Oh, that blasted infield dirt!
- Thread starter jim1
- Start date
fairbanksb
Panhandler
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2003
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 1
Expound please. What about it? The U didn't seem to have a problem with it last night.
Article from ( I think) a Sun Sentinel blog. Apparently the hard infield dirt is causing poor footing and a lot of cuts, scrapes and bleeding. No surprises there. My question is why the team over the years hasn't laid a high quality artificial turf over the dirt patches. Not ideal, but maybe better than dirt.
fairbanksb
Panhandler
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2003
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 1
Not an ideal surface, no doubt but IMHO just excuses. As I posted, the Canes thumped GT last night. What about play on a snow covered field, rain soaked fields, frigid conditions, stifling heat? Taylor was interviewed and stated that we can put a man on the moon but not figure out how to remove that dirt. True, but you have to be able to play and win under all the above stated conditions. Why is the dirt such a problem?
More of an annoyance than a problem. Both teams on the field have to live with it. My point again is why not cover the dirt up with artificial turf- I'm assuming that real grass wouldn't stick well and would be a mess.
Howard Stern
☠️ Banned ☠️
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,206
- Reaction score
- 10
It actually worked in the favor of the Canes last night. Turns out they didn't need any miss field goals, but if they did, the dirt sure would have helped.
Had it been the Fins, we probably would have ended up on the short end of that stick.
Had it been the Fins, we probably would have ended up on the short end of that stick.
fairbanksb
Panhandler
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2003
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 1
You have a point but how would they anchor is down? Would it slip if someone tried to make a cut on it? What about the mound? Would turf disguise that rise in the field and cause players to trip and stumble over it?
The mound is flat for football games :crazy:
fairbanksb
Panhandler
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2003
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 1
Point taken. What about the first point. It's quite different having artificial turf covering the whole field than trying to patch individual areas with it. What would the cost of doing this be. The cost of the turf, the extra man hours it would take for grounds keepers to cover and uncover the dirt. I don't follow baseball so I don't know when their last game was but just this week they would put turf down for the Canes game, taking it off for baseball, putting it back on for a Sunday or Monday night Fins game, etc., etc.
What's your point?
This isn't about competetive advantage, it's about thwe annoyance of playing on dirt. Again, both teams have to live with it equally.
fairbanksb
Panhandler
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2003
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 1
Regardless of my mistake covering the dirt with turf would still be a field with two different playing surfaces. Dirt and grass vs. turf and grass. I don't know whether turf would help.
It was just a thought, but I would guess that playing on carefully placed and secured pieces of turf would be better than hard dirt.
fairbanksb
Panhandler
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2003
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 1
And a fair issue to debate. Not meaning to attack the messenger just making counter points. I don't like the dirt either. I just don't know what to do about it.
And a fair issue to debate. Not meaning to attack the messenger just making counter points. I don't like the dirt either. I just don't know what to do about it.
I hear you. It just seems like a simple solution to me, put high quality turf where the dirt is. I don't really see a down side. As to securing it, they should be able to peg it down in a way that wouldn't cause harm or discomfort, ie no hard tops or sharp edges on whatever fastens it down.