The water-based field: the ultimate field hockey surface
Let’s be honest: the water-based field has been the ultimate field hockey surface for decades, and for good reason. To understand why the debate around these pitches is now in full swing, it’s worth zooming in on the biomechanics behind that superiority.
Water-based fields fall under the FIH Global category and consist of an extremely dense mat of short synthetic fibres with no sand or rubber infill. The clever trick? That’s the water film applied to the fibres just before the match and during half-time. And that film does more than you might expect.
First, it reduces friction (the Coefficient of Friction, CoF) between ball and surface to a minimum. The result: a ball roll that is not only lightning-fast but also unprecedentedly consistent and predictable. For a hockey player who depends on precision for drag flicks and long-distance passes, that consistency isn’t a luxury — it’s a necessity. Three-dimensional skills (lifting and jinking the ball) also flow much more smoothly on a wet water-based field.
Then there’s the safety aspect. Synthetic fibres without a water film can cause serious abrasions at high speeds — the notorious carpet burns. Water acts as an effective lubricant and coolant, allowing players to perform sliding tackles with minimal risk of injury. And as a bonus: in a warm climate, a dry synthetic surface in direct sunlight can reach temperatures above 50°C. Water keeps that in check.
The performance indicators for the current Global category are laid down in FIH standards:
| Performance Parameter | Description | Typical Value (Wet Global) |
|---|---|---|
| Ball roll distance | The distance a ball travels after a standardised launch. | ≥ 10.0 metres |
| Ball roll deviation | The degree of deviation from a straight line over 9.5 metres. | ≤ 0.30 metres |
| Vertical ball bounce | Rebound height after a free fall from 2 metres. | 100–400 mm |
| Shock absorption (SA) | Degree of impact reduction on the player. | 45%–60% SA |
| Stick-surface friction | Resistance when sliding the stick across the surface. | ≤ 0.85 CoF |
| Surface deformation | Depth of foot indentation under load. | 4–9 mm |
The downside: water-based fields in the ecological crosshairs
All well and good — but nothing is perfect, and the water-based field has a serious problem. Historically, the FIH prescribed that a field required no less than 18,000 litres of water per watering session. Modern irrigation systems have brought that down to around 6,000 to 10,000 litres per session, but on a tournament day you easily go through three or four waterings. That’s between 18,000 and 40,000 litres per field per day. On an annual basis, an intensively used water-based field can consume up to 6 million litres.
In a world where water scarcity is an increasing threat to public health, agriculture and ecosystems, that’s hard to keep defending. The FIH has committed to the UN Millennium Goals — specifically goal 6 on sustainable water management — and announced in 2018 its intention to make the sport entirely independent of water for playing surfaces.
But it’s not just an ideological story. It’s also simply an economic one. A water-based field requires, in addition to the turf itself, a complete irrigation system: buffer wells, pumps, kilometres of underground piping and powerful sprinklers. Moreover, moisture promotes algae growth, which in turn requires costly and environmentally unfriendly pesticides. Add the maintenance burden and you understand why clubs are starting to think twice.
The FIH Innovation Category: the quest for Dry Hockey
To stimulate the industry, the FIH introduced the Innovation Category — a kind of testing ground for products that replicate the performance of a water-based field without a single drop of irrigation. The framework for this is the FIH Hockey Turf and Field Standards, focusing on four pillars: performance replication, player welfare, sustainability and durability.
The technical challenge is considerable: designing a fibre and construction that mechanically replicates the friction reduction of water. This is achieved through ultra-textured yarns and advanced crimping techniques, where the fibres are so closely packed that the ball essentially floats on a cushion of air and plastic rather than ploughing through the mat.
The threshold values for the Innovation Category, distinguishing between the ideal Target Range and the acceptable Wider Range for new technologies:
| Parameter | Unit | Target Range | Innovation (Wider) Range |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ball roll speed retention | Percentage | 64%–72% | 60%–80% |
| Ball roll deviation (at 9.5m) | Metres | ≤ 0.30 | ≤ 0.50 |
| Oblique ball bounce (Pace) | Percentage | 58%–65% | ≥ 54% |
| Oblique ball bounce (Angle) | Degrees | 30°–37° | 30°–40° |
| Stick-surface friction | CoF | 0.80–0.85 | ≤ 0.90 |
| 3D surface stiffness | N/mm | ≤ 300 | ≤ 350 |
| Skin-surface friction | µ | ≤ 0.75 | Reporting mandatory |
A particular point of attention is heat retention. Dry fields are, after all, not cooled by water, so manufacturers must report thermal properties in three categories: Category 1 (≤ 40°C), Category 2 (41°C–50°C) and Category 3 (> 50°C). The aim is to develop fields that remain in Category 1 or 2 even under intense sunlight.
Practice speaks: Oman and Weesp as benchmarks
Theory is all well and good, but the real test is of course practice. And that delivers both good news and a few interesting headaches.
The first major moment was the very first FIH Hockey5s World Cup in Oman (January 2024), played on a waterless Poligras Paris GT zero field. Players such as Sander de Wijn were positive about the playability and speed of the surface. But there were also clear warning signs: the performance of the dry field fluctuated throughout the day, depending on temperature and humidity. When the sun was at its peak, the synthetic fibres became softer, friction increased and the surface felt “heavier”. The result: the morning team played on a different surface than the afternoon team. In top-level hockey, that’s an unwelcome variable.
Closer to home, MHC Weesp serves as a true pioneer. In 2023 they installed the first full-size waterless hockey field in the world (GreenFields Pure EP). The speed of the ball can indeed match that of a water-based field — but in extremely dry weather the experience tends more towards a sand-dressed field, while in light rain the field responds exactly like a classic water-based field. Promising, but that weather dependency is still a point of concern.
This is precisely why the FIH adjusted its original plan to play the 2026 World Cup in Belgium and the Netherlands entirely on dry fields. The choice fell on irrigated fields — a decision driven by sporting fairness and the need for a level playing field for all participants, regardless of when their match is scheduled. For the 2028 Olympic Games in Los Angeles, a hybrid approach is also expected: dry surface technology with minimal wetting for cooling and consistency.
REACH: European regulation as an unexpected accelerator
Besides water, there is a second — perhaps even more pressing — factor shaking up the hockey world: European microplastics legislation. On 25 September 2023, the European Commission adopted a regulation under the REACH framework (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) that restricts intentionally added microplastics.
For synthetic turf systems with granulate infill, this has direct consequences. Hockey water-based fields (Global category) typically contain no infill and are less directly affected, but the thousands of sand- and rubber-filled fields (National and Community category) on which recreational hockey is played certainly are. The ban applies specifically to polymeric infill materials such as SBR (recycled tyre rubber), EPDM and TPE.
The timeline is as follows:
| Date / Deadline | Provision | Impact on Sports Facilities |
|---|---|---|
| 17 October 2023 | Entry into force of the regulation. | Start of the transition period. |
| 2023–2031 | Transition period of 8 years. | Existing fields may be used and maintained with existing stocks. |
| 17 October 2031 | Ban on sale of polymer granulate. | No new rubber granulate may be sold or purchased. |
| After 2031 | Use of existing stocks. | Clubs may only use granulate from their own stocks purchased before 2031. |
This ban is a powerful catalyst for non-infill systems and biological alternatives. Clubs renovating in the coming years must think about future-proof choices: organic infill materials such as cork, crushed olive pits, coconut fibres or specially treated wood (such as Brockfill) are gaining popularity.
The technology ahead
The industry is responding to the dual challenge of water conservation and microplastic reduction with an interesting wave of innovation.
Bio-based and carbon-neutral synthetic turf — The Poligras Paris GT zero (Polytan, for the 2024 Games) is made of 80% polyethylene derived from sugarcane. The sugarcane first goes through two pressings for the sugar industry, the third pressing is converted into ethanol for plastic production, and the bagasse (fibrous residue) is burned in bio-energy plants to power the factory. The result: a field with a negative CO₂ balance.
Dry Hockey systems (Innovation Category) — Systems built for full use without water. The focus is on fibre geometry: monofilament fibres with a specific shape (e.g. the Helix technology from GreenFields or the crimping techniques from Edel Grass) give the ball more lift relative to the surface. These systems often require a heavier shock pad to provide the shock absorption previously partly delivered by the water film.
Semi-water fields and sand-dressed systems — Popular hybrid systems for national and regional competitions with a small amount of sand deep in the mat. They play best slightly moist but remain safe when dry, consuming on average 66% less water than a full water-based field.
Who determines the future of the market?
The market for hockey synthetic turf is concentrated and a handful of players set the innovation agenda. The FIH oversees this through the FIH Preferred Supplier programme.
Polytan / Sport Group is the absolute market leader with 12 consecutive Olympic Games on their record. They are already working on the LA28 surface. AstroTurf (also part of Sport Group) dominates the North American market. GreenFields (TenCate) is the driving force behind the Pure series and works closely with the KNHB — their Pure EP surface is one of the few dry systems already being tested at scale in top-level hockey. Edel Grass focuses on the underfoot experience and joint loading and monitors their Edel Aero surface together with top clubs such as HC ’s-Hertogenbosch. Lano Sports (Belgium) excels in multifunctional systems through their S•Tec technology, ideal for smaller clubs that also want to use their field for tennis or multisport. FieldTurf (Tarkett) distinguishes itself with recycled materials in their Hockey Gold Speed D series, popular in university environments in the US and UK.
Do the maths: Total Cost of Ownership
When choosing a new field, clubs and municipalities increasingly look beyond initial construction costs (CAPEX) to total costs over the lifespan (OPEX). A dry system may be more expensive to purchase, but the TCO is often more favourable due to the elimination of irrigation costs.
An estimate for a standard hockey field of approximately 6,000 m² in a Western European context:
| Cost Item | Water-based (Global) | Dry Field (Innovation) | Sand-dressed (National) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Construction (Turf + Shock Pad) | $560k–$920k | $650k–$1.0m | $400k–$820k |
| Irrigation System | $180k–$250k | $0 | $0 |
| Annual Water Consumption | $15k–$30k | $0 | $2k–$5k |
| Annual Energy (Pumps) | $5k–$10k | $0 | $0 |
| Maintenance (Algae/Cleaning) | $10k–$15k | $5k–$8k | $8k–$12k |
| Lifespan | 8–10 years | 10–12 years | 10–15 years |
Over a 10-year period, the savings on operational costs for a dry field can amount to more than $250,000. Provided the sporting performance is acceptable for members — and that’s precisely where the challenge lies.
Maintenance, health and a few unexpected considerations
Maintenance is an underestimated part of this transition. Water-based fields capture dust and pollen through the water, which is then drained away. On dry fields, that dirt remains in the mat, compromising water permeability and ball roll consistency.
Algae control on water-based fields is a well-known challenge: the combination of moisture and sun creates a perfect breeding ground. Innovative solutions such as MO5 Sport — living micro-organisms that consume the nutrient base for algae — are already being successfully applied at MHC Weesp.
For dry fields, the primary problem is thermal expansion. Without the ballast of water (which adds up to 10 tonnes of extra weight to the surface) and without cooling, mats can start to “wave” in heat. This requires specific anchoring techniques and a very stable subbase.
And then there are two public health points that deserve attention. Irrigation systems with standing water in buffer wells can pose a risk for Legionella spread (particularly at water temperatures between 20°C and 45°C), which has led the FIH to prescribe that the water used must be of potable quality or that the system must eliminate bacterial growth. Additionally, there is growing attention to the leaching of heavy metals and PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) from synthetic turf systems. Recent German research suggests that modern systems with EPDM or sand infill leak minimal pollution into groundwater, but pressure towards non-fill systems remains strong. Filter systems such as Hauraton channels can reduce granulate discharge into the environment to virtually zero.
The roadmap to 2030: a managed evolution
The transition to waterless hockey is not a sudden break — it’s a carefully managed process that takes into account the lifespan of existing infrastructure and the time technology needs to mature.
2024–2025: Extensive data collection from Hockey5s events and first club installations of dry fields. Introduction of adapted footwear and balls.
2026: World Cup in Belgium and the Netherlands on irrigated fields, but with maximum water savings through Turf Glide technologies and water recycling.
2028: Olympic Games in Los Angeles. Hybrid approach: dry surface technology with minimal wetting for cooling and consistency.
2030: Target date for full implementation of the UN Millennium Goals. All new Global-certified fields must in principle be able to function without water.
2032: Olympic Games in Brisbane — the moment when Dry Hockey must be the absolute and undisputed standard for the entire sport, from recreational hockey to the Olympic final.
What does this mean for the sector?
The transition from water-based fields to sustainable, dry alternatives is the biggest challenge for the hockey world since the switch from natural grass to synthetic turf. And that requires a coordinated approach from all parties.
Federations (FIH/KNHB): Transparent standard-setting that stimulates technological innovation without undermining the essence of the game. The decision to play on water in 2026 demonstrates healthy pragmatism — but the pressure on the industry must be maintained.
Clubs: When renovating fields, TCO and future EU regulation (REACH) are decisive factors. Investing in a traditional water-based field without water-saving techniques is a financial and ecological risk in the long term.
Industry: The focus must shift from the turf to the complete ecosystem. Innovation in footwear, balls and maintenance methods is at least as important as the polymer chemistry of the fibre itself.
Players: Dry Hockey requires a different physical load and possibly an adjustment in technique. The adaptation period the FIH is now building in is essential — and a sign that the sport is seriously thinking about how to make this transition smooth.
Hockey is on its way to becoming the first global sport that at the highest level is entirely decoupled from the consumption of scarce drinking water. The road to 2030 still has technological bumps — that much is clear — but the course is set towards a sport that excels not only in athletic ability but also in ecological responsibility. And that’s a story we can be proud of.