Playing Australian football on artificial turf: what do the players think?
Twomey DM, Petrass LA, Gonsalves MS
Journal of science and medicine in sport · 0 citations
How it was studied
- Design
- Cross-sectional study (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- No health outcome
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Possibly industry funded
- Industry group
- Australian Football League
Based on 1 listed funder(s).
Publication
- Published
- 2025-12-06 · J Sci Med Sport · vol. 29 · issue 7 · pp. 733–740
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Cited
- 0 citations · more than 37% of similar papers · 0.0× the field average
- References
- 20 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Sports injuries and prevention · Sports, Gender, and Society · Sport and Mega-Event Impacts
- Keywords
- Football, Perception, Football players, Affect (linguistics)
- MeSH
- humans, athletic injuries, cross-sectional studies, sex factors, floors and floorcoverings, adolescent, adult, australia, female, male, athletic performance, young adult, athletes, surveys and questionnaires
3 authors
From AU
- D. Twomey · correspondingFederation University
- Lauren A. PetrassFederation University
- Marlon S. GonsalvesFederation University
Abstract
Objectives
To investigate Australian Football players' perceptions of the safety and performance attributes of artificial turf, considering the influences of gender, surface composition, level of exposure and injury status.
Design
Cross-sectional.
Methods
Senior male and female Australian Football players, 18-35 years, from two clubs training and competing on artificial turf were invited to participate. Players completed a validated and reliable questionnaire assessing their perceptions of physical performance and injury risk on artificial turf.
Results
118 community-level Australian Football players completed the questionnaire: 68 males and 50 females. Overall, players preferred artificial turf in wet conditions (57.3 %) and natural turf in dry conditions (71.4 %). Natural turf was also favoured for competition (82.2 %) and training (55.0 %). Females and individuals with greater exposure - defined by the frequency of turf interactions - preferred artificial turf for training, and wet conditions (p < 0.05). Gender (p = 0.031) and injury status (p = 0.008) significantly impacted performance-related perceptions. Players' preferences and their perceptions of performance and injury risk were significantly influenced by the surface composition (p < 0.001). Skin-related injuries (48.3 %) were the most commonly self-reported injury. Significant differences in injury likelihood and/or severity statements were found when analysed by gender (p = 0.011), exposure (p < 0.001), injury status (p < 0.05) and surface composition (p < 0.05).
Conclusions
These findings demonstrate that player perceptions of artificial turf are influenced not only by surface composition but also by individual experiences and biases. By recognising and responding to these individual factors, stakeholders in the Australian Football community can refine their approaches to encourage acceptance and adoption of artificial turf.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.