
Very disappointed for Japan. I missed it as I was at work but it sounds like they did have a Brazil style implosion that ended the game before they knew what hit them. It sounds like they pulled it together to some extent later on but to come back from 4-0 down is almost impossible. Did anyone get to see the game?
Wayne
Roar Guru
Same for both teams. Japan won against Aussies in Vietnam (on Grass) earlier in year. Had tournament been played on grass, Aussies might not have even made it through the group stages. Way to many variables get introduced
Rod
Guest
Would have made no difference. Matildas were out played by Japan. USA just won their third world cup. Way to good. Let's hope Matildas can reach this level one day.
jod
Guest
No excuses please
AZ_RBB
Guest
Brazil v Germany all over again haha
The artist formerly known as Punter
Guest
USA 4 nil up after a crazy 15 minutes.
Brendon Vella
Roar Guru
Ultimately if its the same for both sides there is nothing we can really moan about.
AZ_RBB
Guest
Do we have a live blog for the final?
Batou
Guest
Should they be playing on synthetic pitches?: no Would we have won on grass?: also no. Unfortunately Japan were way too good for us. We tired more, despite two days extra rest, because they ran us all over the pitch all game.
SM
Guest
And here was me thinking it was the same for both teams. What wasn't the same was the two days extra rest we had in the lead up. How on earth does one team get such an advantage at a major international tournament? The Japanese would have been rightfully filthy at that had they lost.
Nick
Guest
Why on earth would that have made a difference? Do Japan have masses of experience playing on fake turf?
MyKey321
Guest
Conditions were the same for both teams. Neither had any advantage because of the turf. Face it, we lost. It is as simple as that!