Originally Posted by
Nesta99
It could as interesting and useful as watching the pitch grow in Oriel Park! I am a total nerd when it comes to ground development, new build techniques, pitch options type stuff. I also find it interesting that no matter how unpopular artificial surfaces are, there is a pragmatic need for acceptance at times and imo more is needed on improving the simulation of natural grass rather than dismissing or banning artificial surfaces.
The issues with the new Wembley and the pitch I still look out for - height of the stands prevent natural sunlight getting to the pitch, the money spent on design and building sliding stand roofs to try fix the issue along with artifical sunlight sources would build a new ground for each LoI club, and it has been a complete failure. Computer models of air movement, sunlight, wear etc made prior to the redevelopment in 2003 (at a cost of €1.6billion in todays money) were useless. Within 5 years the pitch was laid 11 times and the FA eventually conceded that the pitch would need to be relaid approximately 65 times by last year and developed a seperate business plan to factor this issue in to their ongoing costs. A pitch that doesnt get weekly use!! Not unusual for stadia to relay a pitch with just the surface turf during a season but they cant get it to bed in at Wembley so its not just the average half a mil per laid turf pitch. White Hart Lane learned from it and why they can wheel the pitch out of the stadium when they need to (and have artificial surface overylay the grass for American Football etc. Solution for Wembley long term is to perfect the artificial surface.
Seeee nerd level of interest so I hope the sincere tone was sincere;)