The Impact of Seeding,Home Continent,and Hosting on FIFA World Cup Results

Abstract

Every 4 years, Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) organizes one of the largest sporting events in the world, the soccer (football) World Cup tournament. Successful players, teams, and national soccer federations are the recipients of significant financial returns, both directly from FIFA and indirectly through professional and endorsement contracts. The structure of this tournament is such that playing on one's own continent and being a seeded team have significant effects on World Cup success. Specifically, we estimate that the ``continental effect'' increases a team's probability of reaching the final eight by 12% points, whereas being seeded increases one's probability of making the quarterfinals by 26% points.

Keywords

tournament format seeding rankings home field advantage

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Altman, D. (2008, October 12). Unshakable home-field advantage in soccer world. New York Times, SP9.

Baade, R.A. (2003). The quest for the cup: Assessing the economic impact of the World Cup. Williams College Mimeo, 1-31.

Carmichael, F. , Thomas, D. , & Ward, R. (2000). Team performance: The case of English Premiership Football. Managerial and Decision Economics, 21, 31-45.

Clark, S.R. , & Norman, J.M. (1995). Home ground advantage of individual clubs in English soccer. Statistician, 44, 509-521.

Coupe, T. (2007). Incentives and bonuses-The case of the 2006 World Cup. Kyklos, 60, 349-358.

Courneya, K.S. , & Carron, A.V. (1992). The home advantage in sport competitions: A literature review. Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology, 14, 13-27.

Edmans, A. , & Garcia, D. (2007). Mimeo. Michigan Institute of Technology, 1-54.

FIFA InfoPlus Report. (2007). FIFA World Cup final draw history. Zurich, Switzerland. Retrieved April 2, 2008, from http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/mcwc/ip-201_10e_fwcdrawhistory_40527.pdf .

Gander, J.M. , Zuber, R.A. , & Lamb, R.P. (2001). The home field advantage revisited: A search for the bias in other sports betting markets. Journal of Economics and Business, 53, 439-453.

10.

Goldman Sachs Report. (2006). The World Cup and economics . New York, NY. 1-57.

11.

Harville, D.A. (2003). The selection or seeding of college basketball or football teams for postseason competition. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 98, 17-27.

12.

Kezdi, G. (2004). Robust standard error estimation in fixed-effects panel models. Hungarian Statistical Review, Special(9), 96-116.

13.

Martin, D.E.K. , & Troendale, J.F. (1999). Paired comparison models applied to the design of the Major League Baseball playoffs. Journal of Applied Statistics, 26, 69-80.

14.

McGarry, T. , & Schutz, R.W. (1997). Efficacy of traditional sport tournament structures . The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 48, 65-74.

15.

Nevill, A.M. , Newell, S.M. , & Gale, S. (1996). Factors associated with home advantage in English and Scottish soccer matches. Journal of Sport Sciences, 14, 181-186.

16.

Nichols, A. , & Schaffer, M.E. (2007). Clustered standard errors in Stata. United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings Mimeo, July 2007. Stata Users Group.

17.

Pollard, R. (1986). Home advantage in soccer: A retrospective analysis . Journal of Sport Sciences, 4, 237-248.

18.

Schwenk, A.J. (2000). What is the correct way to seed a knockout tournament ? The American Mathematical Monthly, 107, 140-150.

19.

Shaw, K.A. (2003). ``Saving'' the economy: The role of soccer in influencing European economies. Mimeo, University of Washington , 1-43.

20.

Torgler, B. (2004). The economics of the FIFA football Worldcup. Kyklos, 57, 287-300.

21.

Vergin, R.C. , & Sosik, J.J. (1999). No place like home: An examination of the home field advantage in gambling strategies in NFL football. Journal of Economics and Business, 51, 21-31.