Photo by John Rieger/USA Today Sports
By RYAN TOLMICH
The temporary pitch installed at San Antonio’s Alamodome has raised some concerns for the Mexican national team, but Wednesday’s sold-out friendly between the U.S. Men’s National Team and ‘El Tri’ is set to go on.
Medio Tiempo reported Tuesday that Mexico was considering backing out of the upcoming friendly with the USMNT due to field conditions at the Alamodome, which has seen grass placed on top of concrete. According to the report, Mexico is concerned with the integrity of the field and the impact it would have on its players throughout a 90-minute contest.
(UPDATE: U.S. Soccer confirmed that the game is set to go on as scheduled at a pre-match press conference on Tuesday following approval from Mexico manager Miguel Herrera.)
U.S. Soccer released a statement on Tuesday downplaying concerns about a potential cancellation.
“The field installation was not completed when the Mexico National Team representative saw it on Monday,” U.S. Soccer spokesman Neil Buethe said on Tuesday. “Improvements have been made in the past 24 hours and the grounds crew will continue to provide maintenance in the lead up to tomorrow’s match.
“The field will be in playable condition in time for tomorrow’s match.”
The USMNT is scheduled to train on the Alamodome field on Tuesday evening. Mexico cancelled its schedule training session at the Alamodome on Tuesday, moving it to a nearby university in San Antonio.
obviously, Mexico doesn’t have much experience with field conditions in CONCACAF…
I saw Mexico play Dominica in the Alamodome back in the early 2000’s, I think, to a 100% pro-Mexican crowd, on a surface that in no way could be better than what’s out there today.
This is just a mind game.
Mexican team concerned about safety of their players? LOL Talk about priorities in a country where the state has failed in almost all aspects of people’s lives other than getting paid. Bet you that money FMF gets never gets past the directors.
pu$$ies
Amateur.
Mexico now has a built in excuse if they lose.
BTW, why do people here compain about a “cash grab”? Players, coaches, trainers, etc don’t work for free. Also, the more money US Soccer has the more they can pay for scholarships, marketing, coaching clinics, subsidize women’s soccer, etc, etc. People seem to hate it when OTHER peole make money.
I don’t think many fans actually care about the cash grab associated to these friendlies between the US & Mex. The bigger issue is having these grabs in stadiums where sod is rolled out 48-72 hrs before the match. There are tones of stadiums within the US that could have hosted this match where the field is always grass and not this rushed (potentially hazardous) field conditions. University of Phoenix (60K+), Rose Bowl (80K), UofM Big House (100K) could all have been used without this kind of crap.
Big House has turf.
We’ll put nice grass down when you take away the lasers and stop throwing cups full of vile liquids. Deal?
Grass + Concrete = Possible knee injuries. Why not move it to Houston or The Cotton Bowl, two natural surfaces. Hands up, those of us who hate this twice a year friendly? The only thing learned from friendlies against Mexico is the inevitable “largest crowd ever for a U.S. match blah blah blah”
Maybe it’s the possible Gold Cup meeting in the future, or the B sides at best. This one just doesn’t feel much different then any other friendly the US would play.
Pretty sure the cotton bowl is field turf these days. If you mean Jerry’s world (where the cotton bowl is now played) that is field turn with the ability to install natural grass like they did for the gold cup last time.
The answer to this is to play of field turf. Pretty much every NFL team plays on field turf now. If there were any indication it created a greater risk of injury none of them would. The idea that field turf is less safe for soccer players compared to grass has no scientific foundation what so ever. If you don’t like the way the ball travels across the turf fine, but that is really no different than a waterlogged grass field or a hard thinly grassed field players in concacaf encounter regularly.
Tuck Furf! NFL wants to play on it that’s fine, there’s a big difference between just running around on Field Turf compared to depending on it to affect the ball in a non-Flubber-like manner.
That being said, it’s pretty shady if they are just flopping down sod on concrete…
The Cotton Bowl still has a grass surface. The Dallas Cup was played there last week and the grass looked sub par at best. They still host the OU-Texas game along with the Heart of Dallas Bowl. I think the Cotton Bowl would be a great place to host this friendly.
I understand wanting to make money AND spread these games around, but I think Phoenix should become the permanent site for this pointless annual friendly.
Cross San Antonio off of the expansion list!
Could anyone think of a more shameless cash grab by the USSF? I would be interested to know.
Its just as much a cash grab for Mexico as USSF. Notice how they play all the friendlies in the US? They have a deal that just plays them 2 million for each match. They just schedule so many and just show up. US soccer has the same deal with the same company.
Of all the Fields in the US we have to pick out one with issues. Do we or can we make any sound/positive decisions? Hahahahahahaha wow
I have always thought that putting down a temporary natural grass surface is a recipe for disaster. But, Sunil needs his Christmas bonus, so let’s get through this thing.
Mexico and US soccer have a deal with the same company that puts on all the friendlies in the US. Both sides just show up and collect the check.
It has worked in plenty of places, as far back as the Silverdome in the 1994 World Cup.
What they did in the Silverdome isn’t even close to what they are doing here. Scientists from Michigan State University worked for a year and a half on designing the field. They spent $2 million rolling very thickly cut sod over landscape fabric and the already in place turf field, giving the pitch some play. This has been done on a number of turf fields since then, but that’s not what is happening here. This is nothing more than a thin layer of sod placed directly on top of concrete.
Care to evidence your claims that the field is treated differently?
You’re joking right? The internet is full of pictures of the grounds crew laying a single, thin layer of turf over the concrete floor of the alamodome. You haven’t seen one?
Since you apparently need to be spoon fed, here’s the more detailed story from the Washington Post, which clearly shows turf laying on the concrete floor.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2015/04/14/mexicos-soccer-team-is-not-happy-with-the-field-at-the-alamodome/
Just getting the excuses ready…
Where is your technical superiority now?
Why on earth schedule it there. Plenty of other stadiums available. We should never be playing on these crappy surfaces unless there’s a needed benefit (i.e. a Seattle home crowd for a qualifier and even then it’s questionable).
Just kick it back it forth for 90 minutes, collect the checks and go home.
The grass in my back yard is also in “playable” condition. What an amateurish statement there…just saw some footage, the field looks pretty bad.
These are the best of the best. Our grounds crew’s and federations should strive to put them in better position to play a good game. Antigua and Barbados have fields that are in playable condition, yet when we send teams there we blame the pitch as an equalizing factor. USSF should expect better than this. Wait until Nguyen or Cubo Torres tears a knee to shreds on this crud, the backlash will be huge.
The field is terrible, we will back out of this game. What’s that? Game is sold out? Chance to makes millions of dollars? Field isn’t that bad, we’ll see you there and we prefer our loot in unmarked hundreds…