By Robbie Butler,

On the 14th of November I wrote about the 2018 MLS season, and the rise of Atlanta United. The piece was in the context of competitive balance in Major League Soccer, and the fact that 12 franchises had won the US title, making it more competitive than any major European league over the past 23 years.

We can make that 13. Atlanta United were crowned MLS Champions on Saturday evening at around 10pm EST.

The remarkable thing about the "The Five Stripes" is that they are playing in just their second season of the Eastern Conference. In total the franchise has played under 80 games in its entire existence, yet is now the number 1 US football team.To put this into context, it is great to compare the closed system in the US, to the oldest set of interconnected leagues in the world in England.

It is difficult to know how many tiers there are in England (there could be up to 22) but it is safe to assume that there are at least 8 interconnected divisions. These range from regional leagues at the lower end, to the Premier League at the top, and are list below. 

Assuming Atlanta United were an English club, and had won promotion in Years 1 and 2 of their existence, the club would be heading into the National League South (given Atlanta's location in the US we will assume South rather than North). From a starting point in this league, it would take a minimum of 6 seasons before the club could even challenge for the Premier League title.

​The current dominance of the big six clubs in England's means they have little to fear from the remaining Premier League clubs (Leicester City may obviously disagree), never mind clubs in the lower tiers of English football. The rise of Atalanta United is not something you can expect to be replicated in England anytime soon, if ever. 

Just another example of how the structure of the same sport on either size of the Atlantic is different, and can result in very different outcomes.  

by Declan Jordan

Earlier this week David Butler posted on the English FA's proposal to limit the number of non-homegrown players in senior squads, a move that has not gone down too well with the Premier League. I agree that the proposal may damage the quality of the Premier League. The justification reminds me of Brexiteers blaming UK economic problems on immigrants, when in reality, just as it is with the Premier League, immigrants are the potential solution to economic issues rather than the cause of them.

There is recent evidence however on the impact of foreign players on club performance in a recent paper in the Journal of Sports Economics (requires subscription). A colleague, Vicente Royuela, and his co-author Roberto Gasquez, from the University of Barcelona examined the influence of foreign players on the success of football clubs.

Using data from 971 clubs across the top-tier of 71 leagues, the paper shows that clubs in leagues with a higher proprtion of foreign players tend to perform better than clubs in leagues with less foreign players. However, within a league, having more foreign players does not have a significant effect on a club's performance.

This has implications for the FA's new policy on caps on foreign players. Fewer foreign players will negatively affect the quality of the clubs in the Premier League, damaging the 'product'. This indicates why the Premier League would oppose the move. At the same time, the relative performance of clubs with the Premier League will be unaffected. The most important determinant of within-league performance according to the authors is a club's wealth.

This suggests that those clubs that can afford to sign better quality foreign players will still be relatively better able to sign them. It highlights of course that the most important part of performance is not from where players come, but how good they are.

By Robbie Butler

This week the Football Association of Ireland parted ways with manager Martin O'Neill and his backroom team. The search now starts for the next the Republic of Ireland manager, who will become the 15th man to manage the national team. The list is illustrious with the likes of John Giles, Jack Charlton and Giovanni Trappatoni all taking charge of the Boys in Green. 

O'Neill achieved considerable success in relative terms. He managed to qualify the  Republic of Ireland for the European Championship Final in 2016 where the team beat Italy in the Group stages, and also recorded a draw against Sweden in Paris.

While these are notable highlights, one that went under the radar was the teams' success in Vienna in November 2016. James McClean's goal that night ensured the Republic of Ireland's first away win in a group game, against a higher seeded team, since 1967.

Performances since haven't reached the same heights but the team's FIFA Ranking has remained quite stable. 

While there was a notable decline under the most recent manager, O'Neill's team has not had an alarming decline. That's said, relegation to Group C of the UEFA Nations League will make qualifying for Euro 2020 more tricky.

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...