Too High To Play Football?
Don’t worry – unlike an earlier exclusive, this article does not involve drugs.
It does, however, involve high altitudes (high enough to make it hard for you to breath), football, politics and a healthy dose of good writing.
Anyway, Jim Shultz from the Democracy Center writes about how the recent FIFA regulation to limit the altitude football matches can be played at has united Bolivia’s political climate.
It’s a light piece and takes the political perspective on the issue, but nevertheless is a good read and makes one very good point.
The core issue at hand is that Bolivia and Ecuador have a strong home advantage based on altitude. The counter-argument to this is that football does not have any regulations to limit the weather conditions in which the game can be played.
If we’re going to limit altitude because it makes it hard for players to breathe, should we also ensure that football is not played when temperatures are too hot or too cold?
Personally, I think the regulation smacks of double-standards and has no place in the game. Natural conditions are either a part of the game or they are not. If FIFA really want to help football, they should try preventing World Cup matches from taking place in hot summer conditions (at least schedule them for late evenings) so that the players can give it their best shot 90 minutes straight, and not be hampered by the weather.
What do you guys think?
Topics: Features, General Football News, Help Football
Football News 24/7
I was also going to make a point about temperatures – not to mention other elements such as snow – affecting things. All teams can play in ideal conditions, but teams used to playing in extreme environments will always have an advantage.
But sometimes I think the Bolivians, Peruvians etc, take things a bit too far. FIFA is not saying that matches have to be played at sea level, just below 2500 meters, which is still extremely high for most countries.
June 4th, 2007 @ 15:06What a joke, why have FIFA picked 2500 and not 2000 or 3000?
FIFA again seem to have their focus on the wrong areas of the game.
Are we to believe the altitude in games is a more important issue than the those surrounding third party ownership of players, corrupt managers/players/agents/chairmen/FIFA delegates, policing both within and outside stadiums or safety issues regarding movement of fans to and from games?
June 4th, 2007 @ 15:44i have to agree with you Ahmed, if FIFA really want to hlp the game and improve it then there are better, more productive ways then limiting the altitude of where a match is taking place. anyway it works both ways, it is not only Bolivia and Ecuador but every South American team has this advantage over european teams which is why they struggle when playing out there but if you look at south american teams success in europe you will see that they also struggle when playing here. Brazil being the only non european team to win a world cup in Europe and that was back in 1958 in Sweden.
The only ‘neutral’ venues have been USA 94 and 2002 in Korea and Japan, where the altitudes are higher then europe and of course Brazil won both. No european team has ever won a world cup held in south america.
What i am trying to get across here is that i dont think altitude can be called an unfair advantage as it works for and against teams whether it be too high and too low teams from both struggle when away from their natural climate.
I just wonder which team will be on top of the mountain come the 2010 world cup in South Africa?
June 4th, 2007 @ 15:57You just knew I was going to throw an answer your way Mr Bilal!
Yes, high altitude game play can have a negative effect on performance for teams who have not acclimatized to…well, high altitudes!
One of thousands of studies (let me rattle off one at least)A. Roberto Frisancho (et al.) in the study “Developmental, genetic, and environmental components of lung volumes at high altitude” cited in the American Journal of Human Biology (1998) showed several factors that can be translated to soccer players, training or playing in high altitude.
The main 3 can be broken down as follows:
1) Genetics plays a part
2) Environmental fators play a part
3) High residual oxygen uptake is related to developmental acclimatization and genes.
So for example, if Jamaica went to play in the mountains of Bolivia…”Yah Man!” they would have a rough time. Acclimatization to higher climes takes time and adaptaion, something you have to train for…and then some.
As they say, you can’t climb Everest in a day! I know from first hand experience how tough it is to adjust to a high altitiude and cold climate coming from sunny Sydney to Northern Europe, I almost shat (if that is a word?)a horse…that is how tough it is to train in high altitude!
With time and acclimatization techniques, the body gradually adjusts. This is why some international teams find it difficult to adjust to a hectic schedule coming from sea-level environments into high altitude. I think it is a smart decision by FIFA, as it ultimately keeps all teams on a level playing field, and ensures the safety of the elite soccer player.
What do the rest of you think?
June 4th, 2007 @ 16:32I guess the real question now is – are changes in altitude tougher to handle for the human body than changes in temperature?
John?
June 4th, 2007 @ 16:41Bilal…why you pushing me! LOL
The scientific principal is actually based on Fick’s Law. It is diffusion at a cellular level, or gas exchange. The law simply states “Atmospheric pressure decreases as altitude increases making effective breathing more difficult at higher altitudes”.
Basically it gets harder for you to breathe as you increase altitude. So, in laymans terms…it is bloody hard to just adapt over night to high altitude coming from sea level. It takes a little time, but definitely not impossible.
Therefore, soccer teams training for elite competition should try to “acclimatize” before and during competiton, there are many acientific methods to do so. Temperature and high altitude go hand in hand.
In cold weather, generally, the body will have to work harder, it’s just basic human science.
June 4th, 2007 @ 17:02Mate, see, my issue is, it’s not about cold weather but hot weather. Is that worse or less harmful than high altitudes?
It would be interesting to see the research behind it.
June 4th, 2007 @ 17:08Tim Vickery’s article on this is enlightening as well, and gives a bit of a background into the regulation.
If it really is Brazil-backed politicking, then it should be thrown out immediately. If it’s based on medical research, FIFA should make that research public and available to anyone who wants to see it.
June 4th, 2007 @ 17:23That’s another ball game (no pun intended). It can be just as harmful playing in intense hot weather as it can be in extreme altitude or extreme cold. Dehydration, heat sickness and in extreme cases death from being over-heated can eventuate.
Every professional soccer team has (or should have) a hydration strategy that entails the soccer player adheres to a very strict formula of hydrating the body during the training week, before, during and after the game.
Electrolytic drinks (like Gatorade) for example help restore potassium, sodium and other vital fluid during intense conditions. We lose many nutrients and fluids when we sweat, so soccer players should always have a master plan when it come to diet and fluid replacement, especially in intense heat.
It’s just a part of the game plan…you’d be surprised how many soccer players are unaware of the need for proper hydration, much to the detriment of their game.
June 4th, 2007 @ 17:28Yeah well, that is where money comes into play Ahmed. You can get your hands on that kind of information, but it comes with a high price tag (think Visa Black Card). If you were to accumulate all of this information (most of which is not readily available for public consumption) it would be costly.
Imagine how awesome it would be to get a full insight into the scientific testings conducted by FIFA. Not much is really pusblished at all, and much of it is outdated.
June 4th, 2007 @ 17:34Altitude is not weather, altitude sickness is extremely common and seems to be impossible to prevent while dehydration’s is possible to prevent. There is less air, plain and simple, it´s not like temperature or humidity.
Also with lower air pressure, air resistance to the ball trajectory is smaller, balls can impact with more strength or behave in strange ways.
So Bolivia has an advantage of being able to adapt to playing football at 4000 meters. But you want to see the best teams in the world cup, and that is not going to be played at 4000 meters. If a country can only win games at high altitude they are not going to do much in the world cup anyway.
June 4th, 2007 @ 21:56Fifa relents on altitude ruling
July 10th, 2007 @ 10:50It’s true all players have an environmental ‘home advantage’ of sorts and it cuts both ways(watch glove-wearing South American players shiver their way through an English winter). But if any player born/raised at altitude has superior pulmonary gaseous exchange (ie they can get by on less oxygen) surely when they play at sea level the advantage carries.. The world’s best boxers and distance runners often train at altitude before a race/fight for precisely this reason – so why don’t Ecuadoreans and Bolivians win everything?
July 19th, 2007 @ 23:56John you have turned this from an article about Football high up to my Science class, I already have science 3 times a week including a double period so bloody hell keep it to football!
July 20th, 2007 @ 13:09