There has always been a great deal of controversy surrounding the use of 3G sports pitches in English football and, with the recent announcements that the artificial grass surfacing is going to be allowed in FA Cup matches and potentially the Football League, further debates have started.

Many see the 3G synthetic pitches as a positive investment for clubs who are struggling financially, whereas others have concerns over the performance qualities and the safety of these artificial surfaces. But would allowing 3G pitches to be used in the Football League be the right decision?

There are a number of benefits which come with the installation of a 3G synthetic football pitch compared with a natural grass surface.

For example, artificial grass surfacing can be used all year round as an all weather system as water drains through its layers easily to prevent flooding.

The advanced technology of artificial grass along with the rubber crumb infill creates a stable playing surface as well as ball bounce capabilities which replicate the performance of natural grass.

Artificial 3G grass is a lot more durable than a natural pitch and also requires less maintenance, meaning the facility can be used a lot more without becoming worn out and muddy.

This enhanced durability means that clubs can rent these synthetic pitches out to other organisations for training and matches to increase revenue.

Therefore the financial gain to these lower-league clubs is clear as they can save money on maintenance compared to natural grass, as well as generating extra income for a great return on investment.

Clubs such as Maidstone United FC have already taken advantage of these benefits by installing a 3G pitch as it was their only option when facing

Bankruptcy if they continued with a natural grass surface.

Although there are a number of benefits to using synthetic 3G football pitches, there are also reasons why some are more hesitant to allow the artificial grass surfaces into league football. Some studies suggest that there could be potential health risks caused by the use of synthetic turf, for example from the chemicals in the grass fibres and the possible spread of diseases through bacteria thriving within the carpet.

The safety of 3G surfacing is also questioned as some players have fallen victim to the dreaded artificial grass burn, as well as minor muscle and joint injuries which might not have occurred on natural grass.

The cost of installing a 3G sports pitch is also far greater than the cost of creating a real grass football surface, however this cost can be covered by the extra revenue generated from the additional usability of synthetic grass.

There are clearly valid points from both sides of the debate but many agree that the financial benefit to struggling football clubs is one of the main influencing factors for the decision to allow more widespread use of these facilities in English football.

So could we see a future with more and more 3G sports pitches being used in professional football like we already see in English rugby? Chairmen from the Football League are set to make their formal decision next month.

For more information, visit www.sportsandsafetysurfaces.co.uk/surface-types/3g/3g-benefits/