Last week, following comments from Mr Wazir Mohammed about the state of the playing surface at the Hasely Crawford Stadium, I wrote about the field and dressing room problems at the Stadium. I ended with the question: What can be done? And promised to provide answers this week.
The newly replaced ceilings will soon be destroyed again if this situation is not rectified. Additionally, players have no idea whether this is melting ice or leaking toilets, so you can understand how offensive the water is assumed to be. There are solutions. The floors can be sealed with compounds to prevent any seepage, and, or, waterproof bins can be provided for the storage of the ice. These are simple solutions, recommended for the past 25 years, but ignored to date.
Before we go to the playing surface, let me advise that I had calls after the last column, telling me I had ignored the filthy state of public toilets at the stadium. My apologies, I had been writing more about the players’ conditions, and ignored the fans. Come on, Sports Company! Cleaning toilets is not rocket science, please ensure that all of the public toilets are clean and functioning. Does the TTFF really have to do this for you as well?
The grass planted on the field, as I told you last week, is an imported grass which does not produce its own seeds, nor does it spread as it grows. Most playing surfaces in TT—except the five stadiums – have local Savannah grass fields. This grass produces its own seeds, and therefore regenerates itself. It also spreads, it is a crawling type grass which will crawl across the athletic track if left untrimmed. Queen’s Park Oval had this surface until the CWC was played there. The surfaces at Fatima, QRC, CIC, all secondary schools, Guaracara Park, and all the oilfield grounds have Savannah grass. In fact, all young footballers grew up in TT playing on Savannah grass, which has its own “pace” and bounce, and indeed, therefore provides an advantage to us when we host outside teams.
So why do all of our football stadiums have this thin, imported grass which cannot regenerate itself, and suffers the invasion of other species like the Fowl foot grass described last week? Because it is “foreign”? The answers are Yes—and there is more than one answer. First, we want to be like “away” and use a foreign thing even though it is inferior in many ways to our local Savannah grass.
Secondly, and this has been told to me by stadium managers, this is to let our players “learn to play” on this foreign grass so we can compete better when we play away! So, we give up a surface which gives us a home advantage, to put in one which we cannot maintain or manage, because the stadium management has taken a policy decision on our capabilities. This would be bad enough if we could grow the foreign grass to the standard they grow it “away”. But we can’t, and we end up with a surface which England had to reject, and discerning fans like Mr Mohammed describe as “disgraceful”.
It is my opinion that if Savannah grass was introduced on the Hasley Crawford field, in spots all over the ground, it would spread over a few months and take over the field, giving us a quality surface suited to our type of game, and our heritage, and become “alien” to the visiting teams—which is what their surfaces are to us.
In two words: Home Advantage. But more, the field would be kept in a better condition, for the likes of England, and the concerns of Mr Mohammed. However, prior to any “spot” or full replanting, the Fowl foot grass must all be removed. There is one disadvantage to the Savannah grass: That is its attraction for soil pests. However, this situation is managed on all other grounds, and should be simply a maintenance issue. But I am aware that as far as Government is concerned, maintenance is never a “simple issue”.
So, is it possible for us to do the right thing, and provide a playing surface which is free of Fowl foot grass and suitable for our players in our home matches?