By David Butler

The penalty shootout is a mechanism to decide tied matches in soccer. It was sanctioned by FIFA on the 27th of June 1970. While the idea of a penalty kick was an invention of the Irish, the first major international competition decided through the shootout was the 1976 European Championship final between Czechoslovakia and West Germany. The inaugural penalty shootout in the World Cup finals occurred in 1982 between West Germany and France.

There are many factors associated with the success of individual penalty kicks that are specific to each player. These include psychology (player anxiety, stress and coping levels), ability (particularly shooting ability) and chance. Empirical analyses that consider shooting strategies for players have shown that penalties shot towards the upper left-hand side of the goal represent the most difficult shots to stop (Bar-Eli & Azar, 2009).

Below is data on 97 penalty shootouts (1033 penalty kicks) for six major international competitions from 1976 to 2015.In total for every three penalties scored, one is missed.  Penalty takers in the European Championships have had the most success (discounting the small sample from the Confederations Cup).

Substitutes are precisely no better or worse at scoring penalty kicks than players that start a match. What’s more, no evidence exists to support the argument that introducing a substitute in extra-time leads to improved performance in penalty shootouts. Fresh legs don’t matter too much when it comes to penalties and the performance of kickers is really independent of the time they spend on the field.

For more on this issue it would be wise to start with two papers by Jordet et al in (2007) and (2009).

By Paul O'Sullivan

The last of cycling’s 2015 Grand Tours, the Vuelta a Espana, began last Saturday with a 7.4km team time trial stage from Puerto Banus to Marbella. Grand Tours usually begin with a short prologue time trial, normally on an individual basis, in order to determine who wears the leader’s jersey for the first stage proper, but a rider’s time is also recorded for general classification (GC) purposes.

A significant development in Saturday’s team time trial was that after safety concerns were raised by some teams and riders (see account here by Team Sky’s Nicolas Roche), it was agreed that a rider’s recorded time would not contribute to his overall GC time. In effect, the time trial became a training spin. All that was left to be decided was the identity of the rider who would wear the race leader’s red jersey, which would be awarded to the rider that was first over the finish line for the fastest team. All team members are awarded the time of the fifth team member crossing the finish line.

The interesting aspect was how teams and individuals would react to this decision. As outlined after the stage by Nicolas Roche, teams with contenders for the overall GC title tended to be more cautious, while other teams may have been willing to take risks in order to achieve a rare stage win and generate some publicity for their team and sponsors. Team BMC, the world team time trial champions, won the stage in 8.10 at an average speed of 54.4km/h, though their main GC contender, Tejay van Garderen, was not one of its leading five members. In contrast, the teams with the main GC contenders were further behind, with Movistar (Valverde and Quintana) 24 seconds down in 9th and Team Sky (Froome) over a minute down in 20th place.

One can easily contrast these results to that of the 9th stage of this year’s Tour de France which was also a team time trial but over 28km, and where times did contribute to GC placing. BMC also won this, but with only one second to spare over Sky, and four seconds ahead of Movistar. Given this, it seems fairly clear that Sky and Movistar felt that any benefit from wining Saturday’s stage was not enough to compensate from any possible cost by possibly crashing. Indeed, as Nicolas Roche pointed out, “...we all agreed that it wasn’t worth taking the risk of riding full gas and somebody crashing out and possibly leaving Froomey short on help if he needed it later on in the race.”

For those of us that are regular cyclists, it is notable that while Sky took it easy, and even allowing for the closed circuit, they still managed an average speed of 48km/h.

By Robbie Butler

Just when I had finally managed to get over that night at the Stade de France, Paris in 2009 Sean O’Connor drew my attention to a recently published paper in the Journal of Sports Economics by Johan Fourie (Stellenbosch University, South Africa) and Maria Santana-Gallego (University of the Balearic Islands, Majorca) entitled “The Invisible Hand of Thierry Henry: How World Cup Qualification Influences Host Country Tourist Arrivals”. While I strongly doubt this is what Adam Smith was referring to when he coined the phrase invisible hand, it’s hard not to argue this is exactly what was witnessed that night in Paris.

The paper goes on to investigate the impact of tourist arrivals both during a tournament, in this case the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, and in the years after the event. A gravity model is used to demonstrate the impact of tourist arrivals from different competing countries. A number of counterfactual scenarios are also posed. For example, what if Ireland had qualified?

The authors report “large disparities” with regards to countries that did compete in the Finals and those that did not qualify (I’ll return to this in a moment). They also report that South Africa experienced the greatest levels of tourism growth, after the World Cup, from non-traditional sources such as Honduras, Mexico and Brazil.

But enough of that. To the important stuff. The paper actually claims that the South African economy was better off with France qualifying rather than Ireland! The author’s state:

“France’s participation meant that 36,482 additional French tourists visited South Africa in 2010. In contrast, had Ireland qualified, our model predicts that only 8,234 additional Irish tourists would have arrived. The difference of 28,248 means that the hand of Henry added R333 million in tourism expenditure during 2010 alone. The legacy effect is equally large: in the 3 years following the event, an additional 60,960 French tourists came to South Africa, whereas only 14,784 Irish tourists would have come had Ireland qualified for the finals. This means that tourism expenditure in South Africa during the 3 years following the World Cup was R545 million more because France qualified. In total, the hand of Henry increased tourism expenditure in South Africa by an astonishing R878 million or using the shorthand of 12 additional tourists for each extra job, provided 6,202 more jobs”.

Forget sporting integrity and moral justice, the real winners from Henry’s handball it seems were not the French, but the South Africans.

By John Eakins

Galway’s defeat of Tipperary in last Sundays All Ireland hurling semi-final was a result which mostly went against people’s predictions. It did however continue a trend where the Munster hurling champions lose their semi-final to a team coming through the ‘back door’. 

It is something that I discussed in a blog this time last year when Cork (then Munster hurling champions) lost to Tipperary (coming through the back door). It is now the fourth year in a row that this has occurred, Tipperary (2012), Limerick (2013), Cork (2014) and Tipperary (2015) and the sixth time in the last eight years.  

Many commentators have suggested that the long lay-off between the provincial final and All Ireland semi-final is to blame. I definitely think this is a contributory factor but I don’t think it provides a complete explanation.  If it did, why do Kilkenny routinely win All Ireland hurling semi-finals when having the same gap between games?    

My blog last year suggested another factor based on a particular pattern in these losses. The Munster hurling champions who lost in the All Ireland hurling semi-final hadn’t won a Munster championship in a number of years. Tipperary Munster championship win this year was their first in three years so their defeat seems to provide further support for my hypothesis. The fact that Tipperary (and the other Munster final winners) haven’t been in a similar position in say the previous year’s championship or the year before that is, I think, as much a factor as the long gap between games.  

As previously indicated, Kilkenny are the masters at ensuring success at the semi-final stage. The contrast in their approach is perhaps best summed up by the following quote from Kilkenny forward, T.J. Reid, just after this years Leinster final win against Galway [my emphasis added in italics].  

“Winning Leinster is very serious for Kilkenny. We were looking forward to playing in Croke Park again. We're through now to an All-Ireland semi-final and that's where you want to be, but the work only starts now.  

We have five weeks now to the next game and we'll train like dogs for that. There are things to improve on but for today we got the job done.”  

This is what makes Kilkenny. They have both the mental and physical preparation going into an All Ireland hurling semi-final down to a tee. And how did this happen? Probably because they have won 15 out of the last 19 Leinster championships and have learned over time the best way to prepare.

By Gary Burns

The aftermath of Floyd Mayweather’s decision to have his ‘final’ fight against Andre Berto in September is one of bemusement and amusement. It has been greeted with a general underwhelming reception. Berto is a welterweight contender, no doubt, but his status cannot be seen beyond the remit of a contender. Following three losses in four bouts from 2011 to 2013, Berto’s early promise remained at just that.  Two of those losses were against opponents that came up short against Mayweather previously - Victor Ortiz and Robert Guererro.  Perhaps the most telling loss was against his most recent opponent, Jesus Soto Karass, who had eight losses at the time of the Berto fight.

With two rather ordinary victories to his name since that loss, Mayweather has plucked Berto from a select group. The frustration of the selection is the core issue boxing fans have with the sport. No centralised decision making body dictates match ups whereby the most deserving face each other. From a sporting perspective there are clear issues relating to competition design.

The manner in which Mayweather dispatched Manny Pacquiao in their May mega-fight would suggest Mayweather would have little issue with any of the journalists preferred opponents such as Amir Khan, Kell Brook, Keith Thurman or Danny Garcia (Mayweather would simply not go up in weight to fight Gennady Golovkin). So why Berto? The answer may simply be economic and by that, I do not mean the Berto bout.

Mayweather’s current six-fight deal with television network Showtime ends after the Berto fight. It’s open market for the television companies then to secure what will surely be Floyd’s real last fight, number 50.  Currently at 48 victories and 0 losses, an easy victory over Berto will pave the way for this event where Mayweather will get the chance to finish his career beating Rocky Marciano’s historic 49 fight 0 losses figures. The need for legacy should not be underestimated. This will be Floyd’s.

So why not a more deserving opponent for his 49th fight? Perhaps it is a reaction to the poor reviews of his Paquiao fight. The Berto fight will do a fraction of the Mayweather-Pacquiao fight (reportedly upwards of $500 million, the richest ever fight) but a 50th fight against a ‘better’ opponent will surely do big number PPV sales. Floyd will have vast bargaining power for this and will guarantee him a monster TV deal for one last fight. The appetite for another Mayweather dismantling is simply not there now. Fast forward and an impressive victory over Berto, and his next (and final 50th) fight will be sold as a historic event against Pacquiao again or a Khan or a Brook. Of course, Andre Berto may have his own place in history before that, however unlikely that may be.

By Robbie Butler

If you are interested in knowing which country has the best chance of winning the upcoming Rugby World Cup (RWC) you should check out the recently launched www.rugbyvision.com. Dr Niven Winchester an economist at MIT has developed the site, bringing together several models that he has developed over the years. The website includes:
      1) Probabilities of each team reaching various stages of the RWC
      2) Global rugby rankings - which, unlike the official World Rugby rankings, can be used to predict game scores
      3) Live predictions for selected RWC matches.

The model employed doesn’t throw up many surprises and no prizes for guessing who is predicted as eventual winners; New Zealand (46.4% chance). England are the second most likely winners with a 24.6% of home success.

Irish fans will be pleased to know that the model gives the team a 26.3% chance of making the final and an 8% chance of being crowned world champions. Slightly, more worrying, is the fact that a road map to the final (see below) expects Ireland to be knocked out at the semi-final stage to the hosts. 

The site is certainly worth a closer look.

By John Considine

According to the latest Joint National Listenership Research (JNLR) the programme with the largest listenership figures is Morning Ireland (broadcast on RTE Radio 1, weekdays from 7-9am).  Morning Ireland attracts 433,000 listeners.  The highest ranked sports programme on the list is RTE's Saturday Sport with listenership numbers of 178,000.  Two other sports programmes make the Top-30.  RTE's Sunday Sport is twenty-first on the list with 173,000.  Today FM's Premier League Live is at number 30 with 135,000 listeners.

Both RTE programmes have opened up a listenership gap on the Today FM programme as can be seen in Figure 1 below.  Just over two years ago there was very little difference between the three programmes.  In the first quarter of 2013 the three programmes attracted a combined listenership figure of 396,000 (with 136,000 for RTE Sunday, 133,000 for Today Sat, and 127,000 for RTE Sat).  A year later the combined listenership figure had risen by 28%.  This is a substantial increase.  Even more impressive was the 54% increase delivered by RTE Saturday Sport over the period.

The weekend sports programmes offered by NewsTalk do not make the list of the Top-30.  However, its weeknight offering, Off the Ball, is well ahead of its RTE 2FM rival as is shown in Figure 2 below.  In the two years since the second quarter of 2013, the combined listenership rose by almost 10%.  The overall growth in listeners is down to the NewsTalk offering as there was a slight decline in the Game On listeners between these two endpoints.

The data for this post came from the blog ilevel.ie.

By David Butler

It’s that time of year again when we have some fun calculating the range of prices fans pay to get a footballer’s surname printed on the back of their shirt.

For the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 season Jussi Jääskeläinen’ claimed top spot. The West Ham United stopper was the most expensive player due to the diaereses above his name. It cost a Hammer approximately £26 to get ‘Jääskeläinen-22’ printed on their replica shirt (making our simplified cost assumptions). As the goalkeeper was released at the end of last season, a new name features at the top of list for the 2015/2016 season.

Once again, we apply the same cost structure to all names - £4 per number and £1 per letter. All dots, hyphens, accents etc. are considered letters.

At the time of writing Bastian ‘Schweinsteiger’-31, at 14 letters and double digits, tops the list this season. The German midfielder who was recently recruited by Manchester United costs £22.  The Norwich striker Ricky Van Wolfswinkel is second, with 'V.Wolfswinkel'-29 at 13 letters and double digits costing £21. Six players are joint third costing £20 with 12 letters and double digit squad numbers.

In terms of a giveaway Patrice ‘Evra’-3 and Joe ‘Hart’-1 have been the bargain buys over the last two seasons, costing just £8. They were the best performing, cheapest surnames.  Based on the 2014/15 performance statistics Joe ‘Hart’-1 tops the bargain list once again. If you have your heart set on an outfield player, the best you will get is Juan ‘Mata’-8 followed by Danny ‘Rose’ – 3.

All of the 3 lettered names such as Emre ‘Can’ and Jordan ‘Ibe’ have double digit squad numbers, meaning they cost £11. Even though he has 6 as his squad number, Chelsea’s Nathan ‘Aké’ is actually a four lettered name given the accent above the e. You might also be thinking that Sung-Yueng ‘Ki’ of Swansea City might be the cheapest but the South Korean goes as ‘Ki.S.Y’, coming in at £10.  Luke 'Shaw' - 3 would have been cheap but the Manchester United defender recently revealed why he opted for 23 this season. The number superstitions are clearly important to players. 

While I don’t think the Manchester United hierarchy considered name length when they purchased Bastian Schweinsteiger, this pricey 'Schweinsteiger'-31 stamp will probably be quite lucrative  for the Red Devils relative to the cheaper buys. Bargains don’t seem to interest fans too much. Sports Direct released figures last season on player shirt sales showing that Angel di Maria (9.59%), Alexis Sanchez (3.80%) and Diego Costa (2.27%) topped the list for player shirt sales in the English Premier League. Schweinsteiger would definitely satisfy the taste for a superstar name.

While shirtonomics is intended to taken with a pinch of salt, merchandising, image rights and a clubs ability to market their stars has grown in importance. In my view, this will get increasingly significant going forward. From a psychological perspective it's also interesting to think about how fans identify with players and enjoy basking in the reflected glory of a star. 

So that’s it for 2015/2016.  While a new name tops the list this season, Jan Vennegoor of Hesslink-29 remains the most expensive in EPL history. You still can’t get as good a bargain as Ruel Fox-7, Rob Lee-7, or as a friend recently informed me, David May-4!  

If you’re interested in thinking about shirts and numbers further, John Considine has written about how we identify numbers with positions. Stefan Szymanski also refers to the importance of merchandising in chapter 4 of his new book Money and Football - A Soccernomics Guide.

by Declan Jordan

Fans and commentators in Gaelic Football have been very exercised by the spate of one-sided games in the All-Ireland series recently (for a primer on Gaelic games see here). There have been calls for the Gaelic Athletic Association (GAA) to "do something" or risk turning spectators away from the sport. The future of the game itself has been called into question by the more doom-laden pieces. As someone with less than a love of this particular sport, I have given very little thought to the future of the game. However, there are some very interesting sports economics issues being raised by the current debate.

Jim McGuinness said, in an article in the Irish Times last week, that the one-sided games in the previous weekend made him fear for the game. He said "the gap between the elite counties and the rest is becoming a chasm. This is blatantly obvious now, and the GAA has to address the issue urgently". His suggestions to improve the situation centre around better coaching, paid for by more money from the GAA to "poorer" counties. An alternative proposal is Joe Brolly's suggestion of a two-tier Championship to ensure closer games is one proposed solution. 

What the arguments are based on is the classic idea of competitive balance. There are growing concerns that more games at the latter end of the Championship are so imbalanced that there is no uncertainty in the outcome. Jim McGuinness worries that "if what happened last weekend at Croke Park happens for the next five years in a row, then the 60,000 people who turned up will become 30,000 and it will dwindle from there. Who wants to see that?". 

Gaelic games are unusual in that they place greater importance on the knock-out Championship than the league tournament. In some ways the league is considered as a form of preparation for the Championship. Attendances at Championship games far exceeds attendances at league matches - even league play-offs and finals. A 'back-door' element was introduced to avoid the situation for decades where half of the counties would have one Championship game every year. Now counties are guaranteed a minimum of two - which is still a difficult situation for counties that train and prepare over the winter and spring. It also mitigates against team development where a county will find it difficult to progress on the basis of two matches at Championship level in a year.

The importance of the Championship also makes it difficult to measure competitive balance in Gaelic games. The structure of the Championships - with four provincial competitions leading into an All-Ireland series - also makes it difficult to determine how much (im)balance there may be nationally. Also, a knock-out tournament may at times through up mismatches simply because of the teams drawn against each other and how those teams have fared in previous rounds' draws. This is important in the current debate because very often the availability heuristic hinders good decision-making. This means we tend to rely on immediate examples and our opinions are more heavily weighted toward more recent information. In the Sunday Independent, Eamonn Sweeney was getting at just this notion (perhaps more succinctly than me) when he referred to the idea of a two-tier championship and worries about imbalance as this year's "Big Stupid GAA Idea".

So, is there any evidence, apart from a couple of games in which Dublin and Kerry rack up huge wins? The table below shows the number of counties that have appeared at different stages in the Championship since 2004. It also shows a breakdown between 2004 and 2009 (6 seasons) and 2010 and 2015 (6 seasons) - while the winners and finalists aren't known at this stage we do know that there won't be a new team reaching those milestones.

The main story in terms of imbalance in the Championship over the past 12 seasons has been a relative decline in  Kerry dominance between the two periods. Kerry appeared in every final in the first period - winning 4 of them. Since 2010 they have had to settle for "only" 2 final appearances and 2 semi-final appearances including this year. Interestingly Kerry's dominance at provincial level is stronger in the second period (winning 5 of 6) than the first period (winning 3 of 6). Dublin have dominated Leinster winning 10 of 12 titles while they have only recently appeared as the potentially dominant county. Over this period they have no final appearances until 2011 with 2 semi-finals in the first period. In the second period they have appeared in the same number of finals (2) as Donegal, Kerry and Mayo (this may after this year's semi-finals).

Looking at the numbers in general there would appear to be some evidence of greater imbalance as the number of counties reaching a semi-final has declined. However, it would seem that these counties may be more competitive as the number of different finalists and winners has increased.

I can't recall similar calls for two-tier Championships and moves to enhance competitive balance during the mid-2000s when Kerry were dominant. Perhaps the spectre of the most populated county (Dublin) with its potential for commercial success is dominating hearts and minds. If Dublin go on to win this year expect more calls for "something to be done". Otherwise we can wait for nest season's big GAA idea.

The second graph below shows how Irish talent is still preferred to that of other British Isles countries. For the vast majority of the EPL, there has been more Irish players in the league when compared to Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish. Scotland and Wales both saw a downward trend in their numbers since 1992/1993. This has reversed since 2008/2009 for Scottish players and since 2010/2011 for the Welsh.