The effect of different playing surfaces on soccer skill performance

Abstract

Football (soccer) is traditionally played on natural grass but artificial surfaces are becoming an increasing popular alternative. Understanding how different surfaces affect a player's skill performance has not been examined. This study sought to compare soccer skill performance, using a validated test, on natural grass, third generation (3G) artificial turf, and indoor sprung wooden floor. Following familiarisation, 14 male players (12.7 ± 0.5 years-old, with 6.21 years playing experience) performed the Loughborough Soccer Passing Test (LSPT) on three different surfaces in the following order: indoor, grass and artificial turf. Players were given two practise attempts before the best of two trials were recorded. Movement time was faster on artificial turf (45.1 ± 1.3 s) than natural grass (46.2 ± 1.8 s; p = 0.045), but there was no difference in overall LSPT performance between grass (54.1 ± 4.2 s) and artificial turf (54.0 ± 4.7 s; p = 0.92). Overall LSPT performance was better on indoor surface (50.9 ± 4.6 s) than grass (p = 0.02) and artificial turf (p = 0.02) due to reduced penalty time on the indoor surface (5.5 ± 3.3 s) than grass (7.9 ± 2.9 s; p = 0.001) and artificial turf (8.9 ± 3.9 s; p = 0.003). There is no difference in soccer skill performance between grass and 3G artificial turf. Skill performance on an indoor surface was ∼6% better than both grass and 3G artificial turf due to better ball control and/or accuracy of passing. Our findings will enable comparison of studies using the LSPT on indoor and outdoor (grass or artificial) surfaces.