Preparing St James’s Park
terms of a reduction in surface hardness (less jarring of limbs and lower risk of injury in falls) and an increase in surface resilience (more energy feedback to players feet and lower ball bounce) but also the bonus of an increase in traction. As a direct consequence of the research
Preparing Bristol City
results a fully patented, modified Fibreturf rootzone has now been launched under the trade mark name of ‘Fibrelastic Turf ’ with the aim of providing a pitch surface that has all of the attributes provided by a typical fibre reinforced sand dominant rootzone but, most important, is more ‘player friendly’ because of the reduced hardness and extra resilience increase in the surface. It provides a fibre reinforced sand dominant rootzone pitch that feels more like a good quality soil pitch in optimum
early season condition. Two top tier football clubs, Bristol City in the Championship League and Newcastle United in the Premier League have chosen to install Fibrelastic Turf ’ rootzones this season. Initial feedback from the first few matches has been very positive. It will be very interesting to see if this second generation fibre reinforced rootzone material continues to perform as well as a typical fibre reinforced pitch together with the ‘player friendly’ benefits that are indicated by the STRI research results. The STRI will be monitoring both pitches closely throughout the season with at least four visits per pitch in order to record hardness, traction and grass cover data.
New technology at Newcastle Full growth at Bristol City
Stuart Pearce, England’s Under 21 coach, thanked Bristol City for their “Unbelievable pitch” after the 1-1 draw against Romania U21’s in August.
He said “I spoke with the Groundsman before the game and the quality of the pitch was great.
I was told it was in good nick but didn’t realise it was as good as it was.
“I’d definitely support the use of Ashton Gate again.”
EDDIE Rutherford, Newcastle United’s Stadium Manager, has always been keen to bring new technologies to St James’s Park. The opportunity to use the Fibrelastic turf product to improve the playing characteristics of the pitch seemed a logical step forward, particularly for reducing any hardness at the start of the season. The Fibrelastic material is pre-mixed into the designated rootzone products. Around 1500 tons of this rootzone material was used in the reconstruction of the playing surface during the end of season renovations carried out in May by contractor, Hellens Sport. The top 100mm of material was koroed off, the pitch was then power harrowed, raked and top dressed with 100mm of the new material, and over sown. The whole job was completed in a week with the seed germinating seven days later. It was then up to Eddie’s groundstaff to take over and bring the surface into play with a programme of feeding, watering and mowing regimes throughout the summer period while, at the same time, having to cope with a Rod Stewart concert in June. Most stadium pitches tend to be fairly firm
for a short period after renovations due to the lack of grass density and, to a degree, due to having no surface thatch present. According to Eddie this often results in
... and at Bristol City Craig Richardson, Head Groundsman explains
top of what you already get from a standard Fibreturf pitch and, more importantly, a softer playing surface was of great interest. We made a collective decision there and then to go ahead and install the new Fibrelastic for the 2007/08 season. Work on the pitch started in May. Pugh
We initially considered using the new Fibrelastic in September 2006 after seeing results from the initial trials carried out on the new product by the STRI. I then visited the trial grounds at STRI in West Yorkshire with our Managing Director, Doug Harman, and our Group Chief Executive, Colin Sexstone in February 2007 met Steve Baker, Head of Soils and Sports Surface Science. Needless to say, we were extremely impressed with what we saw. The fact that we would get extra resilience and increased traction from the addition of elastic fibres on
Lewis were the main contractors. Premier Pitches were the sportsfield contractors employed to install, grade and seed the pitch. Fortunately they had already installed the rootzone at Newcastle United which gave them some good experience. Once the top 100mm of existing fibeturf
rootzone was removed work began on re- draining the pitch by adding new sand slits and also installing a new irrigation system which included pop ups in the pitch. The new Fibrelastic was then installed, expertly levelled and seeded using MM60. We had a concert after six weeks which
left some damage in the north third of the pitch, but we managed to bring it back in
time for the first game against Queens Park Rangers which was an entertaining 2-2 draw. Our players thought the pitch was fantastic and so did the opposition. Their manager at the time, John Gregory, came out to see me and Geoff after the game and complimented us on a superb playing surface on behalf of his players. You don’t normally get comments like that unless the other team has just won 5-0. We also recently hosted England U21’s v Romania. The manager Stuart Pearce and his players were over the moon with the pitch. We have just had our first visit from Steve
Baker of the STRI, (first of four visits), which has been organised by Russell Latham at Mansfield Sand, and the results of his tests are very interesting. The hardness results are more like a soil pitch but without the divots. Let’s hope that the pitch continues to perform this well throughout the season. I’m sure it will!
comments from players about the pitches being hard at the start of the season. However, this year he has not received one single comment about surface hardness and puts this down to the resilient characteristics of the Fibrelastic now installed in the pitch. Eddie accepts that it is still early days, and only time will tell whether the new product will
continue to provide benefits for both players and groundstaff, but the initial signs are promising.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104