Rubber or cork? That is the field question

Opponents to the synthetic turf being installed on the Casa Grande football field are playing the carnival game of “Whack-a-Mole.” Every time they get involved in one field, another pops up somewhere else.

At one time, the opposition was based on the dangers of staph infection, and, at one time it was a very legitimate concern. I covered high school games at Autzen Stadium in Eugene, Ore., where not only the Ducks, but several high school teams played on a “rug” that was little better than what is found in $20-a-night motel rooms. Kids came away with skins and scrapes all over their bodies.

We know now that the dangerous staph infections weren’t directly caused by the fields, but the scrapes opened portals for bacteria from unsanitary locker rooms where players shared shower facilities, along with towels, to enter their bodies.

The opposition to the new Casa Grande field is based on opposition to the small rubber pellets (about the size of a BB) that are used as infill under the turf itself. Incidentally, that turf is almost as soft as natural grass. These small pellets are made from recycled tires, and opponents say they are toxic and can cause cancer and other health problems.

There have been several studies on the subject. Like all studies, they have come to different, or in some cases, no conclusions. I’m not a big conspiracy buff. I was once told that holding a cellphone to my ear would cause all sorts of bad things to happen to my body. I once told a zealous advocate of cellphone rot that he was right. After all, before I started using a cellphone, I was 6-feet tall and had hair like Elvis.

I do, however, believe there are enough legitimate concerns to warrant a comprehensive study done by a group with no political ax to swing, if such an agency can be found.

Personally, I have only two proven objections to the synthetic turf that is used at most high schools in the area and includes the rubber pellet in-fill.

The first is that the little pellets are a nuisance. They do bubble to the surface and they do cling to clothes or body parts. They are fairly easy to brush away and, like I said, are more a nuisance than a problem.

The other problem is more severe. The synthetic turfs are hot. On a warm Saturday afternoon on the sidelines at St. Vincent, I have to take my shoes off at halftime or I would never last the entire game.

My personal preference, as I’ve stated several times, is for natural grass. I like the feel, I like the look. I like the footing. I like the tradition.

But, I am fighting a losing battle. Synthetic turfs are more durable, much easier and less costly to maintain, provide better footing and are less likely to create leg and ankle injuries. Whatever chance those old timers like myself had of preserving natural grass dried up with the drought. With water at a premium, synthetic turf makes even more sense than it did just four years ago.

As far as whether or not to go with the rubber pellets or the more expensive cork in-fill, I would have to say there probably isn’t enough evidence to require a change at this late stage in the game, but I waffle to the extent to say those who oppose the rubber in-fill have made some valid points and the issue definitely deserves more study.

It’s a tough decision, and whichever way the school board decides will be correct.

Not at the end of the day, but at the end of October, Casa Grande will have a new field and, most excitingly, a home track the Gauchos can actually run on.

(Contact John Jackson at johnie.jackson@arguscourier.com)