Are MLS Field's Small?

[Goalie20]

This may be a stupid question but are the fields that MLS play on smaller than those over in Europe or is it just the style of play that makes it look smaller? In MLS there never appears to be any "space" and there is always a player/players all around the ball.

We saw a game at Charlton last year and the stadium has a similar seating capacity but the field looked to be much larger.

[boban]

^^^ Perhaps because the seating around it was less this making the field appear larger??

As for Europe, the passing is just that more precise.

[Oldtimer]

Only KC has an abnormally small (narrow) pitch, due to playing in a converted ball park.

[rocker]

I looked this up last year.. wish I could find the post.

TFC's field is about average in MLS and in the world... maybe a tad shorter in the width than average.

Colorado's is really really big.. like way bigger than the minimum for international matches.
RSL's this year is big, same with Los Angeles.

NY's Giant's stadium field is really really small... like yards shorter than BMO in length and width.
Not sure if KC's is the smallest but I would think so...

NY's was so small it was a joke how tight the dimensions were.. and since they play on old field turf, the ball skids faster and quicker, making it seem like players have even less space.

[gmacpheetfc]

all stadiums around the world are different sizes even in the premier league I'm pretty sure craven cottage is one of the smaller ones by a couple yards or something as well.

[Chewy Unikronik]

Measurements can be anywhere from between 90 and 120 metres in length by 45 to 90 metres wide...

That's a lot of wiggle room!

[rocker]

here's a post from big soccer on the dimensions of stadiums from 2006
BMO is 115x75 yards.

---------------
Columbus Crew
Stadium: Columbus Crew Stadium
Field Dimensions/Pitch size: 115x75 yards
http://columbus.crew.mlsnet.com/MLS/coc/stadium/

LA Galaxy/Chivas USA
Stadium: Home Depot Center
Field Dimensions/Pitch size: 120x75 yards
http://la.galaxy.mlsnet.com/MLS/lag/...ntent=teaminfo (http://la.galaxy.mlsnet.com/MLS/lag/load.jsp?section=about&content=teaminfo)

FC Dallas
Pizza Hut Park
Field Dimensions/Pitch Size: 117x74 yards
http://fc.dallas.mlsnet.com/MLS/fcd/fans/fan_guide/

Chicago Fire
Stadium: Toyota Park
Field Dimensions/Pitch Size: 120x75 yards
http://www.suntimes.com/output/fire/cst-spt-fire11.html

Colorado Rapids
Stadium: INVESCO Field at Mile High
Field Dimensions/Pitch size: 116x74 yards

Red Bull New York
Stadium: Giants Stadium
Field Dimensions/Pitch Size: 106x70 yards

New England Revolution
Stadium: Gillette stadium
Field Dimensions/Pitch size: 115x75 yards

DC United
Stadium: RFK
Field Dimensions/Pitch size: 110x72 yards

Houston Dynamo
Stadium: Robertson Stadium
Field Dimensions/Pitch size: 115x70 yards

[cougars732]

If any of you have seen the new field at Bayview and Lawrence (toronto french school) thats the minimum FIFA
45x90

[rocker]

Colorado's is 120 by 80 yards.

international minimum is now 115x75.

[rocker]

just looking up some others around the world

Craven Cottage is 110x75.

Old Trafford is 116x76

Camp Nou is 115x74.

[Shway]

i just the camera angles my friend....
if the camera was higher up at these MLS games you would see the difference

[Suds]

i just the camera angles my friend....
if the camera was higher up at these MLS games you would see the difference

yeah, for sure ... by just watching TV you would think the Camp Nou was way bigger than BMO .. but it isn't at all

[Shway]

yea because i when i went to the camp nou i was expecting it to be HUGE!
but it was the same size field i would play on lol

[prizby]

I believe FIFA minimum is 105m by 68m

[Toronto Ruffrider]

According to the 2008/09 FIFA Laws of the Game, international fields must be 110-120 yards long and 70-80 yards wide. If there has been a change in the minimum measurements, could someone provide a link?

[Oldtimer]

According to the 2008/09 FIFA Laws of the Game, international fields must be 110-120 yards long and 70-80 yards wide. If there has been a change in the minimum measurements, could someone provide a link?

There was a change at some point in time. Older fields not meeting the minimum were grandfathered.

Here is the 2002 version:

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/JenniferYu.shtml

Note the difference between what was needed for international and league play.

[Toronto Ruffrider]

There was a change at some point in time. Older fields not meeting the minimum were grandfathered.

Here is the 2002 version:

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/JenniferYu.shtml

Note the difference between what was needed for international and league play.

Thanks for the link, Oldtimer. If there was a change in field dimensions, however, that change must have occurred fairly recently. The most recent Laws of the Game make no mention of the increased minimum dimensions, nor do they mention older fields being grandfathered.

http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/lawsofthegame.html

[Oldtimer]

Thanks for the link, Oldtimer. If there was a change in field dimensions, however, that change must have occurred fairly recently. The most recent Laws of the Game make no mention of the increased minimum dimensions, nor do they mention older fields being grandfathered.

http://www.fifa.com/worldfootball/lawsofthegame.html

That wasn't in the laws, but in the discussion that FIFA published when they revised the laws. Sorry, can't remember where the link for that would be. Try their web site.

[Carefree]

I was thinking about this a few weeks ago. The camera angle does affect our impression of the field's size, but the style and quality of play also has an effect.

At the KC game I was sitting in the last row of section 223, right down the middle, so I had a great view and could see that the field was in fact quite large. However, almost all the time, the players were all bunched up around the ball rather than being spread out all over the field. Seriously, on goal kicks you could draw a circle 15 metres in radius around where the ball landed and all 20 players would be in that circle.

By comparison, the better leagues in Europe use the whole field and have much more precise long-range passing, so the camera has to have a wider angle, which makes it look like the field is bigger.

[Goalie20]

Thanks for all of the information.

I guess better players make the pitch appear to be larger by controlling the ball and accurately passing it. It is always easy to sit in the stands, or at home, and ask why they don't hold on to the ball instead of just booting it forward :)

[Toronto_Bhoy]

Celtic Park and Ibrox are 115 x 75…same as Hampden and Wembley (same as BMO?).

It must be the camera angles that make these pitches look larger.

[rocker]

yeah, true.... when we see the ball skip out of the boundaries all the time we might think "this field is small" but really it was a shit pass or bad first touch.

KC's look really small definitely because of the camera angle. their camera is so low and I think it's actually in the baseball diamond (the pitch is essentially much of the baseball outfield).

[Canary Canuck]

Home Depot Center and Dick's Park were built to allow for maximum playing dimensions. In Colorado the theory was that a large surface combined with the high altitude would give the team a strong home field advantage. In both cases, coaches didn't agree with the architect's theory and had the fields narrowed to FIFA regulation dimensions (105m x 68m or 115yds x 75 yds). The result is a bit of a debacle where the stands are unnecessarily far from the pitch. I know New York is not making the same mistake and are situating the stands around the standard FIFA recommended dimensions to keep fans close to the action.

[nimamalek]

its the camera angle as well, most mls games are broadcast with the camera placed much lower then EPL games. Which makes the field appear smaller.

[jabbronies]

Celtic Park and Ibrox are 115 x 75…same as Hampden and Wembley (same as BMO?).

It must be the camera angles that make these pitches look larger.

The camera Angles in the MLS suck. They are too low. They do this either to make the game seem faster or because they cannot get high enough.

[rocker]

i like BMO's camera angle tho.. when CBC does the games....
that camera in front of section 223 is at the perfect angle.. not too close, not too far.

[Don Julio]

I'm pretty sure KC has an extremely low camera and an extremely narrow field.

[MFBODD]

All this mention of camera angle reminds me of Highbury.

[Toronto Ruffrider]

Obviously this is not the case, but the BMO pitch does look small to me. I wonder how big the field would look if it was natural grass and had grass lines to break the monotony of the solid green surface.

[RealG-TFC]

Columbus has a shit camera angle.