Playing Surface Characteristics and Their Effects on Football Performance Across Multiple Surface Types: A Systematic Review

The characteristics of the playing surface are increasingly recognized as key determinants of football-specific performance. This systematic review synthesizes mechanistic and applied evidence on how natural grass, artificial turf, and sand influence physical, physiological, neuromuscular, and perceptual outcomes in football players. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search of PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science was conducted from database inception to 17 June 2026. Eligible studies included original peer-reviewed research involving football players performing football-related activities on natural grass, artificial turf, or other playing surfaces, provided that natural grass or artificial turf was included as a comparison condition. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized intervention studies and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale adapted for cross-sectional studies (NOS-xs). Results were synthesized using a qualitative narrative approach because of substantial methodological heterogeneity across study designs, surface comparisons, and outcome measures. A total of 814 records were identified, of which 16 studies met the eligibility criteria. Locomotor responses were the most surface-sensitive domain: several studies reported greater external running demands on artificial turf, including higher sprint frequency, acceleration demands, and total running distance; however, results were heterogeneous and some studies observed no meaningful differences between surfaces. Sand consistently imposed greater metabolic cost and reduced running efficiency. Physiological responses (e.g., heart rate and lactate) showed variable results across studies, suggesting that internal load may be influenced not only by surface characteristics but also by task constraints, participant characteristics, and familiarity with the playing surface. Neuromuscular outcomes revealed limited acute variation, although isolated evidence indicated greater residual hamstring fatigue following exposure to artificial turf. Perceptual responses were inconsistent and appeared moderated by surface familiarity. A critical limitation across studies was the scarce reporting of objective mechanical surface properties, such as shock absorption, deformation, and rotational traction, restricting mechanistic interpretation. Overall, the findings highlight the importance of integrating mechanical characterization, standardized football-specific protocols, and contextual covariates when evaluating player–surface interactions. These results inform evidence-based training design, load management, and pitch selection in football. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024605254.