Bad Football Pitches in the United States - Fact or Fiction? A Look into Validity of Playing Surface Complaints at the FIFA Club World Cup

Introduction

Following his side’s 2-0 win over Seattle Sounders, PSG coach Luis Enrique complained about the poor state of the pitch, comparing the poor pitch at Lumen Field, Seattle, to a pothole-filled basketball court.

“I wouldn’t imagine an NBA court full of holes,” Enrique said. “The ball bounces almost like a rabbit jumping around.”

His sentiments were echoed by Real Madrid star Jude Bellingham, who decried the poor state of the pitch of Bank of America Stadium, Charlotte, NC, after their 2-0 win over Mexican side Pachuca.

“The pitches are not great here, honestly. It holds up the ball.” Bellingham admitted after the match, terming them ‘bad for the knees.’

Chelsea captain Reece James went on his own two-footed, studs-up challenge on the state of the pitches after their win over Benfica.

“It’s difficult pitches, a difficult climate. The ball goes 100 feet in the air, and it bounces one meter up. It’s not what we’re used to.” Reece James said. He further went on to state that the poor state of the pitches made players tired out quicker. “I feel you get a lot leggier quicker, playing on pitches that are not so good. It’s not just for us; it’s for everyone involved in the competition. For the fans, for the people watching, it would be better quality if the pitches were more acclimatized for us.”

These are just a few samples of a wide myriad of complaints that have plagued American Stadiums throughout the recently concluded Club World Cup. And these complaints are relevant heading into World Cup 2026 because at least five venues hosting the Club World Cup will be part of the 16 venues to host the World Cup in 2026.

But are the complaints of poor pitches valid, or could it be just a bunch of overpaid prima donnas making much ado about nothing? Join me in this deep dive to find out whether the state of pitches increases the risk of injuries to players and minimizes the quality of football.

Optimal vs Sub-Optimal Conditions

I was out with a friend recently, and our football conversation shifted into what exactly makes the apex of football so exceptional. We ran through the usual - exceptional talent and athleticism, a boatload of luck, and of course, a perfect confluence of luck meeting opportunity. But then this friend, nerdy as always, pointed out another thing - optimization. 

He said that what separates the professionals from amateurs in any given field is optimization. 

"Above all else, having the right tools calibrated to bring out the best in you matters a lot." He said.

Being a top, top journalist, photographer, and videographer himself, he does know a lot about having the right tools, so I was intrigued.

You see, the best talents accumulate at the top professional level, sure, but more importantly, things are optimized there to encourage the highest performance. Just like the ball, the blades of grass on a football pitch have to be optimized to ensure smooth movement of the ball, but more importantly, minimize impact loads on the player's body. It has to be watered just right – not too much water and not too little, and it has to be cut at the right height. It has to be soft enough to give, but also firm enough to push back and give them leverage. In short, it had to be optimized to bring the best out of the elites.

How Different Playing Surfaces Affect Players

Now, let us look at what optimal and sub-optimal means using a detailed study by Arne Jasper, Yannick Lambrichts, and Athol Thompson. In their study titled Sports Field Surface and Injury Risks: Grass vs. Turf is Just The Beginning, they looked at how various playing surfaces affected injuries in sports people, and one of the points they made lent credence to the complaints from top European players.

“Players who regularly train and compete on a specific surface may adapt to its characteristics, potentially reducing the risk of injuries associated with that surface’s properties. Conversely, stepping out and playing on an unfamiliar surface has frequently been associated with higher injury incidence and reduced performance,” Reads an excerpt from the study.

Now, for top European players, what are these optimized conditions? Well, according to FIFA, hybrid pitches are the best type of pitches at the optimal level, something which Arne Jasper and Co. agreed with too. Hybrid surfaces combine both natural grass and artificial turf fibers to provide excellent, balanced conditions from both surfaces.

Natural grass, according to Arne Jasper and Co, provides ‘a natural feel, good ball control and cushioning for players.’ However, these grasses tend to vary widely in quality depending on maintenance, plant health, and water conditions. Artificial grass, on the other hand, offers durability and can be used in different weather conditions with proper maintenance. However, it has a different feel as compared to natural grass; hence, it could feel unfamiliar to players not used to playing on it, increasing the risk of injuries.

So, what do you do to combat the cons of both types of grass? Create a hybrid of course, which is why hybrid grass is the most common grass used at the elite football level in Europe (most probably created using Perennial Ryegrass or Kentucky Bluegrass supported by artificial turf fibers).

Now, coming back to the U.S and the FIFA Club World Cup, why were there a lot of complaints about the pitches? Surely the MLS is a top-level football competition, so they use hybrid grass, too, right?

Well, it’s a bit more complicated. Many MLS teams still use NFL stadiums, and many NFL stadiums often prefer grass that grows quickly and can withstand heavy human traffic over grass that is sleek and allows the ball to move quicker, since, you know, in the NFL, the ball almost always never moves along the ground. As such, the Bermudagrass, known for its texture and dense growth, is preferred in these stadiums.

But the thing about Bermudagrass, though, is that it also requires sun, a lot of it. As a consequence of this, it is not very common in Europe, which tends to be cooler and wetter than much of the U.S. This makes it even a worse fit for England, a place which cycles through gloomy weather quicker than Pete Davidson cycles through Hollywood baddies. Thus, this means that these top players are not used to playing on it and are not used to its characteristics, hence the complaints.

Now, this does not mean Bermudagrass is bad for football. Far from it. In fact, in warm places, it is one of the top recommended grasses for the game. The issue lies in familiarity with many top European professionals. It could be that, since many of the players in Europe are unfamiliar with it, it feels weird playing to it at first and would need some getting used to.

The two stadiums used in the Club World Cup that had Bermudagrass were Lincoln Financial Field in Pennsylvania and Hard Rock Stadium in Miami, both of which did not experience major quality complaints from players, which points to the fact that it's not a bad spread for football games. But it’s not just Bermudagrass pitches that are present in the U.S and were used in the Club World Cup. 

Artificial turf was the bane of complaints for many teams that played on it. The aforementioned Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte, North Carolina, MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, and Lumen Field in Seattle, Washington, are all artificial turf stadiums, and all three stadiums came under heavy criticism from the top players and coaches at the Club World Cup. However, both Lumen Field and MetLife Stadium are switching to temporary natural grass for the 2026 World Cup.

As you can see, it’s not a matter of one size fits all. The changes from the usual pitches that many of these players are used to are what lead to these complaints, and they become louder among the Europeans because they play in the most optimized conditions. As such, they experience the most drastic change when playing outside this bubble, turning them into polar bears in the suburbs. Not cool.

At least teams from parts of Asia, Africa, South America, and even the U.S itself, are used to playing in a wide variety of stadiums, because football is optimized to a lesser degree in these parts of the world than it is in Europe, allowing local teams to play on different pitches and maybe adapt to their varied characteristics.

That’s different for someone like Phil Foden, who was raised in Manchester, has gotten used to playing in hybrid stadiums for much of his life, and perhaps one or two other grass types, but nothing more, and now has to adjust to playing on artificial turf at Mercedes-Benz Stadium and other types of grass. Tough ask.

Maintenance Issues

But aside from the turf types, there is also the issue of maintenance. In fact, I think that this might have been the biggest cause of complaints and not the lawns themselves. Many of the complaints, from both players and their gaffers, were about the pitches being dry and thus making it harder to move the ball.

“In the beginning, the pitch was dry,” Said Palmeiras’ boss, Abel Ferreira after their group stage clash with Porto at the MetLife Stadium. “I don’t know who the patron saint is for rain, but after it rained, it then enabled us to play our game.”

Porto coach Martin Anselmi also backed his opposite number.

“I do feel like the pitch caused us to be a bit more imprecise,” Martin Anselmi said. “This was particularly when we wanted to accelerate the game. Some mistakes happened (as a result), but the grass is the same for both teams. We had to adapt.”

Even going back to the quotes opening up this piece, it was all down to the state of the pitches rather than simply the fact that they were different. I watched Bayern vs Boca Juniors at Hard Rock (Bermudagrass), and PSG vs Bayern Munich at Mercedes-Benz Stadium (artificial turf), and both of these games were fast-paced and entertaining despite being on pitches that many top players may not be used to. This then means that most of the complaints could have resulted from maintenance jobs that were not up to standard. And when players perceive a pitch as not being ideal, well, it can lead to a lot of problems.

As per Arne Jasper et al, a player’s perception of the pitch directly relates to injuries since the player then adapts their playstyle to suit the pitch, and this could result in them developing coping mechanisms that could put them at higher risk of injuries.

“Each surface presents a unique challenge affecting the player’s biomechanics, performance, and risk of injury. Moreover, players adapt their movements based on the surface characteristics.”

So, for example, a surface being ‘hard’ or ‘soft’ could increase the risk of injury if it’s not a surface the player is used to. A harder surface can lead to higher impact forces in the player’s joints, muscles, and tendons, and also causes higher rotational traction (the force needed to rotate the foot on the surface), increasing the risk of certain musculoskeletal injuries. 

On the other hand, softer surfaces might reduce the aforementioned impact but could lead to other biomechanical and physiological issues. For example, if the ground gave too much, then it would result in overextension of the knee, which could increase the risk of pulling a hamstring or twisting an ankle.

From the points above, we can see that players complaining about poor quality pitches aren’t just throwing tantrums. The state of a pitch affects their whole body differently, leading to adaptation to the new playing surface, something that then increases the risk of injuries. So yes, Recce James complaining that poor pitches were making players 'leggy' quicker are not just him throwing a fuss. These players have been conditioned to play at optimum conditions and thus, a deviation too far from the norm would certainly feel weird and sub-optimal, hence a cause for concern.

The best way to combat changes in playing characteristics when playing on different pitches, as per Arne Jasper et al, is to implement a comprehensive approach to integrating surface characteristics into training load and injury risk management.

This means that the club needs to put time into understanding the different pitches the player will be playing on and adjusting their training to match the different characteristics of these different blades of grass. But that's something that many teams already do, which is why they often have a training session at the away stadium a day or two before the match to get a feel of the pitch (At least that happens in Europe). So, again, you might wonder, if all their complaints are easy to explain away, why were they complaining at the Club World Cup?

Well, if I may guess, it has a lot to do with the timing and the wide variety of pitches across different U.S. Stadiums. I don't think many teams had time to have a feel of the different pitches in U.S stadiums. And even if the teams had the time, the fact that many U.S football pitches are so different and varied depending on regions means that it would be impossible for any player to properly adapt to these changes at such short notice. No sooner had a player gotten used to the artificial turf at Atlanta Stadium than they needed to travel north to adjust to the unique feel of MetLife. The wide variety of grasses in these stadiums means that these players needed to adapt to new playing surfaces every two or three days. That is bound to cause some complaints.

And let's remember that European teams, who complained the most and loudest, were coming off a long 60-70-game season. Thus, all the travel and the need to adjust to different playing surfaces may have added more work to an already tired set of players and coaching staff.

Conclusion

A multitude of factors can cause footballers to complain about a playing surface - the hardness or softness of lawns, unfamiliarity with a specific lawn type, and lawn maintenance or lack of it.

Football is a game best played when the ball is on the ground, sleekly sliding across the shimmering lawn from player to player. Thus, if the ball keeps bouncing around like a rabbit, as Luis Enrique stated, that will indeed make for an ugly showing which forcing the players to overexert themselves. If we wanted to see a bunny bounce up and down, then we would have watched Looney Tunes. 

Football at the top level requires optimal conditions to thrive. Thus, while players in Europe might need to touch more grass, their complaints over pitches at the Club World Cup are not invalid. At the very least, proper maintenance can go a long way toward turning what could have been a suboptimal situation into a somewhat optimal situation. Going by most of the complaints, just a bit of proper maintenance on the pitches, whether artificial or Bermudagrass, would have gone a long way in minimizing the complaints.

It is my hope, as it is for many other football fans, that FIFA addresses the issues of pitches before next year’s World Cup if we are to avoid a repeat of similar complaints next year. They should be optimized to the highest standards of the game, as per their guidelines. 

Luckily, FIFA is already on it, with FIFA Global Football Development Chief, Arsene Wenger (you might have heard about him), stating that the pitches would be better for the 2026 World Cup. The switch to hybrid grass at Lumen Field and MetLife Stadium is a great start so let's hope by next year, these pitches would all be standardized so that we can enjoy watching Messi's last hurrah on a proper football pitch.