Incentives matter sometimes: On the differences between league and Cup football matches

{"title":"Incentives matter sometimes: On the differences between league and Cup football matches","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.serev.2024.100037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Economic agents react to incentives, and this holds true for professional football teams as well. Double round-robin and single-match elimination represent two opposite competition regimes, with incentives varying distinctly between them. At the level of individual matches, a single defeat needs not be fatal under a double round-robin regime, unlike in a single-match elimination system. Utilizing data from Dutch professional football from the 2004/05 season to the 2022/23 season, we compare single-match elimination Cup matches with double round-robin league matches, focusing on stadium attendance, match results, and home advantage. Stadium attendance tends to be lower in Cup matches, although the gap narrows in later stages of the Cup tournament, and it eventually disappears. The home advantage is similar in Cup matches and league matches, but when Cup matches extend beyond regular time, the home advantage diminishes. In later stages of the Cup tournament, both during extra time and penalty shootouts, home advantage appears to be virtually absent.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101182,"journal":{"name":"Sports Economics Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773161824000144/pdfft?md5=2126c5d2378df2ffaf1b960e9addf4c8&pid=1-s2.0-S2773161824000144-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Economics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2773161824000144","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Economic agents react to incentives, and this holds true for professional football teams as well. Double round-robin and single-match elimination represent two opposite competition regimes, with incentives varying distinctly between them. At the level of individual matches, a single defeat needs not be fatal under a double round-robin regime, unlike in a single-match elimination system. Utilizing data from Dutch professional football from the 2004/05 season to the 2022/23 season, we compare single-match elimination Cup matches with double round-robin league matches, focusing on stadium attendance, match results, and home advantage. Stadium attendance tends to be lower in Cup matches, although the gap narrows in later stages of the Cup tournament, and it eventually disappears. The home advantage is similar in Cup matches and league matches, but when Cup matches extend beyond regular time, the home advantage diminishes. In later stages of the Cup tournament, both during extra time and penalty shootouts, home advantage appears to be virtually absent.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
激励有时很重要:联赛与杯赛的区别
经济行为主体会对激励机制做出反应,职业足球队也是如此。双循环和单场淘汰制代表了两种截然相反的竞争制度,两者之间的激励机制也截然不同。就单场比赛而言,与单场淘汰制不同的是,在双循环制度下,一场失败不一定是致命的。利用荷兰职业足球从 2004/05 赛季到 2022/23 赛季的数据,我们比较了单场淘汰制杯赛和双循环联赛,重点关注球场上座率、比赛结果和主场优势。在杯赛中,球场上座率往往较低,但在杯赛后期,这一差距会逐渐缩小,并最终消失。主场优势在杯赛和联赛中相似,但当杯赛超过常规时间时,主场优势就会减弱。在杯赛后期,无论是加时赛还是点球大战,主场优势似乎都不复存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Is there a nationality wage premium in European football? Professionals do play Minimax: Revisiting the Nash equilibrium in Major League Baseball Momentum-stopping: Effects on performance Incentives matter sometimes: On the differences between league and Cup football matches The transfer market for sports players - A contest theory approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1