Hectic xmas schedule gives some teams an artificial advantage



Earlier this week West Brom made an official complaint to the Premier League regarding the scheduling of their match against West Ham, which took place only 48 hours days after their 1-1 draw against Arsenal. The root of their concern is not that their players had only one full day to recover, but that West Ham did not have the same issue. The Hammers' previous match was on Boxing Day, giving their players an extra 5 days of rest. Despite taking a first half lead West Brom went on to lose the match 2-1.

West Brom clearly feel that five additional days of rest may have given West Ham an edge in what was already an important fixture in the relegation battle. Is there hard evidence to support this? Using historical results, can we demonstrate statistically that one team is at a disadvantage when they play twice in a short period of time and their (second) opponent does not?

Is one full day of rest enough?


I searched for every professional league match in England in which one team were playing their second match in three days against an opponent that had enjoyed at least one extra day of rest. Since the 1995/96 there have been 482 such matches: 54 in the Premier League, 175 in the Championship (or the old Division 1), 137 in League 1 and 116 in League 2. Most of these matches took place either over the Christmas period or in April, as the season draws to a close.

To determine whether the teams were at a disadvantage, I compared their win percentage in those matches against their win percentage in the return fixture that season (which actually was normally earlier in the season). In the return fixture both sides had at least two full days of rest, so this comparison should isolate the impact of one team having very limited recovery time. Of course, home advantage could also be a factor, but that should average out over the entire sample.

Table 1 shows the results. The team that had only one full day of rest – labeled ‘Team A’ – won 29% of the matches, lost 39% and drew the remaining 31%. However, in the return fixture they won 36%, losing 36% and drawing 28%. So Team A won 7% fewer matches when they had had substantially less recovery time than their opponents. This difference may seem fairly small, but it’s highly significant (in a statistical sense): Team A were at a clear disadvantage.


What about longer recovery periods? I repeated the analysis looking at matches between teams that had had two full days of rest since their previous match (e.g, playing Sunday-Wednesday) against opponents that had had at least 3 days of rest (Saturday-Wednesday). This time I found no evidence of any disadvantage: there was no significant difference between the win percentage in that match and the return game the same season. This implies that two full days of rest is generally sufficient for players to maintain their performance levels in consecutive matches (although presumably that is not sustainable in the long-run).

Summary


I’ve provided evidence, using data, that when a team plays their second match in 48 hours against an opponent that had at least 24 hours more rest, they are at a small but significant disadvantage. If the Premier League and FA want to ensure that the fixture schedule does not favour some clubs they should either avoid making teams play twice in 48 hours, or – if it that is not possible – schedule the match so that both teams have exactly the same amount of time to recover from their previous match. 

Of course, if the Premier League's priority to is to please the companies that pay to broadcast matches live, all this will be very much a secondary concern. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Using Data to Analyse Team Formations

Image
I recently presented a research paper at the FC Barcelona Sports Analytics Summit on detecting and analysing team formations using tracking data (click here and scroll down to find the paper). I thought it would be nice to publish a shorter version on my blog. The work, which was awarded the "best research paper" prize at the conference, was done in collaboration with Mark Glickman at the Harvard Sports Analytics Lab. Too long? You can take a look at the poster version here , or the cartoon version here . Introduction A vital aspect of a football manager’s job is to select team formations – the spatial configuration of the players on the field. The choice of formation determines player roles, how they interact, and influences the playing style of both teams during a match. Despite their central role in team strategy, descriptions of formations are largely reliant on classifications based on the number of defenders, midfielders and forwards: crude summaries of pla
Read more

Structure in football: putting formations into context

Image
This article was published as a chapter in the FC Barcelona Innovation Hub Football Analytics Guide, 2020. The Guide is freely available for download by filling out the online form here . Links to other work cited in this chapter are given at the end. Formations are the foundations of tactics in football. They provide structure to a team that helps the players to position themselves and broadly defines their specific roles in attack and defence. They are the means through which managers attempt to maintain control of high-value territory while denying their opponents the same.  The debate around formation tactics is as old as the game itself and is a central theme in the history of how the game is played. Innovations in formations have mirrored the evolving balance between defensive solidarity and attacking flair, discipline and freedom of expression and outcomes versus entertainment. From the early 2-3-5 ‘pyramid’ in the late 1800s to the more balanced W-M formation of Herbert Chapman
Read more

Exceeding Expected Goals

Image
From blogs to the BBC, the concept of expected goals  (or xG) has entered the mainstream media's lexicon. It has caught on because it's a useful concept; it's a useful concept because football is a low-scoring game. Chance (or luck) can be the difference between victory and defeat, a good day or an off-day. Expected goals, however, measures what would have happened on an average day. It's a simple quantity to measure. Shots are assigned a number between the 0 or 1: the proportion of similar shots (from the same position, for example) that have resulted in a goal. This number, sometimes referred to as  chance quality , is then added up over every shot taken by a team during a match (or a season) to calculate the number of goals that you would have 'expected' them to score. Conventional xG models do not take into account the identity of the player taking the shot. You need a dataset comprising many thousands of shots to properly measure chance qual
Read more