How It Changed Sports
WHEN ASTROTURF WAS FIRST INTRODUCED in baseball, no one knew quite what to make of it. The Astrodome, which not only had artificial turf but was also indoors, was basically written off as a freak, especially since the Astros were so bad. During the late 1960s and early 1970s, however, as fake grass was installed in St. Louis, Kansas City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and elsewhere, people began to pay more attention to how it was changing baseball.
The most obvious difference was that on an artificial field, balls bounced faster, higher, and truer, lnfielders stationed themselves in the outfield to cut off sharp hits, knowing that the springy surface would make it very hard to bunt successfully. Led by Dave Concepcion of the Cincinnati Reds, some infielders intentionally bounced their throws to first, trusting the surface to give them a straight and lively hop. The result of all this was fewer singles but more doubles and triples, as balls that got through the infield often shot past outfielders or kangarooed over their heads. Since artificial turf was easier to run on, managers also placed more emphasis on stealing. Teams whose home fields were synthetic stocked their rosters with slap hitters who had blazing speed. Baseball’s legion of statistics lovers learned to make allowances for stats accumulated on artificial surfaces.
In football, too, artificial turf gave new importance to speed, increasing the number of long passes to sprinting receivers and decreasing the emphasis on power-oriented running plays. It also increased injuries, with friction rubbing players’ skin raw and the lack of “give” causing damage to knees and ligaments. Another problem, even with new-style artificial turf, is its tendency to retain heat, which can make it 10 degrees or more hotter than a grass field. Owners of professional teams still dispute the evidence, but almost to a man, NFL players prefer natural grass (except kickers, who welcome artificial turf’s predictable footing and even surface for spotting the ball).
Even cricket, perhaps the most traditionbound of field sports, has seen a shift to pseudoturf, with more than a thousand artificial pitches in England alone (though natural grass is still mandatory for firstclass matches). In lawn bowling, artificial greens allow indoor play year-round in chilly Canada and Britain and are becoming increasingly common outdoors in other countries, especially Australia. These greens are carefully inspected to make sure they are level, varying no more than 3 centimeters in 10 meters, and match as closely as possible the resilience and friction of natural grass.
Yet even as artificial fields proliferate in recreational and amateur sports, in Major League Baseball artificial turf is going the way of Afros on players, tacky multicolored uniforms, and other 1970s innovations. From a peak of 11 in the early 1990s, the number of major-league stadiums with artificial fields is down to only 3: Rogers Centre (formerly SkyDome) in Toronto, Tropicana Field in St. Petersburg, and the Metrodome in Minneapolis.
Years ago major-league teams had many reasons to install artificial turf. Indoor stadiums required it; playing football and baseball on the same field was murder on natural grass; artificial turf dried out faster after a rainstorm; it was cheaper; and it just seemed more modern. But these are no longer major concerns.
In some cases technology has allowed grass to catch up. Improved drainage systems let grass fields dry much faster than before, and in Arizona and Houston, natural grass flourishes in retractable-domed stadiums. In other cases, money has made the difference. Today’s high-priced teams expect to have their own stadiums instead of sharing them with another sport, and with the great increases in revenues and player salaries (which make injuries that much more expensive for owners), the savings from eliminating grass wouldn’t buy a decent middle rellever. As for the notion of AstroTurf as an emblem of hipness, that now seems as corny as the Astrodome’s space-suited grounds crew. These days baseball is eager to associate itself with history and tradition, which is why even the Astros have switched to a natural-grass field.
In the 1960s artificial turf was too expensive and unproven for most users outside of professional sports. Today it’s cheaper than grass, feels the same, and is much more durable. For these reasons, the Ford Foundation’s dream of artificial fields in schools and city parks has finally come true. But for pro sports, looking back to the good old days is turning out to be even more lucrative.
