In the world’s poorest countries, kids play soccer on fields of dirt. This coming Wednesday evening, partly for reasons of cost and drought, San Jose’s Parks and Recreation Commission will discuss whether the city should imitate them.

Yes, fields of dirt. The stuff that turns to mud in a heavy rain. The stuff that keeps carwashes in business. The stuff that has inspired countless parental crusades. The stuff that has launched the career of several notable players outside the United States.

In Santa Clara, soccer parents can quibble over the precise grade of grass that they want the NFL and 49ers to preserve after they vacate the soccer fields used for Super Bowl events. In San Jose, the conversation is more basic: How do you feel about sand, clay and packed fill?

The assistant director of parks, recreation and neighborhood services, Matt Cano, told me that the city had no intention of converting grass fields into dirt surfaces. And he cautions that any dirt field would have to be embraced by the local neighborhood or community.

“This is something we started to see if it’s a viable alternative,” he told me. “It’s not something we’re proposing yet.”

Tough sell

Fair enough. Cano is one of the best managers at City Hall. You can count on him to give you the straight story. That doesn’t mean he won’t have plenty of trouble convincing the San Jose soccer community of the virtues of dirt.

“I don’t think that’s the best we can do for our community here in San Jose,” says Rick Simons, the fields director for South San Jose Youth Soccer League. Noting pictures of dirt fields the city has released, he added: “It looks like Third World countries.”

Among the chief complaints of soccer fans is that a dirt field fundamentally changes the nature of the game. It speeds up the play. And in leagues where kids have been taught aggressive tactics to seize the ball, it inevitably means more injuries and more scrapes.

The city’s report on “alternative sports fields” (goo.gl/2fhxlA) acknowledges the likelihood of injuries. It also lays out the costs and demands for maintenance for dirt, grass and artificial turf fields.

Costs

A dirt field constructed from engineered soil can run around $880,000 to build. A grass field typically costs less than half that, at $370,000. And artificial turf is the most expensive, costing $1.4 million.

To some degree, these costs are offset by the maintenance bills. A dirt field costs about $30,000 a year to maintain, grass costs $68,000 and artificial turf only $15,000. (Significantly, you need to water a dirt field. And the runoff can create trouble for storm sewers.)

Beyond all the numbers, Cano says, a discussion about dirt fields could touch on innovation in a retro way: San Jose could have something found rarely in American cities.

But there might be a reason why dirt is shunned in the United States. In Washington state, the report notes, two dirt fields in Bremerton are rarely used and barely maintained. The city is considering converting them to synthetic turf.

And at Trona High School in Southern California’s Mojave Desert, where the hot local temperatures make grass difficult to grow, the dirt soccer field is known as “The Pit” among visiting teams. It reputedly gives the home team an advantage.

The parks and recreation commission meeting will begin Wednesday at 5:30 p.m. in Room 118/119 at City Hall, 200 E. Santa Clara Street. Something tells me it might be lively.

Contact Scott Herhold at 408-275-0917 or sherhold@mercurynews.com. Follow him at Twitter.com/scottherhold.