A human-rights complaint alleging it is discriminatory to hold next year's Women's World Cup on artificial turf is merely "symbolic" and should be tossed out, lawyers for tournament organizers say in a submission to the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal.

A group of about 40 international women soccer players, including U.S. forward Abby Wambach, have made global headlines protesting the notion that they should have to play their World Cup on artificial turf, while the men's game would never contemplate holding its top tournament on fake grass.

Earlier this month, the group, with the help of lawyers in the U.S. and Canada, filed a human-rights complaint in Ontario, arguing that forcing women to play on artificial turf is sex discrimination and that the surface results in more player injuries. When they filed their complaint, they asked the tribunal to speed up its hearings so they could be held before the tournament next year.

Story continues below advertisement

But in a response filed with the tribunal and dated Oct. 9, the Canadian Soccer Association argues against a faster hearing, and asserts that "turf is not a second-class surface" and that it is "integral" to the game in Canada, where such surfaces are common.

In the document, tournament organizers allege the women knew about the decision to play an artificial turf for up to three years before filing their "11th-hour" complaint. They also say they will argue that the complaint exceeds the time limit for such cases and should be tossed out.

"The applicants cannot seriously contend that the CSA's decision to bid on the Competition proposing to use Canada's best available facilities, constitutes discrimination," the document reads, submitted by Vancouver constitutional lawyer Joseph Arvay on behalf of the CSA.

Arguing that the women are seeking a "symbolic victory, not a practical outcome," the submission says they should have raised the issue through soccer's Zurich-based international governing body, FIFA, when the decision to hold the tournament in Canada was made in 2011.

But in a response, also filed with the tribunal, lawyers for the players blame the delay on the CSA and FIFA. They say a move by tournament organizers in 2013 to survey women players about the turf issue suggested a "willingness to change course." It was only after attempts to start a dialogue with organizers over this past summer failed that the players decided to file their complaint, they say.

"In fact, as late as this past week, CSA and FIFA continued to suggest that [they] might make changes to the venue surfaces, in conducting 'inspections' of each venue," the submission reads.

Tournament organizers insist that inspections will ensure that the turf at the tournament's six stadiums – in Moncton, Ottawa, Montreal, Edmonton, Vancouver and Winnipeg – meets FIFA's standards for field quality.

Story continues below advertisement

In its submission, the CSA insists that gender plays no role in inspecting a pitch: "FIFA does not distinguish between male and female players in the application of those standards."

But the case, if it goes ahead, is expected to hear technical arguments from both sides about whether artificial turf in fact puts players at a bigger risk of injury.

And the CSA argues that an expedited hearing would make it difficult to compile the studies and expert evidence it says will show that artificial turf poses no increased risk.

The players counter that the CSA has had plenty of time to compile the information it needs: "Surely, prior to scheduling the premier women's sporting event in the world on plastic fields [the CSA and FIFA] compiled research and data on the safety of those fields."

In a statement issued Friday, the CSA says none of the seven players it says are actually directly involved in the complaint live in Ontario or play for a Canadian soccer team. And the CSA says "the suggestion that having matches played on first class football turf rather than grass would be discrimination based on gender trivializes that important human right."