The grass really hurts us!

These were the words of Xavi Hernandez after Barcelona's dismal draw against Getafe last week. These kinds of statements, and especially from Xavi, aren't anything new because the Spaniard has a long history of criticizing the pitch's grass. So much so that many had dubbed Xavi the nickname "Grasscutter". But, is Xavi wrong?

Xavi's nickname was dubbed all the way back in 2012 and has been repeated ever since, and expectingly so because Xavi has never really stopped talking about it. Similarly, Arsenal's current manager, Mikel Arteta, was heavily mocked for similar comments on the Turf Moor grass following a 0-0 draw against Burnely. So, does grass affect a football game? The direct and straightforward answer is yes. A bad grass status affects a football match in a clear and obvious way.

Another question that may come to mind is how come it is a specific kind of coach who complains about it. The answer is actually, no. It's not just a select few who complain about it. Almost everyone does. Every coach complains about the state of the grass when it doesn't fit that coach's style of play. Antonio Conte criticized the grass in Lille's stadium in Italy's game in Euro 2016, and it was actually bad and too long, yet Conte did the same thing when he had the grass grow longer ahead of facing Barcelona in the UEFA Champions League as Chelsea manager.

So, why would someone like Conte complain about grass length and humidity in Italy's game against Ireland in Euro 2016 and then have it look the same when Chelsea faced Barcelona in the UEFA Champions League? Conte isn't the only one, by the way, as many coaches do, but, why? The answer is what many coaches say about grass and how it affects football is true.

Grass State

There are many laws put ahead by international football associations as well as local ones. So, what exactly are the factors that affect grass? Well, if we go to our usual complainers about it, Xavi and Arteta, we could see that there are mainly two factors, length and humidity.

When it comes to length, the rule is that it shouldn't exceed 30 millimetres,3 centimetres, and 1.8 inches. Football grass experts, I don't mean Xavi and Arteta here, say that while the law says 3 centimetres, no one lets it grow that high. The usual length is 20 or 22 millimetres. They all say that the problem at Turf Moor was probably that they let it grow to 30 millimetres. So, does that extra 10 or 8 millimetres really affects football that much?

The answer is yes. The goal of letting the grass grow that much in length is to affect the single most repetitive action in football, passing. Any extra length over the usual 20-22 millimetres than what the players trained in means more friction between the grass and the ball. More friction between the ball and the grass means the ball will be slower, which means the player will need to put more strength into the ball so it would reach the pace he needs it to.

Every time a pass needs to be made more effort will need to be put which means there's room for mistakes as the players will need some trial and error to get used to the new length, physics for beginners. Notice that little extra effort players need to put into passing or kicking the ball now increases in a cumulative fashion, not a steady one. That's because the more the distance the ball needs to go is further, the faster it slows down, which means the further the distance a pass needs to go, the more effort needs to be put in a cumulative fashion.

The second point of grass length is that the higher it is, the more it is able to absorb the ball's bounce. This means if your team plays long ball, it would be easier to tame the ball the higher the grass is. Extra length to the grass simply benefits a team like Burnely more than it would Arsenal in both ways, attacking and defending. That's why Conte hates the grass length at Lille's stadium when playing a team like Ireland but loves it at the same length when playing a team like Barcelona.

An extra factor some people suggested is that the lengthier the grass the less are the players able to identify the ball in its complete form, meaning that they are less able to identify which area to kick. Also, that means a player would kick more grass ahead of kicking the ball which takes much of the kick's power.

So, Did The Extra 8 Millimetres Cost Arteta and Xavi Their Matches?

Did Sean Dyche hold a draw against Arsenal with Burnely solely thanks to the grass length?

Those two questions are what is expected when it comes to this issue. Even when you understand the issue, it doesn't really seem that effective, does it? Well, this is what the science world calls a compound error.

First, it's a mistake to assume that in order for one factor to be influential, it needs to be the only, main, or decisive factor between victory and defeat. Football, like many aspects of life, is a result of many sequenced events happening. Some factors have more value than others. This is similar to saying that a coach who entered a game with the wrong tactic deserves to lose thanks to an offside goal or an unfair penalty.

Second, why are those questions directed at the people complaining about the grass when it's too lengthy and not the people keeping it at such a length? If it was that stupid, insignificant, and not worth thinking about, then why do it? Why did Conte and Sean Dyche keep the grass at a higher length than usual when facing Barcelona and Arsenal respectively? The answer is that it is not that insignificant.

Proof of the previous statement is that the English FA had to enforce a rule to make the grass length equal across the entire pitch despite it being an obvious thing to do. But, it wasn't that obvious because it turned out that many clubs were making the grass in the middle at 22 millimetres while keeping the wing area at 30 millimetres. There were also people keeping the stadium's pitch grass at a certain length when the away side was training then changing it when the game starts prompting the English FA to enforce a rule preventing that.

Even the humidity of the grass affects the quality of the passes. This is why UEFA forces the host to water down the pitch 2 hours prior to the game once, once after warm-up, and another between the two halves. The English FA enforces only the first rule, that's why the Turf Moor pitch was dry and that was Arteta's second problem with the pitch at Turf Moor.

Arsene Wenger also spoke more than once on the issue and stated that 30 millimetres were too much and that the maximum grass length should be 22 or 24 at best.

To conclude, could grass length cost you a game? It's a very rare occurrence that a team could do everything right and then only lose thanks to the grass being a few millimetres higher than usual. But, is it a factor like many of the factors affecting a football match? Definitely yes.