FIFA insists that the MetLife Stadium pitch is ready for the final despite players' criticism
The 2026 World Cup final between Spain and Argentina will be played on July 19 at the stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, but ahead of the tournament's biggest match, attention is not focused solely on Lionel Messi, Lamine Yamal and the tactical duel between the two national teams. One of the main topics has become the playing surface at MetLife Stadium, which FIFA officially calls New York New Jersey Stadium during the competition. Players and coaches have previously described the grass as dry, hard, rigid and slow, warning that it makes faster ball circulation and the rhythm of the match more difficult. FIFA, however, claims that the results of continuous measurements are significantly better than the impression conveyed by certain footballers after matches. The organizers therefore expect the pitch in the final to be stable, even and of sufficient quality so that the playing surface itself does not become the central story of the match for the world championship title.
According to FIFA's official schedule, the match begins at 3 p.m. local time, or 7 p.m. Coordinated Universal Time. It will be the 104th and final match of the first World Cup featuring 48 national teams, held in 16 host cities in Canada, Mexico and the United States of America. The stadium in New Jersey was assigned eight matches during the tournament, including the final, meaning that its grass surface was exposed to one of the heaviest workloads among all venues. FIFA's pitch management team refers precisely to that fact when rejecting claims that the surface is unsuitable for the closing stages. Alan Ferguson, FIFA's senior pitch management manager, stated that, according to internal testing during the competition, the pitch was generally ranked fourth best among the 16 host stadiums.
Criticism from Vinicius Junior, Rabiot and Deschamps
The debate over the condition of the pitch began after the first matches in East Rutherford. Brazilian forward Vinicius Junior complained after Brazil's draw with Morocco on June 13 that the grass dried out quickly because of the heat, causing the ball to travel more slowly and preventing the team from establishing its desired rhythm. His assessment was particularly important because Brazil traditionally builds its game around rapid ball circulation, switches of play and individual runs down the flanks. Vinicius did not claim that the pitch was the sole reason for the result, but he emphasized that players had to adapt to a surface that significantly affected the way attacks developed. This raised the question of whether the same surface in the final could favor the team that better accepts a slower tempo or adapts more quickly to a harder pitch.
French midfielder Adrien Rabiot was even more critical after France's victory over Senegal. He compared the surface to artificial turf and described it as extremely hard and rigid, questioning whether it could even be regarded as a conventional football pitch. France head coach Didier Deschamps also said that the playing surface was unusual and different from the one his players would normally expect for a match at the highest level. Their statements carried additional weight because MetLife Stadium normally uses a synthetic surface for American football games, while the natural grass pitch was installed specifically for the World Cup. The criticism therefore reopened the broader debate about how successfully and quickly stadiums designed primarily for the NFL can be adapted to the demands of elite international football.
Following those comments, FIFA stated that the pitch undergoes extensive monitoring before every match. According to information from the organization reported by international media, moisture, hardness, stability and general playing conditions are checked, and the results are compared with data from the other venues. Such measurements cannot completely override the players' subjective experience because their perception of the surface is influenced by temperature, footwear, watering immediately before the match and the playing style of each team. Nevertheless, the organizers claim that laboratory and field data do not indicate a surface below the tournament's standards. Ferguson therefore expressed confidence that the grass would not be specifically mentioned after the final, which in practice is the greatest compliment that the team responsible for the pitch can receive.
Why grass suited to a warmer climate was selected
The surface in East Rutherford is not a conventional temporary layer of turf laid immediately before a match. FIFA selected Tahoma 31 bermudagrass for the stadium, a variety intended for warmer climates and higher summer temperatures. David Graham, FIFA's senior pitch manager, explained during the pitch installation that the grass grows laterally and that its condition should improve as the summer in the New York and New Jersey area becomes warmer. The decision nevertheless involved a risk because spring and early summer temperatures in the northeastern United States can change suddenly. Ferguson said that cool-season grass had also been considered, but it was judged that a sharp rise in temperature would pose an even greater risk during the closing stage of the tournament.
That decision is important for understanding the differing impressions of the pitch during the championship. Bermudagrass thrives best in consistently warm conditions, while during periods of lower temperatures it can be harder, thinner or slower to respond to maintenance. On the other hand, after a prolonged warm period, it should become denser and more resistant to wear, which was crucial for a stadium scheduled to host eight matches. FIFA therefore prioritized long-term durability through to the final, even with the possibility that the surface might not make an ideal impression during the earlier stage of the tournament. The players' criticism showed that this compromise was noticeable, but the organizers claim that the chosen approach allowed the pitch to retain its structure and evenness through to the closing stages.
According to data released by FIFA during the installation, the grass was cultivated for several months on a specialized farm in North Carolina and was then transported hundreds of kilometers to New Jersey at the beginning of May. NY1 reported that 27 trucks and approximately 600 rolls were required for transportation, while the laying process itself lasted almost two days. After installation, large hybrid stitching machines connected the sections of turf with artificial fibers so that the surface would function as a single unit. Such reinforcement is intended to reduce grass movement, opening of seams and the formation of unstable areas under the pressure of football boots. Compared with the temporary pitch used at the 2025 Club World Cup, this year's installation was completed much earlier and incorporated a more complex maintenance system.
A complex technical system lies beneath the grass
Although only the green finishing layer can be seen on television, the structure beneath it is one of the most demanding parts of the entire project. During installation, CBS Sports reported that approximately 60 centimeters of sand, an irrigation system and vacuum ventilation that helps manage moisture and airflow were positioned above the original artificial-surface infrastructure. Air-temperature regulation units were also used on the pitch so that the grass could be heated or cooled depending on weather conditions. FIFA additionally applied aeration, fertilization, mowing, watering and targeted lighting. The objective of all these procedures is not merely an attractive appearance, but also predictable ball bounce, sufficient traction and a consistent feeling underfoot across the entire surface.
This infrastructure distinguishes the current pitch from the temporary surface used by the same stadium a year earlier. According to David Graham's explanation, the pitch for the Club World Cup was installed approximately two weeks before the first match and did not have fully automated irrigation or advanced ventilation. At that tournament, players complained that their boots became caught in the seams between the rolls. For the 2026 World Cup, the pitch was installed around five weeks before the first match, while the stitching was intended to provide additional reinforcement to the seams and root zone. This does not mean that all doubts have disappeared, but it explains why FIFA rejects a direct comparison between the two installations.
The New Jersey project is part of a much broader research program conducted by FIFA with Michigan State University and the University of Tennessee. According to information from those institutions, experts spent years testing different types of grass, stitching depths and the effects of shade, artificial lighting, irrigation, altitude and climatic transitions. The task was particularly complex because the tournament is taking place in three countries, several climate zones and four time zones, while some stadiums are enclosed or partially covered. The Associated Press states that eight of the 16 stadiums normally used artificial surfaces before the tournament, meaning that temporary or semi-permanent natural grass systems had to be constructed at those venues. FIFA's official objective was to make the surfaces as consistent as possible so that no national team would gain an advantage solely because of the venue at which it played.
Measurement results and players' impressions are not always the same
The claim that MetLife's pitch was ranked fourth best in the tournament may initially appear incompatible with the criticism voiced by several prominent footballers. However, the two assessments do not necessarily exclude one another completely. FIFA's rankings are based on a series of technical parameters and repeated measurements, while players evaluate the pitch in real time, under the pressure of the result and in specific weather conditions. A surface can meet the prescribed values and still feel too dry for a team seeking to play quickly along the ground. Likewise, watering that would make the ball move faster can increase slipping or alter the pitch's behavior during the match, meaning that the specialist team must find a balance.
The most important question for the final is therefore not whether the pitch is perfect in an abstract sense, but whether it will be the same for both teams and whether it will retain its characteristics for at least 90 minutes and possibly extra time. Spain will probably seek to control possession and accelerate the game through short passes, while Argentina has experience adapting to different rhythms and physically demanding matches. A dry and slower surface could make quick combinations more difficult, but it could also help the defense organize itself in time. A harder pitch can increase the speed of certain bounces, although the effect depends on the amount of water, the temperature and the condition of the grass at kickoff. For that reason, the final watering and mowing on the day of the final will be almost as important as the months of preparation.
FIFA left the stadium without further matches after the round-of-16 game on July 5 and until the final. The two-week break allowed the maintenance team to repair worn areas, adjust moisture levels and monitor the grass's response to summer conditions. The organizers consider that interval crucial, especially because the semifinals were played at other stadiums in the Dallas area and in Atlanta. This avoided the additional workload experienced by MetLife during the closing stages of the Club World Cup a year earlier. Citing the total number of matches and the long period of use, Ferguson said that he was satisfied with the way the pitch had held up.
Heat, humidity and the possibility of storms remain additional factors
The condition of the grass cannot be separated from the weather conditions in East Rutherford. According to forecasts reported by the Times Union on July 16, temperatures in the mid-80s Fahrenheit, or approximately between 28 and 31 degrees Celsius, are expected during Sunday's final, with a possibility of showers or thunderstorms. The final conditions may still change, and it has not been officially confirmed how much the pitch will be watered immediately before kickoff. Rain alone does not usually stop a match, but it could significantly alter the speed of the ball on a surface previously criticized for being too dry. Thunderstorms, on the other hand, could lead to a suspension under the stadium's safety rules.
Throughout the tournament, FIFA introduced cooling breaks in both halves, regardless of whether a match was played outdoors or in an air-conditioned stadium. The organization also stated that it is working with meteorologists, local authorities and stadium operators to monitor heat, humidity and possible storms. For the pitch, it is important to find an appropriate level of watering that balances the needs of the grass and the players. Too little water can slow the ball and further harden the upper layer, while excessive watering can increase instability and slipping. The final preparation will therefore be adapted to measurements taken on matchday rather than solely to a predetermined plan.
FIFA wants the discussion after the final to be exclusively about football
For the organizers, more than one match is at stake. The final in New Jersey will be the tournament's most-watched event and the ultimate test of a multiyear project through which FIFA sought to standardize natural grass pitches at stadiums with very different primary uses. If the pitch withstands the match without visible problems, the organization will be able to present it as evidence that venues with artificial surfaces can also be temporarily transformed into stadiums suitable for elite football. If, however, complaints about hardness, dryness or slow ball movement reappear, the debate will probably continue even after the trophy has been awarded. Particular attention will be paid to whether the choice of bermudagrass was justified and whether the measurement standards are sufficiently connected to the players' actual experience.
For now, there is no official indication that the condition of the pitch could jeopardize the staging of the final. FIFA's team claims that all key parameters are under control, that the surface has been tested regularly and that the two-week break was used for the final work. The players of Spain and Argentina will have equal conditions, but only the first quick passes, changes of direction and challenges will show how well the pitch suits their styles. The organizers hope for a scenario in which the grass attracts the attention of neither television commentators nor footballers after the referee's final whistle. In that case, the main topics would remain the result, the new world champion and the final duel between two generations led by Messi and Yamal.
Sources:
- FIFA – official information on the pitch installation, the number of matches and the multiyear research program (link)
- FIFA – official schedule and information on the Spain – Argentina final on July 19, 2026 (link)
- The Indian Express – statements from Vinicius Junior and Adrien Rabiot and FIFA's assessment of the pitch ahead of the final (link)
- NY1 – technical details of the transportation, laying, stitching and maintenance of the grass in East Rutherford (link)
- CBS Sports – the construction of the layers beneath the pitch, irrigation, ventilation and the choice of bermudagrass (link)
- Associated Press – the broader context of pitch development and standardization at the 16 World Cup stadiums (link)
- University of Tennessee – information on the cooperation between the universities, FIFA and Michigan State University in pitch research (link)
- Times Union – the weather forecast, the risk of thunderstorms and the conditions expected for the final in New Jersey (link)