Home advantage in national tournaments

Discussion in 'FIFA and Tournaments' started by king_saladin, Nov 7, 2004.

  1. king_saladin

    king_saladin New Member

    Oct 5, 2004
    MI, USA
    I read a lot of people talk about how big a home advantage is in tournaments such as the Euro Cup or World Cup.

    Really, why is this such a big advantage?
    I understand it giving a small edge, but at least in the World Cup, it seems to almost determine the winner.

    I know that the home morale and crowd support is nice, but I figure that can only get a team so far.

    Surely the other teams have players that are more professional than to play sub-par when not at home, or not on their home continent, right? Or are pros just that lazy?
    Do corrupt/biased referees often play a factor? (they seemed to in Euro 2004, or so I heard)

    What factors really make this difference? Not just for the home team... but I also read how non-Euro teams have a disadvantage going to a World Cup in Europe... what factors contribute to this?

    Pardon my ignorance... I'm a newbie, in the learning process. :)
  2. Gordon EF

    Gordon EF Moderator
    Staff Member

    Jan 15, 2004
    In international football, climate can play a big part. I suppose this may be why teams don't travel well outside their continent, in general.
  3. beachesl

    beachesl Member

    Oct 21, 2002
    Mendoza, Argentina
    Well, speaking off the top of my head, I think that it has proven to be a huge advantage over the years, especially in the World Cup and in qualifying tournaments held for various further tournaments. This may be because of several factors, but I don't think this is comprehensive.

    1. Intimidation of opposing players. The strongest case of this was in the 1978 World Cup in Argentina. There are no fans more intimidating than the Argentinians, and, although some of the Dutch players denied it, some have admitted that they feared that they would not get out alive if they won.

    2. Intimidation of referees. Studies have proven that home teams of all sorts usually get advantages in close calls. Some claim this happeneded for Korea against Italy and Korea, although I think the reffing there was far fairer than usual. The example of Mussolini's 1936 World Cup is perhaps the clearest example of this.

    3. More chances of fixing. If you are on your own turf, you can naturally fix things better in your own country without raising attention. The obvious asssistance of the Peruivan goalie, who played in Argentina, in allowing enough goals in (6) to allow Argentina to tweak Brazil in the second ropund to the final is the clearest example.

    4. To a minor degree, automatic seeding, weakening group opponents. This obviously assisted Japan and Korea in 2002.

    5. No need for adjustment to surrondings. This is especially true for being on another continent (only Brazil has won away from its own continent). Culture shock cannot be discounted. And , the negatives of home surrondings (the day to day demands of home life) are negated by having a camp hideaway training centre even for the home team.

    6. The little things. Little ways things are done can give an edge. Example, timing of matches to allow more rest or to allow the opposing team to be scouted before the home side plays. Anybody that saw the Crystal Palace-Arsenal match can attest to the little things, such as the non-functioning of the ball boys to eat away at the time at the end of the match. These little things can together be substantial when added up and multiplied.

    7. Lack of qualifying can often be a disadvantage in terms of losing the competitive edge (as claimed by France before and after Korea), but it can also be an advantage, because the home team can be open to experimenting more in the matches leading up to the tournament in player selection and tactics. If Klinsmann does it right, he'll be able to better settle on the team he needs rather than concentrating on winning the intervening matches.

    8. The most important is the lift that is given the team by fan support. Although it has been established that it creates nervousness in the first match (which is why the home team no longer opened from 1974 on), after the initial effect, it has usually been a tremendous advantage...as long as things don't go bad, such as in the final match in Brazil in 1950 when Brazil lost its lead to Uruguay and then froze to allow Uruguay to score the winner.
  4. Excape Goat

    Excape Goat Member+

    Mar 18, 1999
    Real Madrid
    The Peruian keeper was actually a born Argentinian but later became a Peruian citizen.
  5. Century's Best

    Century's Best Member+

    Jul 29, 2003
    Good post, beaches.

    Many years after 1950, I think it was Gigghia (part of the Uruguayan NT that won it that year) who said that "if the Brazilians had defeated us at Centenario Stadium, they wouldn't have left URuguay alive."
  6. Power_of_foot

    Power_of_foot Red Card

    May 28, 2004
    Hey home advantage exists everywhere.
    In WC and Euro Cup, the home advantages always existed.
    Korea had home advantage in 2002
    Japan had home advantage in 2002
    france had home advantage in 1998
    USA had a home advantage in 1994
    Italy had home advantage 1990
    Mexico had home advantage 1986
    Holland had home advantage in 1978

    If you play in home turf, you have more support, and you are used to the home ground, and that's the variable of the win and loss of the game.
  7. beachesl

    beachesl Member

    Oct 21, 2002
    Mendoza, Argentina
    'Home advantage gives you an advantage.' - Bobby Robson
  8. fedwood

    fedwood Member

    Sep 13, 2004
    "If you can't outplay the opposition, you must outnumber them."

    "If you can't stand the heat in the dressing room, get out of the kitchen"

    "If history is going to repeat itself I should think we can expect the same thing again."
  9. condor11

    condor11 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 2, 2002
    New Zealand
    i believe
    argentina only needed 4 goals

Share This Page