By Robbie Butler

The UEFA Nations League returned last night and will continue over the coming days. For those unfamiliar with the tournament, the competition has been created by UEFA to reduce the number of friendly internationals teams play, and offers an opportunity to qualify for Euro 2020. Unfortunately for the Republic of Ireland we have had little to cheer. Things could change on Monday night when the country travels to Denmark, and a win would lift team moral going into the UEFA European Qualifiers.

The game on Monday night (and those in the Nations League that have preceded it) has one oddity when compared to other Irish international games. It is a competitive fixture that is not available on free-to-air television. The reason this is unusual is down to European Commission rules and the Irish Statute Book.

At present, EU Member States can designate sporting and cultural events as being of major importance to society. Any events so designated should be available on a free-to-air television service.The  Irish Statute Book (2016) currently says "All events deemed to be “of major importance to society for which the right of a qualifying broadcaster to provide coverage on a live basis on free television services should be provided in the public interest”. This list includes, amongst other things,Ireland’s home and away qualifying games in the European Football Championship and the FIFA World Cup Tournaments, and Ireland games in the European Football Championship Finals and FIFA World Cup Finals Tournament.

Effectively, this means all competitive games involving the team must be shown on free-to-air television in the "public interest".

​The Nations League has recently joined the list of UEFA competitions. I wonder if this competition will be added to the Statute Book when reviewed by the Former Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment. Last year the Minister added the "All-Ireland Senior Ladies Gaelic Football and Camogie Finals to the Free to Air designation list with full backing from the Cabinet and the European Commission".

It would seem to make sense for Nations League games to join the list. 

By Robbie Butler

Major League Soccer (MLS) will complete its 23rd season on the 8th of December 2018 when the MLS Cup Final is held. The competition is currently in the semi-final stage with Atlanta United FC, New York Red Bulls, Portland Timbers and Sporting Kansas City all still standing in the competition.

For those unfamiliar with the MLS, the competition design is somewhat different to European soccer leagues. For one the top domestic prize is referred to as a "cup". This is effectively akin to winning the league, but mirrors that of other popular US sports in that there is a regular season, followed by the playoffs. The upside of this approach is that teams finishing as low as 6th in either conference (split east/west) can be crowned winners of the MLS Cup.

This approach has similarities in Europe. The Champions League can be won by finishing as low as 4th in one's domestic league, and second in the qualifying group. The Championship Playoffs in English League Football involve teams placed 3-6 (or 4-7 in League 2) battling it out for promotion. Rugby league's Super League is the closest competition design I can think of in a European context to mirror the soccer in the United States.

Whether you are for or against this competition design, one cannot but marvel at the opportunity for franchises to succeed. Atlanta United are in just their second season of the Eastern Conference of Major League Soccer, yet "The Five Stripes" are within touching distance of a place in the MLS Cup Final. Only New York Red Bulls stand in their way. 

The closed system that is MLS, and most of US sport, somewhat facilities this. Maybe this is the reason why the 23 franchises in the league this year will become 24 once FC Cincinnati join in 2019, and 26 by 2020 once Inter Miami and Nashville join the league. And their chances of success are much higher than in top European leagues. The figure below presents data on the number of league winners in each league since the first MLS season in 1996, and the number of league wins accumulated by the most successful club. 

Major League Soccer is more competitive than any of the top European leagues. As the theory would suggest, open systems with promotion and relegation, tend to foster inequality among teams. Winning the league title may be of far less concern to clubs who fear the threat of relegation. 

On the other hand, in a closed system (such as the MLS or Major League Baseball), in theory each team has equal probability of success (winning the Championship) at the start of the regular season. Maybe this why there have been 12 different MLS Cup Champions since 1996, and just 5 different champions in England, Spain and Italy. 

The system in the US might be much different to Europe but there are certainly things that could be learned. ​I'm sure fans of German and Italian soccer, other than Bayern Munich and Juventus supporters, would agree as the former look to win their seventh title in a row, and Juventus their 8th title on the spin.

By Robbie Butler

For those that watch the League of Ireland, it seems apparent (to me anyway) that competitive balance in the league has shifted in the past number of seasons.

On the 4th of November 2018 Cork City and Dundalk will meet for the 4th successive year in the FAI Cup Final. The meeting of the same two teams, four years in a row, has never happened in the FA Cup or Scottish Cup. This is also true of the Copa Del Rey and many other cups across Europe I have checked. 

Given the dynamics of a knock-out competition, and the probability of drawing a team at any stage, it is quite remarkable that Cork and Dundalk meet again. It is all the more remarkable that the last 3 meetings ended tied at the end of normal time, meaning neither has been beaten over 90 minutes in the FAI Cup since late summer 2014! This year's league table gives us further insight to the dominance of these two clubs, and how Dundalk's achievement in regaining the league title is somewhat of an outlier in recent years.

Since 2009 (ten full seasons) six clubs have been crowned champions of Ireland; Bohemians (2009), Shamrock Rovers (2010 and 2011); Sligo Rovers (2012); St Patrick's Athletic (2013) Dundalk (2014, 2015, 2016 and 2018) and Cork City (2017).

The charts below demonstrate how Dundalk and Cork have solidified their positions in recent years. 

It has taken Dundalk just one season to regain the league title. It remains to be seen if Cork City can do the same next year, but if they can it will be further evidence of a "Big 2" in Ireland. For the first time in the history of the League of Ireland, which commenced in 1921, the same two teams finished first and second (in any order) five years in a row. The previous record stood at three. 

​This is important in the context of what comes next. The other four winners of the League since 2009 have failed to regain their title. This is not unusual and I have previously addressed the issue here.

The graphic above presents league position for Bohemians, Shamrock Rovers, Sligo Rovers and St Patrick's Athletic from the season before winning the title to four years after. Following on from winning the League, all four then start a gradual slide. In the case of Bohs and St Pat's, this meant battling with relegation not long after winning the league.

What Dundalk and, to a lesser extent, Cork City are doing is not what we have been used to in recent years. It will be interesting to see if this trend continues. While such dominance will not be welcomed by fans of other clubs, it is in the interest of the league generally, in terms of improving UEFA coefficients and European club competition progression. 

The upcoming FAI Cup Final will be required viewing. If extra time is needed, both Dundalk and Cork will go close to 5 years without losing a FAI Cup game in normal time. I wonder has any other country ever had this experience? 

by Declan Jordan

At the business end of the Airtricity League of Ireland there is very little yet to be decided. Dundalk are on the verge of being champions, UCD won the First Division, and Bray Wanderers are effectively relegated from the Premier Division.
​
It is also very likely that my own club, Limerick FC, will take part in the relegation/promotion play-off against as they seem destined to finish second from bottom of the Premier Division.

To find some hope I looked back over previous playoffs. It made for unhappy reading. The table below shows the outcome of the last 11 relegation/promotion playoffs (there were no playoffs in 2017 and 2008).

In the last 11 years, the First Division team won the playoff. The odds would seem stacked against Limerick this season. The remarkable success of the promoted teams may reflect the momentum going into the game, where from a First Division gets a boost from achieving a play-off place while the Premier Division team is deflated by not avoiding a play-off place.

This may be a similar effect in the English Championship where the promotion play-offs are contested by teams finishing third to sixth at the end of the season. In the last 10 seasons, the third place team was promoted 50% of the time.

By Robbie Butler,

It was recently reported (see here and here) that UEFA intend to hold a discussion about the future of the "away goals" rule in European club competitions. Introduced in the mid-1960s, the rule is used as a tie-breaker where, in the event a two-legged match remains level, goals scored away from home count double. For example, if Team A and Team B drew 1-1 in the first leg (with Team A at home), and 2-2 in the second leg (with Team B at home), the 3-3 deadlock would be broken by virtue of the fact that Team A's 2 away goals exceeds Team B's single away goal.

Football has changed dramatically since the 1960s, with coaches and managers now suggesting that scoring away from home is not as hard as it once was. The costs associated with travel have collapsed in recent years, while labour mobility has shot up. Once unknown and distance places are much easier to now play in. Those in favour of the move also argue that an unintended consequence of the rule, is actually more defensive play, with teams afraid to concede away goals. Similar rule changes in rugby, to encourage more tries with the use of a bonus point, have had the same perverse effect. 

What does the data suggest? Below are the number of away goals scored in the UEFA Champions League, since the move in 2003/4 to the current competition structure. ​

The coaches and managers appear to be right. The most recent competition in 2017/18 saw the greatest number of away goals (44). This is six more the the previous record of 38 set during the 2013/14 competition. The trend is also upward, with the three lowest totals since 2003/4 reported in 2006, 2008 and 2012. Just 20 goals were scored away from home during the 2005/6 knock-out stage, less than half of last years' total.

In the months ahead it will be interesting to see what UEFA decide to do. A removal of the rule will allow for a nice comparisons in the years ahead, to see if teams (especially those are home) become more offensive. 

By Robbie Butler

For the first time in many years, September will not see the traditional commencement or continuation of a UEFA qualifying group for a major championships. Instead next month UEFA members will take a step into the unknown with the start of the UEFA Nations League.

This new format appears to have two main purposes; the elimination of friendly matches from the fixture calendar; and secondly, offering an entry point to the 2020 UEFA European Championships. While the former is very much welcome, the latter might be less so given the competition structure of the new league. 

With 55 teams set to take part, countries will be divided into four groups based on international performance over the past number of years. Group A includes the likes of Belgium, France and Germany. The Republic of Ireland are in Group B (second-tier) along with countries such as Russia and Sweden. Group C contains weaker nations again such as Bulgaria, Finland and Albania, while Group D comprises of the traditionally weakest teams such as Malta, Latvia and San Marino. 

The good news for the minnows is that they not only get to play one another, and therefore have a golden opportunity to register a rare international win, the winner of this group also qualifies for the 2020 European Championships. This poses an obvious question? Is a country better-off targeting a place in Group D rather than Group C? This logic can apply to Group C/B and Group B/A. 

It will be interest to see how this plays out in the months and years ahead. It may be that some tweaking of the competition structure is required. This is certainly not unusual for new competitions.

By Robbie Butler,

​We are now just days away from the start of the 2018 FIFA World Cup Finals. The word "finals" is important. 211 teams have participated in the 2018 World Cup with qualifying starting in Africa as early as the 12th of March 2015.

Unfortunately I am only too aware of when qualifying ended for the tournament in Europe. It was Tuesday the 14th of November 2017. I sat in the Aviva Stadium, Dublin and watched Denmark take the final UEFA spot in Russia at the expense of the Republic of Ireland.The following day Peru claimed the final spot beating New Zealand in a play-off. We will revisit Peru shortly.

As an Irish supporter it is frustrating to finish 2nd in a qualifying group, ahead of two teams ranked 10th and 15th in the FIFA World Ranking at the time of the draw, only to face the 19th best team globally in a play-off. 

I have previously shown how it is becoming harder for UEFA members of qualify for the World Cup. Even expansion in 2026 will do little to help the European cause. Some might argue UEFA have the best deal of all. There will be 14 teams at the Finals this summer from the confederation. This includes hosts Russia and is almost treble that of any other FIFA confederation. The pie chart below presents the breakdown for the 2018 Finals.

Just five of the six confederations are represented. This is because no OFC (Oceania) country managed to qualify. This confederation represents 14 countries and the failure to qualify  does beg the question of whether this truly is a "world cup".

Having watched this tournament, with clear memory since 1990 (I do recall the final in 1986), it seems natural inequalities play a role when qualifying.

Geographic location on this planet is very important. Outside of Europe countries such as South Korea, Japan, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina and USA (although not this time round) seem to appear every four years. Brazil in fact are the only country to have played at all 21 World Cup finals. The CONMEBOL qualification system plays a huge role in this regard. The graphic below presents the number of teams eliminated versus those qualifying from each confederations for the 2018 Finals. South America is an obvious outlier. 

CONMEBOL members will benefit from the expanded tournament, starting in 2026, when a 6th place with be available in South America. That means more teams could play at the finals, than are eliminated in regional qualifying. Maybe it is the fear of the likes of Brazil or Argentina not qualifying (as is the case with Italy this time round) but one has to spare a thought for African, Asian and Central/North American FIFA members. 135 of these nations started out in qualifying. More than 90% (122) won't be in Russia. 

Peru, a country that lost 6 games in qualifying, will line out against Denmark on the 16th of June. The country qualified with a total of 26 points from 18 games, an average of just points per game 1.44. Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland had an average return in qualifying of 1.9. Italy's was 2.3. 

Switzerland finished second in UEFA qualifying Group B with 27 points. The Swiss then had to win a two-legged playoff against Northern Ireland to qualify. Colombia finished 4th in CONMEBOL with 27 points and qualified directly for the finals. 27 points from 18 games. In fact, the Swiss got more points from 10 games then Peru did from 18!

​If only Ireland was in South America...

By Robbie Butler,

For the next 10 days the posts on this blog will focus on the FIFA World Cup which is due to kick-off in the Luzhniki Stadium, Moscow on Thursday 14th of June. This is the first time Russia has hosted either of the big two football tournaments. Games will be played across 11 different cities, spanning a huge geographical area, from Kallingrad in the west to Yekaterinburg in the east. The distance between these two cities is almost 2,500 km (1546 miles). That is roughly the same as Cork to Sofia in Bulgaria.

Like all major events, the tournament is likely to cost more to the Russian state than is recouped in revenue. However, FIFA suggest that the benefits lie elsewhere. According to the government bodies Russian's can look forward to the following:

"Some of the benefits experienced by host countries of FIFA competitions include:

• A catalyst for new and improved facilities to support the development of the game at all levels;
• Increased number of and higher quality football development programmes for both the elite game, talent identification and grassroots;
• Increased cooperation and goodwill between the various stakeholders – the member association, the government and other bid stakeholders such as the bid host cities, commercial partners, the media and the community at large;
• Increased civic pride and community empowerment as groups of stakeholders get to contribute to and support the bid, together with new skills and training for those involved in delivering the event;
• Enhanced partnerships and greater commercial activity and investment from new sponsors, media, broadcasters and large corporations;
• Help in breaking down social barriers to participation and high performance by both women and young people;
• Using successful players as role models to encourage young and emerging players and to promote health and other social benefits”.

Two notable studies have looked at the feel-good factor associated with hosting the world’s biggest football tournament. Maenning and Sussmuth (2007) examined the 2006 World Cup in Germany and found locals were happier after hosting the tournament. In former East Germany the effects were found to be greatest, particularly among the less-well educated. Kavetos and Szymanski (2004) consider a longitudinal data set from 1978 to 1994. Using happiness data from the Eurobarometer Survey the authors found that hosting a tournament has a positive, significant effect on a country’s happiness, both during and after the Finals. As one might expect, those under 50, males, the unemployed and less educated saw the greatest jumps in happiness.

The happiness of the Russians might depend on how long the their team stay in the competition. At odds of around 40/1 to win the tournament that may not be too long...

By Brian Cronin,

The Republic of Ireland U17 European Championship squad made national headlines recently when they controversially exited the tournament on penalties at the hands of the Netherlands. The performance of the squad raises hope for the future and is no doubt down to a combination of dedication, effort and skill on the part of the players, and excellence in coaching and tactics.

Another factor at play might be a relative age effect. The concept, which is now well understood, suggests relatively older children, assembly collectively under a selection year, will outperform their younger peers.  

To have been eligible to compete in the 2018 U17 European Championships, all players had to have been born on or after 1 January 2001. Indeed, the January 1 cut-off date is also used in Irish underage schoolboy competitions. Consequently, the Relative Age Effect (RAE) manifests itself, whereby players born closest to this cut-off date would tend to be physically more mature and co-ordinated when compared with players born later in the year. They are also likely to be both cognitively and psychologically more developed. Ultimately, this results in these players then getting chosen for representative squads at an earlier age where they are exposed to better coaching, better opposition and greater opportunities to progress within the game. 

​The chart below shows that of the 21 players selected in the Republic of Ireland squad for the 2018 UEFA U17 European Championships (Kian Clarke, who was originally selected but ruled out through injury, is also included). 

9 (43%) were born in the first three months of the year (seven in 2001 and two in 2002). Conversely, not a single player selected was born in the final three months of the year, even though the distribution of the general population in Ireland is evenly spread throughout the year.

The particularly interesting feature of this Irish U17 squad is that, although there were no players born in the final three months of 2001, there were two players born in the first three months of 2002 - both of whom started all four games at the tournament (Troy Parrott and Jimmy Corcoran). This accentuates the pervasiveness of RAE - these players, being two of the more physically developed within their 2002 age group, would have been more likely to have been exposed to elite coaching growing up when compared with those born in the final months of 2001.

Perhaps some food for thought for underage schoolboy soccer coaches.

Brian Cronin is a 3rd year student at University College Cork and has just completed an Erasmus Year in France as part of his BComm International (French) Degree. Brian represented the Republic of Ireland at U16 level and is now the goalkeeping coach to four Cork Schoolboys League Kennedy Cup teams, and has coached goalkeepers at regional Emerging Talent level as well as internationally, with the Irish Amputee Football team. 

For more on Irish soccer and the relative age effect see here.

By Robbie Butler

With the dust settling on the 2017/18 Premier League season, preparations for the league's return in August are already gathering pace. With World Cup 2018 on the horizon, club activity usually occurs in two bursts. before and after the tournament, making World Cup years feel somewhat different.

This is no more evident that the recent sacking/parting company of Premier League managers in the past number of days. Arsenal have been joined by West Ham United, Everton, and today Swansea and Stoke, who are all seeking a new managerial appointment. 

In a previous post, I illustrated the downward trend in the number of days managers stay in their job, which the League Managers Association chief Richard Beven described as "embarrassing" for the sport. His words have had little effect on club owners.

During the 2017/18, excluding the recent exists of Arsene Wenger, David Moyes, Sam Allardyce, Carlos Carvalhal and Paul Lambert, ten managers lost their jobs. This includes two changes at West Bromwich Albion. That's a total of 16 managerial changes. 

The pressure that managers come under, particularly at the start of the season, seems to be growing year on year. Within this, the league itself appears to be breaking into two groups. Teams fighting for the top 4 and teams in a relegation battle.The mid-table appears to be disappearing. In fact, this season one could argue only Burnley and possibly Watford (although their season tapered off) were not in a relegation battle or in with a realistic chance of reaching the top 4.

The graph below would support this somewhat, and illustrates how the league is squeezing out the mid-table teams.

The data used in the graphic is drawn from Premier League tables from 1995-96 season to 2017-18. Data prior to this is not useful as the league contained more than 20 teams. 

The number of points required to win the league and finish 4th (last Champions League place) is upward trending. The points needed to survive is downward sloping.

As a general rule, 40 points is used as a benchmark for safety. One would have to go back to 2002/03 to find the last time 40 points was actually required to be safe. in the past five seasons, an average of just 34.4 were required to stay in the division. The average from 1995-96 to 1999-00 was 37.4

On the other hand, the number of points needed for the top 4 is climbing. Just 65.6 points were required in the first five seasons show above. Since 2013-14 this has risen to 73.2. In the first twelve seasons (1995 to 2007) only once did the 4th place team break 70 points. In the eleven since May 2007 the 4th placed team was broken 70 points on 8 occasions. Arsenal finished 4th in 2013-14 with a whopping 79 points.