FOOTBALLERS in the Netherlands have called for artificial pitches to be banned and grass surfaces made compulsory.
Six of the 18 teams in the Dutch top-flight use artificial turf in their home grounds, but captains of the remaining 12 clubs have united to demand that natural grass becomes obligatory.
The players complained of surfaces leading to an increased risk of injury, longer recovery time and a different style of play during matches.
On Thursday, the Dutch player union VVCS officially urged the country’s football association to organises games on natural pitches only.
“I totally understand these players”, VVCS President Danny Hesp told the world players’ union FIFPro.
“Playing football on artificial turf changes the game and negatively influences the development of Dutch football. To stop these trends, we jointly have to work on liberating the Eredivisie from artificial turf.
“We are aware of the financial implications the proposed ban will have. A possible solution could be the creation of a special fund allowing clubs to return to playing on real grass.”
In Scotland, Hamilton Academical and Kilmarnock are the only two Premiership teams with artificial pitches, while several others in lower leagues, including Falkirk and Queen of the South, have also had them installed.
Twelve Eredivisie captains, including former Liverpool forward Dirk Kuyt, published statements speaking out against artificial surfaces today.
“I know for sure that due to artificial pitches Dutch football will fall further behind,” Kuyt said.
Ajax skipper Davy Klaasen said: “Pitches like these seriously make you consider leaving the Netherlands. You cannot enjoy playing football on these pitches.”
Former Aston Villa defender Ron Vlaar, now captaining AZ Alkmaar, added: “Because of my history with injuries, I unintentionally play much more carefully on artificial turf.”
NEC captain Gregor Breinburg didn’t hold back in his assessment of the situation: “In Europe, everybody is laughing at us,” he said. “It should be obligatory to play on real grass.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here