The concept of home field advantage is given credence in pretty much all sports; there are always explanations for why the home team has a better chance of winning, some more believable than others. However, consideration to the winning percentages of home sports show that some sports have more of a home-field advantage than others (for instance, baseball stadiums - which have no set dimensions, and therefore can heavily influence the game if players don't know the quirks of a stadium - can seriously impact a crucial moment).

I haven't checked the statistics on footy, but I do know that many of the reasons that usually impact the existence of home field advantage don't apply here.

1) all the fields are the same shape; while moderate differences in size exist, I find it difficult to believe that this would uniformly benefit the home-team, as they may face teams that take advantage of a wide/long/short/narrow pitch better than they do. Knowledge of the pitch is not a particular advantage in and of itself, it needs to be tied to a specific style of play.

2) jetlag and general fatigue from travel is not as strong of an issue as in the US (except for champions league games). I think its self explanatory that playing a 1 PM game on the east coast when it feels like it's 10 am, or having to travel 6 hours to get across the country the day before a game, would be worse for players' performances than travelling a few hours to get to northern England.

3) weather differences - the NFL has certain players that supposedly can't play in the cold; they've spent their entire career in the south or in a dome, and struggle when it's 5 degrees outside and snowing. But again, due to the size of the countries, most areas have similar climates in European football - while a cold rainy day in stoke might be worse than a cold rainy day elsewhere, let's be honest - all of England has their share of cold rainy days.

4) fan impact - I'm not really a subscriber to this theory in any sport. The idea that the enthusiasm of a crowd can impact the play of the opponents has not been shown to be true in any of the numbers I've seen, except for tangible instances (such as where crowd noise interferes with play calling/snap counts), but I'm not sure those apply here either.

So with that out of the way, I'd like to come to my question - in soccer managers seem to put more emphasis on home field advantage than in any other sport I've watched. They change entire game plans, adjust their team's style, shuffle formations and start different players simply because they're playing in an opponent's stadium. We do see numbers to back this up sometimes; while I don't have a league-wide statistic to share, we all know the home-away splits of Man City/Everton/Liverpool so far this year, and other anecdotal instances of teams dominating at home from previous seasons. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that there is a big difference between all-time home and away records.

So how does this happen? I think we have a chicken-and-egg situation here. Without other explanations (and I'd love to hear other people's thoughts below), I think the managers' changes CAUSE the splits. When a team walks into a match intimidated, refusing to play their own style and instead backing up and playing defensive, they will achieve negative results. By accepting the fear factor of certain arenas, teams are causing the home-field advantage they're trying to protect against. I think if more managers insisted on playing their own game away AND home, they'd pick up more points in the supposedly harder away matches. Note this isn't a commentary on any style of play - just on the consistency by which teams use that style.

Anyway, are their possible explanations for home-field advantage in football that I've forgotten? Is there some reason teams SHOULD be more worried when playing away from home? Or is it all mental, and they're creating the very problem by buying into it?

The most compelling evidence is that refs are likelier to benefit the home team is close calls. This is thought to be because they are influenced by the fans reactions. But I think the impact of home advantage, such as suggesting teams are completely different in different t pitches, is overblown.

Also under pitch differences you should mention the length of the Grass, wetness and amount of potholes. This definitely does influence ball distribution and affects certain styles of play.

Came in to say what BC said. The state of the pitch itself does have a huge influence on the outcome of a match (length of the grass, wetness, etc). And to a lesser extent (especially in PL) home teams being favored some 50/50 decisions.

I agree with the pitch differences point, but I'd argue that it doesn't uniformly benefit the home team. It may impact different styles, but some visiting teams may execute on a narrow pitch better than the home team, and the pothole could scuff the home teams shot as easily as the away.

As for the referee point, the data shows this is true, but it's not a substantial enough margin to warrant all the differences we see in play. This study seems to show that there's a statistically significant likelihood that calls will favor the home team, but the result is only slightly more than 50% of calls go that direction. It's a factor, but not enough of one to warrant the reaction we see (which you seem to agree with in your post).

In my fair share of games played, I would add the fact that the football jersey colors play as an advantage too.

the xcx wrote:In my fair share of games played, I would add the fact that the football jersey colors play as an advantage too.

That's a weird one

how so?

Pretty sure Barca plays completely different at home than on the road in the UCL games. The size of the Camp Nou, the security it gives the home players and nervesnous it gives the away teams could have something to do it with

Same with Highbury vs the Emirates. I've read how when Highbury was around it was a much more intimidating place to play as oppose to the Emirates. Shape of stadium, etc has allot to with the how the opposing players react, feel the fans heat etc

I think it doesn't apple as much in the NBA because all of the stadiums are practically the same thing/shape. The NFL might be a bit different and closer to the scenarios I mentioned for footy

Borussia Dortmund only won one game away from Signal Iduna Park in the CL but still made the final last year. Home advantage is highly important.

I've always wondered about this topic. At the end of the day why should being home/away matter? It's just a football pitch. However for example the fans cheering louder at home as opposed to away might motivate the players more. It just feels more comfortable playing in your own stadium. That and as mentioned above, the pitch size can make a slight difference in terms of style of play.

ioilersrock448 wrote:Borussia Dortmund only won one game away from Signal Iduna Park in the CL but still made the final last year. Home advantage is highly important.

Yes, but why?

My personal opinion is that home field advantage is only important because people ascribe importance to it. Managers change tactics, players become intimidated, but its all predicated on a myth. If people refused to change their approach to fit the location of the game (again, not addressing switching tactics for the opposition, just for where the game is played), I think you'd see home/away splits drop much closer to 50/50.

Players are more confident at home and attack more. Same reason we use Pedro mainly in away matches for counters while at home look to to be the aggressors

Tons of factors come into play, and nobody knows why. Have you guys never played sports? Playing away in a hostile environment can fuel some people and break others. It's not the same thing as playing at home where you are supported, comfortable etc.

Look at the home records vs the away records of teams in the big leagues of Europe. For the most part, yes home field advantage exists- it just may mean the home team really bleeds for their fans or that the away team struggles without that extra push

stevieg8 wrote:

ioilersrock448 wrote:Borussia Dortmund only won one game away from Signal Iduna Park in the CL but still made the final last year. Home advantage is highly important.

Yes, but why?

My personal opinion is that home field advantage is only important because people ascribe importance to it.  Managers change tactics, players become intimidated, but its all predicated on a myth.  If people refused to change their approach to fit the location of the game (again, not addressing switching tactics for the opposition, just for where the game is played), I think you'd see home/away splits drop much closer to 50/50.

before, the home always give the extra advantage to the home team

but nowadays, away team have adapt it, which mean that advantage is decrease to almost 50/50 chance

Well, altitude can give quite some home field advantage, if the home team is used to play in high altitude, while the guest teams isn't.

And the fan impact in some grounds might intimidate the guest players and cause them to commit errors when they are constantly shouted and whistled at.

Did some study on this in uni, to obviously (with uni isnt it always) inconclusive results

For every study which shows that there is a home field advantage does exist and reason why

http://www.amsciepub.com/doi/abs/10.2466/pms.1997.84.1.283?journalCode=pms

There are some which disclaim its exsistance and even say it can be a disadvantage.

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/47/1/85/

(note, both articles are not full, read abstracts for general overview).

Anyway, in relation to football. I think its all a bit of what everyone has said, refs, crowd's effect on the players, pitch dimensions, field quality and more.

I think it becomes a physiological at some point, the team knows they do better at home and therefore have increased confidence, the opponent knows the home team is strong at home so play the game differently and it becomes almost inevitable in some situations.

But really its an eternal mystery and finding a definitive answer is really impossible.

I wouldnt say its a myth, but it depends on the player, some players play better on the road and worse at home ( they thrive off the opponents crowd, insults jeers etc make them play better not worse).

I think a majority of players play better at home and worse and the road however( at home they use their crowds energy to get jacked and get their adrenaline way up, then on the road they get nervous and play worse).

Then there are some players who are able to shut the crowd off in their head, block the noise so they arnt affected whether they are playing on the road or at home.

Some block out the noise on the road but not at home etc etc.

Like i said i dont think its a myth, just different players respond differently.

People who say that the crowd doesn't play a factor have never played in front of over 5,000 people before (let alone 30,000).

It's a psychological advantage and it's not something you can "get over" playing away, it has more to do with the home team playing better then the away team playing worse.

I think it exists to some extent, but the extent to which it exists is completely overblown.

In the end it's more about the psychology of the team. Watching Barca a lot over the years as well as Spurs last season and this certainly helps me think I'm right. Barca look a lot more comfortable at home...psychologically perhaps it's because of Barca, or because of other teams being scared to go the Camp Nou, who knows. On the other hand, Spurs last season and this continually boast an impressive away record, and have on many occasions looked terrible at home. I feel more confident when Spurs are away from home just like I am when Barca are at home.

Like Dani said, for every case where it is proven, there is one that disproves it. I've watched two opposite cases with my own eyes. I think the majority of what we think home field advantage is is psychological, and therefore very difficult to prove.

The real proof we have is what BC posted (refs favoring home teams in 50-50 decisions), after that it's psychological imo.

Sports sets the stage for playing at home to be an advantage. lts up to the managers and coaches and players if they want it to take advantage of that. Some emphasize the importance of winning at home while others don't. lt all depends on the team.

No, it isn't a myth, it is well documented statistcally in almost every sport.

Only in Ice Hockey there is almost no home field advantadge (probably because of widespread use of drugs), in other games it is 60-70% more likely that you have a home win than an away win.

What it is a myth, is that in a two legs knockout round, the team playing at home the second leg has an advantadge.

McAgger wrote:

the xcx wrote:In my fair share of games played, I would add the fact that the football jersey colors play as an advantage too.

That's a weird one

how so?

Something to the with the A Hypothesis of Erroneous Perception BS. Hard to explain you might want to google it.

Just to show it's not a myth, here are La Liga data from this season:

170 games have been played.
76 home wins, 34 ties, 60 home defeats.
238 home goals, 215 away goals.
262 points for home teams, 214 points for away teams.

Last season it went like this:
380 games played.
189 home wins, 84 ties, just 107 home defeats.
641 home goals, 450 away goals.
651 home points, just 405 away points.

Even a much more clear home advantadge than this season.

That there is a home advantage is no myth. As Free-Cat said, it is a well documented phenomenon. Even if there is outliers like Milan and Spurs, it is more likely that Home teams get a favorable result than not.

As to why this phenomenon exists, I would say that the cause is three fold:
1- Refs tend to give more calls to the home team.
2- Fan reactions give huge psychological advantages and disadvantages to the home and away teams respectively.
3- Travel is exhausting even in small flights, especially when you are playing in a cramped schedule time.

free_cat wrote:Just to show it's not a myth, here are La Liga data from this season

Interesting. I just added up the stuff for the Bundesliga this season to compare:

152 games have been played.
71 home wins, 35 ties, 46 home defeats.
269 home goals, 217 away goals.
248 points for home teams, 173 points for away teams.

It's not a myth, but it's overblown to some extent. With home advantage you are more likely to get the 50/50 calls and your team is more likely to attack the opponents and the fans feed off that energy of there team trying to score.

On the other hand while you're playing away, teams usually opt for a more defensive approach. And ref decisions are more likely to go against your way. And as the away team you don't get much fan support so it creates a bit of a problem mentality wise. Confidence levels naturally drop during the game, making players more prone to mistakes and conceding goals.