By Robbie Butler
​
Home advantage in sport has received considerable attention in both the economics and psychology literature. Playing at home is advantageous for teams as it is a familiar environment for players, requires shorter travel and often contains a partisan groups of supporters.

Previously, Nevill, Balmer & Williams (2002) have found that crowd noise effects refereeing decisions, with home teams awarded significantly more free-kick than away teams. Garicano, Palacios-Huerta and Prendergast (2005) report referees often favour home teams, in order to satisfy the crowds in the stadium, by shortening close games where the home team is ahead, and lengthening close games where the home team is behind. In fact, stadiums where supporters are located further from the field of play, for example due to the presence of a running track, are more likely to witness more impartial refereeing decisions. Spectators simply can't influence referees in the same way.

The English Premier League (EPL) is a nice place to consider this. One of the many great things about the EPL is the substantial presence of away fans at games. If one watches other European leagues, particularly La Liga, away fans are barely noticeable. For example, when Barcelona travel to Madrid to play great rivals Real, a scattering of fans can be seen in the upper tier of the Bernabeu when they score. The same is true of Real fans at the Camp Nou.

Away fans in the EPL normally get access to 3,000 tickets per game, or 10% of stadium capacity if greater than 30,000 seats. In 2017/18 the EPL introduced rule changes to further encourage away fan attendance. This was on a back of a three-year cap on away fan ticket prices at £30. According to the EPL, the 2017 changes included a commitment that would see "away supporters...seated together at all stadiums and at least one block of away fan seats...made available pitch side". This is important as it moved away fans closer to the field on play.

Four clubs at the time were earmarked for change: Sunderland, Newcastle, Manchester United and Tottenham. I often thought it a masterstroke from Manchester United to place fans in the upper tier of the stadium by the corner flag. The Old Trafford club have subsequently had to change, as have Sunderland. Tottenham moved stadium but have since now allocated away fans lower tier seats in the new Tottenham Hotspur Stadium. Newcastle remain the only club to place fans in the 'gods'. The Tyneside clubs are permitted to do so on health and safety grounds, meaning away fans are a long way from their heroes at St. James Park.

By Robbie Butler

I have previously spoken about broadcasting and the Premier League on this blog on numerous occasion (see here and here) and have a more detailed analysis of supply in the market published in the Journal of Sports Economics (see here). Things have developed further for customers in the Republic of Ireland since the return of the Premier League last week. Let's take a closer look.

To summaries what I have previously said, it seems that customers of subscription television were best off when the service was provided by a monopoly. The best of all scenarios was the free-to-air model that existed until 1992 for top tier English football. However, following BSkyB's purchasing of the rights from the 1992/93 season, consumer surplus started to be reduced. The European ruling to ban monopoly selling of broadcasting rights from 2006/07 resulted two providers selling the product. This will move to 3 this year in the UK, with the arrival of Amazon, and 4 in the Republic of Ireland. 

The Republic of Ireland is not subject to the 3pm Saturday blackout rule in the UK. As such live games can be screened on television. Premier Sports has the right to screen these games. During 2017/18, these games came as part of the Sky Sports subscription. 

Sky now sells both BT Sport and Premier Sports as part of an "extra" sports package, with the pricing varying initially from between €10 and about €17 depending on circumstances. An extra payment of somewhere between €20 and €40 is required for Sky Sports. While customers are receiving a reduced rate in many cases buy the BT Sport and Premier Sports subscription, the irony of course is that people are now paying for something (3pm Saturday game) that they were getting for free last year! 

if you are paying the extra charge, you are getting BT Sports. The rest is hardly extra. And if Premier Sports is to be considered extra, Sky Sports customers are then arguably getting less during 2019/20 then they were in 2018/19, aside from 2 additional games. 

By John Considine

Our under-12 coach would always tell us that we were playing into the scoring goal in the second half of games.  It was both funny and comforting.  He knew that we knew he was going to say it.  It was one of his stock sayings.  We enjoyed his sayings and having him as our coach.  The messages were basic and clear (regardless of the logic involved) – my favourite was “catch it [the ball] and squeeze the water out of it”.

At half-time next Sunday, one of the coaches will be able to say with some justification that, “we are playing into the scoring goal in the second half”.  That said, the scoring goal is not likely to be the crucial factor for the captain that wins the coin toss.  In gaelic games, winning the coin toss means getting to decide what direction to play.  It has no bearing on possession as there is a battle for possession at the start of each half.  There is no option to follow a New England Patriots strategy of receiving the ball at the start of the second half.  Nor is there a decision to be made about getting the kick-off versus deciding what direction to play.  Winning the coin toss gives the winner a choice about what direction to play in the first half (knowing that you will be playing the other direction in the second half).
 
So, where is the scoring goal in Croke Park?  Is it at the Davin Stand end of the ground or at the Hill-16 end of the ground?  In an attempt to answer these questions, I have used the GAA Archives of All-Ireland Senior Hurling finals (available here).  These short highlights allow me to determine the direction teams played and the score at both half-time and full-time.  I have used the hurling finals since 1976.
 
The All-Ireland hurling finals have been of 70-minute duration (plus added time for unnatural stoppages) during the period.  This 70 minutes is made up of two 35-minute halves.  There have been 43 finals and three replays during this period.  The 1984 final was played in Thurles and the remainder were played in Croke Park.
 
There was 1,873 points scored in the 45 All-Ireland Senior Hurling finals held in Croke Park between 1976 and 2018.  This comprised 149 3-pointers (goals) and 1,426 1-pointers.  The scores are split almost exactly between the Hill-16 end and the Canal end.  There is only one score (goal) between the scores into either end.  No evidence of a scoring goal for the full period.
 
However, there is a marked difference between the start of the period and end of the period.  In the early years, a greater proportion of the scoring occurred at the Hill-16 end of the ground.  In the latter years, the scoring goal has been at the Davin Stand end.  Between 1976 and 1997, 53.19% of the scores were into the Hill-16 end.  Between 2003 and 2018, only 45.88% of the score have been into the Hill-16 end.  A sizable enough difference.

The choice of years is based on my hunch as to what happened.  My guess is that the redevelopment of Croke Park helps explain much of the difference.  In early years, there was a stand at both sides of the ground and there was terracing at both ends (Hill-16 end and the Canal end).  Nowadays, there is a stand (called the Davin Stand) at the Canal end of the ground.  It helps provide shelter from the prevailing winds that blow in the direction of Hill-16.
 
On Sunday, the team playing into the Davin Stand end for the second half will probably be playing into the scoring goal.

By Conor O'Shea

“Do you have a ticket for the game?”, “Tickets are fierce hard to come by this year.”, “Go out to the Sevens, you will come across a few spare tickets out there.” These are all phrases you will hear from people around kitchen tables, at the water coolers in work and in dimly lit club function rooms across the country as we approach this weekend’s final.

Here we will look at the changes in ticket prices since the beginning of the millennium, and how the GAA currently operates its pricing model for All-Ireland Final day.
 
In terms of the effect of price on sporting tickets, many academic studies find demand to be price inelastic - that is, a proportionate increase in the price of the product leads to a less than proportionate decrease in the quantity demanded for the product. In simple terms, attendance demand does not respond greatly to an increase in price.
 
Since the beginning of the millennium, the GAA have undergone five pricing reviews and ticket prices for the All-Ireland Hurling Final have risen by 125% since 2000. Despite this increase, a sold-out stadium is still guaranteed, highlighting the price inelasticity. The All-Ireland Semi-Final and Quarter-Finals have also increased in three of the five price reviews. Semi-Final tickets have doubled in price since 2000, with a 75% increase to be seen with the quarter-final tickets.
 
The accompanying graphic below shows the change in the price of a stand ticket for the All-Ireland Series from 2000 onwards.

The GAA currently operates a pricing model which sees all seats, regardless of position or viewpoint in the stadium, being priced at the same value. Is this pricing model maximising consumer surplus, or is there a better method of doing so?
 
If we take a couple and two children who want to attend this year’s All-Ireland, it will cost them €360 to purchase tickets to attend the All-Ireland Final. If we compare this to the All-Ireland Quarter and Semi-Finals respectively, the difference is significant. With U-16 discounts, it would cost the same family €80 in total (less than one ticket to the final!) to attend the Quarter Final and €110 for the Semi-Final. Given that the prices of tickets rise, a family will come under pressure to purchase at this price.
 
Is it right that a seat in the back row of the Cusack Stand Upper, or an obstructed view behind the net in the Davin End costs the same as a seat on the 65 in the Lower Hogan? Tickets to attend the Champions League Final, or a Six Nations Rugby game are priced at various levels, depending on how much you are willing to spend on a seat. Rather than a single price model, should the GAA start looking into a price discrimination model that offers lower quality seats to supporters, and families in particular, at different prices and increase the price of the best seats in the house as a way of maximising consumer surplus?

By John Considine

In advance of next Sunday's All-Ireland hurling finals it is worth looking at the changes in the price of the match-day programme (or Clar Oifigiuil). The picture below presents 50 years of data.  The prices are presented in terms of our present currency regime.  Looking back it is interesting to note the number of monetary changes during the period.

The booklet has cost €5 (or 500 cents) for the last fifteen years.  Prior to the move to the Euro, the purchaser handed over pounds and pence.  This was the case for all of the 20th century years in the picture.  In the majority of those years there were 100 pennies in a pound.  However, this was not the case at the start of the period.  Those two red triangles are from a period where there was 240 pennies in a pound.  For those two years, the programme cost 1 shilling (or 12 pence).

The move to decimalisation, and the move to the Euro, made an explicit difference to the way the price (or Luach) was presented on the cover of the booklet.  Another important monetary change did not have the same explicit impact.  Because of the close relationship between Ireland and the UK, the majority of the citizens were aware of the break with sterling in 1979.  Prior to 1979 one Irish pound could be exchanged for one pound sterling.  Even as a teenager, I remember discussions of how the Irish pound had lost value against Sterling after this happened.  I don't remember whether it was given as a reason for an increase in the programme price at the time.

During the 1970s and early 1980s Ireland experienced high rates of inflation.  Programme price changes were no exception.  In the period to 1984 there were three 100% increases, one 60% increase, and two 25% increases in programme prices.  In later years the price has changes by 50% on two occasions.

It would be fair to say that income changes also influenced the amount of money handed over for the programme.  It is no surprise that there was no change in the price during the decade since 2007.

Rather than annual change in prices there are a series of step changes.  The size of the price changes make sense in terms of the way the transaction takes place.  The majority of vendors stand close to the points where people enter the ground.  To facilitate the transaction, it is useful if the price is readily made up of easily handled units of currency.  Exchanging a €5 note for the programme is a neat transaction.  The next increase will probably take the price to €6 or €7.

By Robbie Butler

Followers of horse racing in Ireland will no doubt have enjoyed last week's Galway Festival. The Ballybrit course was celebrating 150 years in action and was as popular as ever with owners, trainers and punters.

The magic of Galway, which continues to be the most popular festival in Ireland, can be found in the general ordinariness of it's races. Over the course of the 7 days there is a very limited number of high-end races, with a Grade 3 hurdle race, a number of listed races, and the ever-popular Class A handicaps of the Plate and Hurdle. However, many of the races are for lower grade horses, in handicap company.

Making money is very tricky as a result. Unless of course you just follow Champion Trainer Willie Mullins. An even stake of a €2 win if a horse was priced below 5/1, and a €1 each way stake on all horse priced 5/1 and greater, would have again made positive returns, building on similar success in 2017 and 2018.

​The plot below shows the return for each of the Mullins' runners over the 7-day festival.

12 of the 40 starters going to post returned at least the €2 stake. Great White Shark on Day 1 scooped more than €35. Dandy Mag saw a return of €11, while Mr Adjudicator an Minella Beau both returned nearly €10 on Friday.

In total, an €80 stake returned €108.66 or 35.83%. There are few that could report such a return over the 7-day period from following a strategy of reading the form and trying to select the winner. Sometimes accepting you can't pick the winner is the surest way to win.

As is customary at this time of year, we will take our summer break and return on Tuesday 6th of August 2019.

​We hope all our readers have a very enjoyable summer.

By David Butler

Some of the last entries below concern the future of Irish soccer talent development. In short, I argue that focus should be placed on developing our U13 to U19 divisions with the aim of continually exporting our best to a variety of leagues (not just those in England). The league of Ireland senior level should play a secondary role. This type of structure would be in the tradition of European counterparts that are ranked similarly to us.

Below are some stats that give an insight to the ability of other European countries to retain talent in their national league structure and subsequently draw only a few domestic players at a senior level.

I sampled a selection of countries relatively similar to Ireland (population and coefficients), many of which were cited in the original entry below. The table shows estimates for the percentage of players in an underage national squad that are attached to a domestic club. Again, it’s pretty clear to see a trend for all nations except Ireland. Players from other countries generally fly the nest later. Most Irish players have left these shores by the time they are eligible to play U17 (assuming they are trained here to begin with). At present, the temptation to move to the UK at a young age is as strong as ever.

​The aim should be to retain this talent domestically for a longer developmental period prior to exporting. Of course, this would require investment and the appropriate structures. Achieving this retention should be a primary goal for the national league. Albeit difficult to emulate the facilities, standards and the potential monetary rewards offered by UK clubs, policy should focus on providing a strong developmental process domestically that would at least give players a difficult choice regarding whether to move now or wait.

By Robbie Butler

Last year Croatia reached the Final of the FIFA World Cup in Russia. The team is presently 6th in the FiFA World Rankings. With a population of just over 4 million people and a land area less than two-thirds the size of Ireland, many asked why the Republic of Ireland could not also achieve these feats. 

Those that watched the Republic of Ireland versus Gibraltar recently would probably admit the team is a very long way off reaching the World Cup Final. But if a country with a smaller population and area can do it why not us? 

There are a number of differences between the two countries that make comparisons tricky. Firstly, Croatia has one dominant team sport - football. Ireland has four - Gaelic Games, rugby and football (or soccer). 

The national league of Croatia, at first glance, is not too different to Ireland. A top division of 10 teams in both countries, coupled with low attendances at domestic games, means there are a number of similarities. What is different however is the composition of the teams. 

Ireland is very much about growing indigenous talent. More than 90% of players in the League this season are from this island. This translates to just 58% in Croatia. EU players and non-EU (of which there are about 1 in 4) players constitute the remainder. In economic terms, Ireland does not tend to import talent. This is not the case across the vast majority of European leagues, Croatia included. 

The export side is also interesting. For many years, Ireland benefited from favourable "terms of trade", and exported almost exclusively to the UK. From the 1940s to the 1990s, Irish players found homes at the best English clubs. However, since the mid-1990s the favourable trading conditions have vanished. Ireland has not adjusted however and we continue to export almost exclusively to a single market - England. Not necessarily to the Premier League anymore, but the Championship, League 1 and so on. A more productive route might be to do what almost all others in UEFA do - export to all countries. 

A broadening of our horizons, both in import and export terms, is something we should all consider. It might be our first step to becoming more like Croatia.

By Robbie Butler

The Wealth and Poverty of Nations is a masterful exploration of political economy by the late Harvard professor David Landes. Very early into this 650 page text the author raises the issue of Eurocentrism - a worldview that is inherently biased towards Western civilization, or western Europe (depending on ones' definition). 

At a recent event at the University of Oxford, UEFA President Aleksander Ceferin appeared to suggest that such Eurocentrism is alive and well in European football. The former Slovenian lawyer said the following about the recent Europa League Final stage in Baku, Azerbaijan:

"We decided a year and a half ago that we play in Baku, which has a modern stadium of 70,000. I think there is only one stadium in England that is bigger....If somebody asks me why we played in Baku, I would say: 'People live there. Homo sapiens live there...They had to watch the game at 11pm because of the time difference but nobody complained...If we have two Azerbaijani teams playing in London nobody would complain. They would come and play without any problems...We have to develop football everywhere not England, Germany only...[the] Europa League and everything else should be shared with the others who love football."

Ceferin's comment was largely motivated by the negativity surrounding the Final last month between Chelsea and Arsenal. Much of the commentary of the Final focused on the empty seats at the stadium and lack of atmosphere. Many questioned why fans had to travel so far to see their teams complete. A vivid example of Eurocentrism?

Although the 'big 5' have some of the largest populations in Europe, UEFA represents 55 full member associations . The association’s strategic plan from 2019-2024 has four pillars one of which aims to “Promote and develop football infrastructure across Europe”. Spreading the game is a mission that has been at the core of UEFA, and FIFA for that matter, for many years. This is why cities such as Baku get the chance to host major finals. 

It was impossible to predict who would play in Baku, and the distance fans had to travel was probably accentuated by the fact that Chelsea and Arsenal are under 10 miles apart. Despite what people may now believe, this was not a poorly attended final. In fact, it is the 3rd best attended Europa League Final to date.

Countries on the periphery of Europe are just as entitled to hosts these games as the England, Germany or Spain. In fact, I recall not so long ago a country on the edge of Europe hosting the Europa League final. I was there when two Portugesse teams just 55 km apart, were forced to travel a round trip in excess of 2,700 km. The location? Dublin. I don't remember the Portuguese having any problems. 

45,391 people showed up in the Aviva that night. There were 5,979 more in the Baku Olympic Stadium.