Entertainment desk
< December 9	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 11 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 10

Artificial turf in field hockey versus other outdoor sports

What is the reason why artificial turf has been embraced by field hockey so much to the point that its use is almost universal in the professional level, but other outdoor sports, particularly football codes, tend to prefer natural grass whenever possible and the use of artificial turf tends to be disliked by players? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:27, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See Field hockey pitch#Artificial playing surface, particularly the first quote: "Artificial grass permits easier ball control and this in itself helps to reduce the number of infringements of the rules—which means less whistle and fewer stoppages. The game thus becomes easier to follow, as well as being a faster spectacle and much more interesting from a spectator point of view." Clarityfiend (talk) 03:44, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've read the article and that section, but it doesn't explain why other field sports haven't universally embraced artificial turf, unlike field hockey. I've read that the potential for harder injuries is a factor, but if that were the case, then why doesn't that apply to field hockey? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is gridiron football-style tackling allowed in field hockey? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:14, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Players sliding is very common in various forms of football, where the ball may be played with the feet. Such a slide is a manoeuvre rather than accidental, and may be initiated while the player has a high velocity, thus making "turf burn" a very real risk. In field hockey, any slides are accidental and rarely involve high speeds. --Lambiam 11:44, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And as Bugs implied, there is no tackling in field hockey as there is in American Football or Rugby, so the harder artificial surface in not an issue. In baseball, artificial turf used to create unnatural bounces and faster ground balls, changing the game. More modern versions of artificial turf mitigate these problems, so there is a budding trend of professional teams using it once again, as it is easier to maintain. But purists will always prefer natural grass. Xuxl (talk) 13:26, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Artificial turf also provides for a more consistent playing surface. Natural grass, as a natural product, has far more variation; from both venue-to-venue and even within the same field. Indeed, the same grass surface may play differently on different days. Turf is likely to be much more consistent. --Jayron 32 13:40, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Artifical turf gets "crushed" over time and otherwise deteriorates. I recall in the early 2000s, before they replaced the fake grass at the Metrodome, they were spray-painting the bare areas with green paint. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:32, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Artificial Pitches and (Association) Football: A History. Alansplodge (talk) 00:51, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also see artificial turf#Environmental concerns and the section after that. There are some health and environmental concerns about artificial turf. It's non-biodegradable material containing some chemicals known or suspected to be hazardous, which may get in wounds, be inhaled after being kicked up or end up in the environment (especially for outdoor fields). So natural grass would be the default. Hockey uses a rather small ball that mostly rolls over the field (footballs are larger, baseballs fly), making it very sensitive to inconsistencies in the surface. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:08, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to the destroyed house at the end of the incredibles?

I don't understand the incredibles parr family would be arrested because of destroying their own house. Didn't ever in the US that have a law for the money loss incurred of destroyed house caused by accidental fall of nonpartisan villain like syndrome. Parr family would be homeless and be subjected at police station for forgetting insurance that had done. Are the Incredibles rendered homeless upon the accidental destruction of the parr's family house caused by syndrome's jet? 2404:8000:1005:555:1422:A887:1E54:5A69 (talk) 12:36, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Incredibles is a work of fiction; unlike a documentary, where the people on screen have lives that continue after the cameras stop rolling, in fiction, the work is completely made up. When the story ends there is nothing that happens to the characters. They only exist for the duration of the work, and they don't have lives that continue on after the story, unless someone comes along later to invent more story. Your question is unanswerable in the sense that there is no way to find it out from a reliable source of information. There is a sequel titled Incredibles 2; you can watch that if you want to learn more about the story of the Parr family. That sequel may or may not directly answer your questions. --Jayron 32 12:49, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And as an aside, most household insurance policies should include cover against loss or damage by "aircraft or other aerial devices or articles dropped from them" [1]. Alansplodge (talk) 00:43, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't The Incredibles a cartoon? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:28, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

American law has no jurisdiction in Pixaria. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:23, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which makes it a popular tax haven. —Tamfang (talk) 01:48, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]