Recent findings in sports economics have provided both theoretical and empirical support for the hypothesis that the three-point victory rule leads home teams to choose a more defensive playing style. The main aim of this paper is to test this hypothesis by analyzing line-ups, as well as yellow and red cards. To do so, we used a difference-in-differences approach in which the Italian and French leagues were the treatment group, and the German and Spanish leagues were the control group. In addition, we used a triple-difference model to analyze whether home teams responded differently from visiting teams to the three-point victory rule. Unlike previous results, we provide evidence supporting that home teams increased their aggressiveness. We found that both home and away teams increased the forwards/defenders ratio in the starting lineups, with no indication of significant differences between them. Moreover, home teams increased the actions penalized via red and yellow cards more than did the away teams.
AbadieA., DiamondA., & HainmuellerJ. (2010). Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: Estimating the effect of California's tobacco control program. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105(490), 493–505.
2.
AngristJ. D., & PischkeJ. S. (2009). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist's companion.Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
3.
AylottM., & AylottN. (2007). A meeting of social science and football: Measuring the effects of three points for a win. Sport in Society, 10(2), 205–222.
4.
BertrandM., DufloE., & MullainathanS. (2004). How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates?The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(1), 249–275.
5.
BoykoR. H., BoykoA. R., & BoykoM. G. (2007). Referee bias contributes to home advantage in English Premiership football. Journal of Sports Sciences, 25(11), 1185–1194.
6.
BrocasI., & CarrilloJ. D. (2004). Do the “three-point victory” and “golden goal” rules make soccer more exciting?Journal of Sports Economics, 5(2), 169–185.
7.
BuraimoB., ForrestD., & SimmonsR. (2010). The 12th man? Refereeing bias in English and German soccer. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 173(2), 431–449.
8.
ChengC., & HoekstraM. (2013). Does strengthening self-defense law deter crime or escalate violence? Evidence from expansions to castle doctrine. Journal of Human Resources, 48(3), 821–854.
9.
del CorralJ., Prieto-RodriguezJ., & SimmonsR. (2010). The effect of incentives on sabotage: The case of Spanish football. Journal of Sports Economics, 11(3), 243–260.
10.
DekeJ. (2014, December). Using the linear probability model to estimate impacts on binary outcomes in randomized controlled trials. Evaluation Technical Assistance Update for OAH & ACYF Teenage Pregnancy Prevention Grantees, Brief 6, 1–5.
11.
DewenterR., & NaminiJ. E. (2013). How to make soccer more attractive? Rewards for a victory, the teams’ offensiveness, and the home bias. Journal of Sports Economics, 14(1), 65–86.
12.
DilgerA., & GeyerH. (2009). Are three points for a win really better than two? A comparison of German Soccer League and cup games. Journal of Sports Economics, 10(3), 305–318.
13.
DohmenT. (2005). Social pressure influences decisions of individuals: Evidence from the behavior of football referees (IZA Discussion Paper No. 1595).
14.
ElaadG., KrumerA., & KantorJ. (2018). Corruption and Sensitive Soccer Games: Cross-Country Evidence. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 34(3), 364–394.
15.
Fernandez-CantelliE., & MeedenG. (2003). An improved award system for soccer. Chance, 16(1), 23–29.
16.
GardeazabalJ., & PoloE. (2018). How income-elastic is the demand for culture? The causal effect of unemployment spells. Unpublished manuscript.
17.
GaricanoL., & Palacios-HuertaI. (2014). Sabotage in tournaments: Making the beautiful game a bit less beautiful. In Palacios-HuertaI. (Ed.). Beautiful Game Theory: How Soccer Can Help Economics.Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
18.
GaricanoL., Palacios-HuertaI., & PrendergastC. (2005). Favoritism under social pressure. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 87(2), 208–216.
19.
GilbertR. (2006). Looking for Mr. Schumpeter: Where are we in the competition-innovation debate?Innovation Policy and the Economy, 6, 159–215.
20.
GuedesJ. C., & MachadoF. S. (2002). Changing rewards in contests: Has the three-point rule brought more offense to soccer?Empirical Economics, 27(4), 607–630.
21.
HaugenK. K. (2008). Point score systems and competitive imbalance in professional soccer. Journal of Sports Economics, 9(2), 191–210.
22.
HemelD. J., & OuelletteL. L. (2013). Beyond the patents-prizes debate. Texas Law Review, 92(2), 303–382.
HonL. Y., & ParinduriR. A. (2016). Does the three-point rule make soccer more exciting? Evidence from a regression discontinuity design. Journal of Sports Economics, 17(4), 377–395.
25.
HuberA.III, NewmanR., & LaFaveD. (2016). Cannabis control and crime: Medicinal use, depenalization and the war on drugs. The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 16(4), 1–35.
26.
Karaca-MandicP., NortonE. C., & DowdB. (2012). Interaction terms in nonlinear models. Health Services Research, 47(1 Pt 1), 255–274.
27.
LechnerM. (2011). The estimation of causal effects by difference-in-difference methods. Foundations and Trends® in Econometrics, 4(3), 165–224.
28.
MoschiniG. (2010). Incentives and outcomes in a strategic setting: The 3-points-for-a-win system in soccer. Economic Inquiry, 48(1), 65–79.
29.
NevillA. M., BalmerN. J., & WilliamsA. M. (2002). The influence of crowd noise and experience upon refereeing decisions in football. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 3(4), 261–272.
30.
Palacios-HuertaI. (2004). Structural changes during a century of the world's most popular sport. Statistical Methods and Applications, 13(2), 241–258.
31.
PollardR., & Gómez, M. A. (2014). Components of home advantage in 157 national soccer leagues worldwide. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 12(3), 218–233.
32.
RiedlD., HeuerA., & StraussB. (2015). Why the three-point rule failed to sufficiently reduce the number of draws in soccer: An application of prospect theory. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 37(3), 316–326.
33.
RohdeM., & BreuerC. (2017). Financial incentives and strategic behavior in European professional football: A match-day analysis of starting squads in the German Bundesliga and UEFA competitions. International Journal of Sport Finance, 12(2), 160–182.
34.
ShepotyloO. (2005). Three-point-for-win in soccer: Are there incentives for match fixing? Unpublished manuscript.
35.
ThomasS., ReevesC., & SmithA. (2006). English soccer teams’ aggressive behavior when playing away from home. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 102(2), 317–320.
