On Tuesday, Edmontonians woke up to a typical mid-November day, with 20 centimetres of snow on the ground and an outside temperature of -7 C (feeling like -14 C in the wind chill). Same old for Canadians maybe, but what about the Mexican national soccer team, who had to face off with Team Canada on Tuesday for a World Cup qualifying match? With temperatures in most regions of Mexico averaging double-digits all year long, did playing on “Estadio Iceteca,” as Edmonton’s Commonwealth Stadium was dubbed by Mexican media, put Mexico at a disadvantage?
We asked Ira Jacobs, a professor at the University of Toronto Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, for his opinion on what role the cold weather conditions played in the match. Jacobs’s areas of expertise include physiological responses and adaptations to short-term, high intensity exercise and environmental extremes.
How much can the Mexicans blame the cold weather for their defeat?
In general, and in spite of what some have been making of the cold factor, it’s unlikely that it played a significant role, presuming that the players on the field really didn’t get cold. I suspect home field advantage was more important in stimulating the excitement and arousal of the players.
What happens when players are cold?
When muscles are colder than normal, there’s a decrease in reaction time and slight decreases in explosive muscle power, which means that the cold might have been important at the start of the game, but only IF the players didn’t warm-up adequately.
And then, presumably, they would have all warmed up during the match?
Yes, all players generate an awful lot of heat while playing, as a by-product of the high metabolic rates required to sustain the high intensity physical activity of the game. It is very unlikely that there was a significant risk of hypothermia to any of the players on the field.
In what instances would hypothermia occur?
That might happen if the rate of heat loss from the body to the cold air was so great that it exceeded the amount of heat being released as a consequence of the elevated metabolism needed to meet the demands of playing soccer. But that would not have been the case given the duration of play and the air temperature on the field.
Are there any advantages to playing in the cold?
The players, both Mexican and Canadian, likely did not sweat as much as when they play in warmer temperatures because body temperature would not be rising as quickly or as much given that heat transfer from the body to the environment is more rapid in colder air than in warmer air. That can actually be an advantage in terms of maintaining body hydration levels when exercising in cold environments …. But that would be equally applicable to both teams’ players.
So, Canada won fair and square?
Yes, but I can only vouch for the physiological playing field.