EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
Home All issues No 124 (2024) Mov Sport Sci/Sci Mot, 124 (2024) 61-68 Full HTML
Free Access
Issue
Mov Sport Sci/Sci Mot
Number 124, 2024
Page(s) 61 - 68
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/sm/2023025
Published online 06 February 2024

© ACAPS, 2024

1 Introduction

In team sports, players, coaches, fans, and journalists are convinced that the team playing on its own field has an advantage on the visiting one. This so-called Home Advantage (HA) has been statistically demonstrated in several team sports (Areni, 2014; Carron et al., 2005; Carron & Paradis, 2014; Courneya and Carron, 1992; Morton, 2006; Nevill and Holder, 1999; Pollard, 1986; Pollard & Pollard, 2005; Pollard, Prieto, & Gomez, 2017; Schwartz & Barsky, 1977; D. Thomas & Carmichael, 2005; Thomas, Reeves, & Bell, 2008; Thon, Doutreloux, & Sparrow, 2000).

At least two indicators can be used to reveal the advantage of playing at home: the percent of home wins is superior to 50% (draws excluded) and more points are obtained by teams at home than in away venues.

Several factors have been put forward to account for this ubiquitous phenomenon, the most frequently cited being attributed to the crowd attendance (Agnew & Carron, 1994; Goumas, 2013; Jaguszewski, 2021; Johnston, 2008; Nevill, Newell, & Gale, 1996, but see Johnston, 2008; for a different point of view). The influence of this factor has been initially suggested by the significant correlation observed between crowd size and performance of the home team (Goumas, 2013, 2014b; Inan, 2020; A. M. Nevill & R. L. Holder, 1999; Nevill et al., 1996). For example, Goumas (2014b) has shown that home advantage increased by 3.3% per each 10% increase in crowd size in the Football European Champions League.

Beyond the simple observation that the attendance of the public influences the performance of the teams, it is a question of understanding the mechanisms by which this effect occurs. In other words, how the supporters can influence the result of a contest?

As important as crowd density in the stadium, the behavior of the supporters seems to be an influential factor determining the extent of HA. The presence of more fans cheering on the home team could have a beneficial effect on its performance. The hostile attitude of the public against competitors is known to affect negatively individual performances (Epting et al., 2011) as well as collective performance (Boyko, Boyko, 2007; Downward & Jones, 2007; Glamser, 1990; Greer, 1983; Nevill, Balmer, & Williams, 2002; Thirer & Rampey, 1979; Unkelbach & Memmert, 2010).

Fans behavior have also an influence on referee’s decisions, resulting in a positive bias favoring the home team (Avanzini & Pfister, 1994; Balmer et al., 2007; Bilalić et al., 2021; Boyko et al., 2007; Downward & Jones, 2007; Goumas, 2014a; Johnston, 2008; Lovell & Parker, 2014; Nevill et al., 2002; Ponzo & Scoppa, 2018; Poolton, Siu, & Masters, 2011; Sors et al., 2020; Unkelbach & Memmert, 2010, but see Johnston, 2008 for a different point of view).

To study the influence of spectators’ behavior on home advantage, it would be necessary to consider two types of audience (friendly and violent) and analyze how their absence influences home advantage.

Several sources suggest that fans of Rugby and those of Football display different behaviors in stadiums. Reading sports newspapers brings to mind that violent attitude (racist offenses, throwing objects to players or invading the field for example) is more often observed in football than in other sports, such as rugby (Dunning, 1999; Fabre, 2007; Inan, 2020; Murat & Martin, 2007; Young, 1991). This rather intuitive opinion is supported by a report of the French senate that highlights the differences in behavior between Football and Rugby fans in France (Murat & Martin, 2007) opposing the violence of Football fans to the friendliness of the supporters of rugby teams. In his review, Young (1991) report several examples of very violent events in the Football context, and only one in Rugby.

In South Africa, Football spectators exhibit more aggressive attitudes against the referee than rugby spectators do (Slabbert & Ukpere, 2010). Of course, the authors acknowledged that their study was preliminary and concerned only South-African audience, but it constitutes the single scientific study comparing the attitudes of fans in these sports.

Recently, several authors took benefit of the absence of an audience in stadiums due to the COVID-19 pandemic to evaluate the possible influence of the supporters on the advantage of playing at home in soccer. They compared the performance of home teams between the beginning of the 2019-2020 season (with spectators in stadiums) and the second half of the season (when spectators were not allowed in stadiums). Some studies did not show any difference in Home advantage between the two periods in country such as England and Italy (Jaguszewski, 2021) and Portugal (Matos et al., 2021) and main European football leagues (Wunderlich, Weigelt, Rein, & Memmert, 2021). However, most of the studies revealed that HA dissipates in the absence of supporters in several European Football competitions (Bilalić, Gula, & Vaci, 2021; Hill & Van Yperen, 2021; Jackson, 2021; Jaguszewski, 2021; McCarrick, Bilalic, Neave, & Wolfson, 2021; Nazmul, Peter, & Nicholas, 2021; Santana, Bettega, & Dellagrana, 2021; Sors, Grassi, Agostini, & Murgia, 2020; Hill and Van, 2021).

Beyond the simple observation that the lack of supporters in stadiums reduce and even suppress Home advantage in Football, it is necessary to search for possible determinants of this phenomenon. A comparison with another sport with different behavior of the fans such as Rugby could aid to analyze the role of fans’ behavior on the advantage of playing at home.

Thus, we choose to analyze the impact of crowd behavior on HA in French Football and Rugby union championships by comparing two seasons, one with spectators in the stadiums (2018-2019) and the second when fans were absent (2020-2021). A similar study has been previously conducted (Sedeaud, De Larochelambert, Schipman, & Toussaint, 2021) that revealed a general decline of the Home advantage, and specific decline of HA in Football and Rugby in the 2020-2021 season. These effects were revealed by using chi-square tests independently in Football and Rugby data. In our approach, we considered each team as a unit (subject) and we have used an analysis of variance (Anova) to search for an interaction effect between Sport, Season and Game location on teams’ performances.

The first variable used to evaluate the advantage of playing at home was the percent of victories at home and away for each team.

Another index has been used to evaluate the advantage of playing at home: the percent of points gained at home relative to the total of points gained at home and away venues (Matos, Amaro, & Pollard, 2020; Matos et al., 2021; Pollard, 1986). It allows to evaluate the advantage of winning at home even if the team did not win any contest or win all the contests at home and away.

Finally, the mean number of yellow cards per match was use as an indicator of players’ misbehaviors and referee’s decision.

Taking into account the difference in fans’ behavior between Football and Rugby, we expect that the absence of supporters in stadiums would have different consequences on HA in these sports, leading to a more important decrease of HA in Football than in Rugby.

2 Methods

2.1 Data

Data were obtained from websites of sport newspapers and French federations. They concern the French Rugby union and Football championships at the highest level of competition: Top14 for Rugby and Ligue1 for Football during seasons 2018-2019 and 2020-2021.

Only teams that played the two seasons at the same level were included in the analysis.

There were 16 teams in Football and 12 in Rugby. It is important to mention that the results of the matches between these teams and those eliminated because they were not in the same division during the two seasons were taken into account for statistical analysis.

Each team of Football played 19 matches at home and 19 away during each season (608 matches per season). In Rugby, each team played 13 matches at home and 13 away during each season (312 matches per season).

2.2 Statistical analysis

First, we assessed home advantage by the percent of victories of each team at home and away with respect to the overall number of matches (draws included) played at both locations.

The Anova design was a 2 Sport (Football, Rugby) x 2 Season (2018-2019 and 2020-2021) x 2 Game location (home and away) with repeated measures for the last two factors.

Home advantage was also evaluated by the percent of points gained at home relative to the total of points gained at home and away venues. Due to the very different ways of scoring in Football and Rugby, we compute the percent of home goals with respect to home plus away goals for Football. We did a similar computation using trials for Rugby. A one-way Anova with Season as a repeated measure factor was conducted separately for each sport.

The mean number of yellow cards per match was used as an indicator of player’s misbehaviors and referee’s decisions. The meaning and consequences of a yellow card are different in Football and Rugby. In Football, the yellow card is a warning given to the player, while in Rugby, it is a punishment that results in an expulsion from the field for 10 min. For this reason, we decided to operate separate Anovas with Season and Game location as repeated measure factors separately for the two sports.

There were not enough red cards to be statistically processed.

3 Results

The winning percentage at home (H-W%) and away (A-W%), home goal percentage (H-G%) and the mean number of yellow cards per match at home (H-YC) and away (A-YC) for each team during both seasons are shown in Table 1.

Mean and standard deviation of theses parameters are indicated in Table 2.

Table 1

Winning percentage at home (H-W%) and away (A-W%), Home goals and trials percentage (H-G%), mean number of yellow cards per match at home (H-YC) and away (A-YC) for each club involved in the higher level of competition of the French championships of Rugby union and Football.

Table 2

Means and Standard deviations (SD) of winning percentage, home goals and trials percentage, and number of yellow cards per match (same conventions as in Tab. 1).

3.1 Percent of victories

The Anova indicates that the Season factor had no influence (F(1,26) < 1) on winning percentage and did not interact with the Sport factor (F(1,26) < 1).

Game location had a significant effect (F(1,26) = 59.50, p < 0.0001), corresponding to a greater percentage of victories at home (52.41%) than away (37.01%). Game location interacted with the Sport factor (F(1,26) = 22.79, p < 0.0001). The percent of home wins was greater in Rugby (65.01%) than in Football (42.34%), whereas it was rather similar in away location for the two sports (38.46% for Rugby and 36.02% for Football). This corresponds to the fact that draws are less frequent in Rugby than in Football.

The interaction between Game location and Season was also significant (F(1,26) = 9.55, p < 0.01) corresponding to an overall decrease of Home wins in 2020-2021 (48.25% of home wins) compared to 2018-2019 (56.56% of home wins).

Finally, the interaction between Sport, Season and Game Location was significant (F(1,26) = 8.43, p< 0.01). Whereas the percent of Victories at home remained stable in Rugby (65.95% for 2018-2019 and 63.46% for 2020-2021) it decreased considerably in Football (from 48.03 % for 2018-2019 to 40.79% for 2020-2021) in the absence of supporters in stadiums. Similarly, the percent of Victories in away location remained rather stable for Rugby (40.36% in 2018-2019 and 36.36% in 2020-2021), while it raised up in Football (from 31.05% in 2018-2019 to 40.80% in 2020-2021). In the last season, Home Advantage stayed unchanged in Rugby whereas it disappeared in Football, since the Percent of Victories was slightly greater in away than in home venue when stadiums were empty (see Tab. 2).

The advantage of playing at home can also be evaluated by the difference between the percent of Home and Away wins (HA = Percent of Home wins − Percent of Away Wins). In Rugby, HA was 27.56 and 26.92 respectively for 2018-2019 and 2020-2021 seasons. For football, HA was 16.78 in 2018-2019 and −3.95 in 2020-2021.

A partial Anova on Football results indicated a significant interaction between Season and Game Location factors (F(1, 15) = 27.75, p < 0.0001) confirming the disappearance of the Home advantage in the 2020-2021 season for this sport. On the other hand, an Anova restricted to Rugby results did not show any significant interaction between these factors (F(1,11) < 1) indicating that Home advantage remained the same for the two seasons.

3.2 Percent oh home goals and trials

The percent of home goals (H-G%) was significantly different between the two seasons in Football (F(1, 15) = 10.53, p < 0.01). Teams gained 57.64% of goals at home during the 2018-2019 season, and only 48.42% during 2020-2021 season. On the contrary, season had no effect on this index for Rugby (F(1,11) < 1). The percent of home trials was 59.93% for the 2019-2020 season, and 58.61% for the 2020-2021 season.

3.3 Yellow cards (YC)

In Football, Season (F(1, 15) = 1.937, p > 0.05) and Game location (F(1, 15) = 3.322, p > 0.05) had no significant effects on the mean number of Yellow cards per match. However, the interaction between these factors were significant (F51,15) = 6.214, p < 0.05). Game location had an effect of YC only for the 2018-2019 season, being less important at home (1.714) than away (1.98). For the 2020-2021 season, the mean number of YC at Home (1.930) and Away (1.911) was slightly identical. This corresponded to an increase of the number of YC for the Home teams in 2020-2021 season with respect to the 2018-2019 season. For the away venue, the number of YC was similar for the two seasons.

In Rugby, Season had no effect (F(1,11)= 1 .73, p > 0.05). The mean number of YC was significantly influenced by Game Location (F(1,11) = 5.656, p < 0.05) being less important at home (1.270) than in away venue (1.449). The interaction between the two factors was not significant, indicating that Game location had the same effect for the two seasons.

4 Discussion

The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of crowd attendance on home advantage in Rugby union and Football at the higher level of competition in France. The main result showed that when public was absent in stadiums, home advantage disappeared in Football whereas it persisted in Rugby union.

This result has been obtained by comparing the performances on the same teams playing at home and away during season 2018-2019 (with spectators) and season 2020-2021 (without audience).

Several hypotheses can be proposed to account for these results.

First, as underlined in the introduction, some observations suggest than in Football, fans are more violent against the opponent players (Murat & Martin, 2007) and the referee (Slabbert & Ukpere, 2010) than in Rugby. With more fans for the home team, they could have a detrimental influence on the psychological state of the players of the visiting team, leading to disruption of their behavior in the field.

Several studies reveal that a stressful climate is detrimental to perceptual-motor performance (Epting et al., 2011; Lo, Hatfield, Wu, Chang, & Hung, 2019) and decreases the performance of the visiting team (Greer, 1983). As suggested by several authors, choking under pressure could be due to a change in the control processes of motor actions due to stressful climate (Baumeister & Showers, 1986; Vickers & Williams, 2007). Pressure could disrupt the automatic control of overlearned perceptual-motor performance by an increase of conscious monitoring of the execution of the intended action. Several studies demonstrate the depressing effect of the focusing of attention on movement execution (internal focus) compared to a focusing of attention on the goal of movement (external focus) (see Wulf, 2007 for a review). External focus has a beneficial effect on reaction time and running speed (Ille, Selin, Do, & Thon, 2013), postural control (McNevin & Wulf, 2002), jump height (Makaruk, Porter, Czaplicki, Sadowski, & Sacewicz, 2012; Wulf & Dufek, 2009), movement accuracy (Zachry, Wulf, Mercer, & Bezodis, 2005) and force production (Marchant, Greig, & Scott, 2009), all aptitudes required by the practice of Rugby and Football. The fact that Football teams are no longer disturbed when playing away in the absence of public confirms the negative role of the home supporters on visiting team performances and attests that they are the main source of HA for this sport. Thus, home advantage in Football in presence of spectators could correspond to an “away disadvantage”. In Rugby, home advantage is the same regardless of the presence or absence of supporters suggesting that crowd attendance and fans behavior play a minor role in HA.

The role of crowd attendance on the home advantage could also be mediated by the influence on referee’s decisions favoring the home team (Areni, 2014; Avanzini & Pfister, 1994; Boyko et al., 2007; Goumas, 2014a; Johnston, 2008; Lago-Peñas & Gómez-López, 2016; Riedl et al., 2015 Riedl, Bernd, Heuer, & Rubner, 2015). This bias tends to vanish in the absence of supporters in Football (Bilalić et al., 2021; Reade et al., 2021; Sors et al., 2020; Wunderlich et al., 2021). The role of the referee on the Home advantage has been supported by the study of Nevill, Balmer, & Williams (2002). They showed that referees looking at sequences of interactions between Football players recorded during a contest tended to make decisions favoring the home team when they heard the noise of the crowd on earphones. This bias was not observed if the referees did not hear the noise produced by the crowd. In the present study, the number of yellow cards given to the teams could be an indicator of the attitude of the referees towards the players, as well as the behavior of the players. In Football, the mean number of YC was lower for the home team than the visiting team in presence of supporters, whereas the two teams received the same number of YC in case of empty stadiums. So, fans’ behavior could be at the origin of referee’s bias favoring the home team in Football. Some authors did not hesitate to affirm that, in Football, the referee” is in fact the most important player in the home team” (Bilalić et al., 2021).

On the other hand, the mean number of YC in Rugby is always greater for the visiting team, whether the spectators are present or not in the stadium. Thus, the presence of fans does not seem to be the source of misbehavior of players in the field, and/or of the positive bias in referee’s decisions in favor of the home team in Rugby. Of course, our result cannot account to the respective role of players’ behavior and bias in referee’s decision favouring the home team. An investigation using the same protocol used in Football (Nevill et al., 2002) among rugby referees could help to separate the reciprocal implication of these two factors on home advantage in this sport.

In Rugby, the impression to be at home would resist to the lack of audience in the stadium, reflecting a higher level of “territoriality” feeling in this sport. Territoriality has been proposed to be involved in home advantage (Edwards & Archambault, 1989; Neave & Wolfson, 2003; Pollard, 2006, 2008; Pollard & Gómez, 2009). It corresponds to the tendency of animals or humans to protect their home territory against invasion by means of aggressive behavior. The geographical variation of home advantage could correspond to variations in the feeling of territoriality determined by historical, political and cultural factors (Pollard, 2006; Pollard & Gómez, 2009). Territoriality could also involve hormonal processes (Carre, Muir, Belanger, & Putnam, 2006; Neave & Wolfson, 2003). Nevertheless, the fact that the number of yellow cards (an indicator of the frequency of faulty and generally aggressive behavior) given to rugby players is always inferior for the home team does not give support to the intervention of incorrect aggressive behavior in the advantage of playing at home. Rugby is an invasion game in which physical contacts between players are allowed in mauls, tackles, and scrums. They participate to the defense of the home territory and allow the team to progress towards the opponent’s goal. On the contrary, physical contacts are restricted in Football, and do not participate in the gain of ground towards the opponent’s goal. So, the involvement of the feeling of territoriality on home advantage could be less important in this sport.

The belief that the home team has an advantage upon the visiting team is certainly more widespread and fixed in mentalities in Rugby than in Football milieu, leading to negative psychological states of visiting players and coaches before et during the contest. Thus, a “self-perpetuating phenomenon” (Pollard, 2008) or “self-fulfilling prophecy” (Anderson, Wolfson, Neave, & Moss, 2012; Gayton, Broida, & Elgee, 2001) could be generated by these beliefs in Rugby and the presence of fans would be useless for the manifestation of the home advantage. A sociological and cultural questionnaire with the stakeholders (players, coaches, referees) involved in these two sports would help to test this hypothesis.

Finally, the most important finding of the present study concerns the differential role of the audience on HA in Rugby and Football, certainly due to different attitudes of the fans before and during the contest on players’ performances and referee’s decisions. Historical, sociological and cultural factors could be at the source of this difference and deserve further investigations. Each study concerning this topic could provide another piece to place in this up till now “unsolved puzzle” (Pollard, 2008).

References

  • Agnew, G.A., & Carron, A.V. (1994). Crowd effects and the Home advantage. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 25(1), 53–62. [Google Scholar]
  • Anderson, M., Wolfson, S., Neave, N., & Moss, M. (2012). Perspectives on the home advantage: a comparison of football players, fans and referees. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 13(3), 311–316. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Areni, C. (2014). Home advantage, rivalry, and referee bias in representative rugby. Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal, 4, 142–157. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Avanzini, G., & Pfister, R. (1994). Le phénomène de l’arbitrage à domicile en football: mythe ou réalité? Science et Motricité, 21, 48–52. [Google Scholar]
  • Balmer, N.J., Nevill, A.M., Lane, A.M., Ward, P., Williams, A.M., & Fairclough, S.H. (2007). Influence of crowd noise on Soccer refereeing consistency in Soccer. Journal of Sport Behavior, 30(2), 130–145. [Google Scholar]
  • Baumeister, R.F., & Showers, C.J. (1986). A review of paradoxical performance effects: choking under pressure in sports and mental tests. European Journal of Social Psychology, 16(4), 361–383. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bilalić, M., Gula, B., & Vaci, N. (2021). Home advantage mediated (HAM) by referee bias and team performance during covid. Scientific Reports, 11 doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-00784-8 [Google Scholar]
  • Boyko, R.H., Boyko, A.R., & Boyko, M.G. (2007). Referee bias contributes to home advantage in English Premiership football. Journal of Sports Sciences, 25(11), 1185–1194. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Carre, J., Muir, C., Belanger, J., & Putnam, S.K. (2006). Pre-competition hormonal and psychological levels of elite hockey players: Relationship to the ‘home advantage’. Physiology & Behavior, 89(3), 392–398. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Carron, A.V., Loughhead, T.M., & Bray, S.R. (2005). The home advantage in sport competitions: Courneya and Carron’s (1992) conceptual framework a decade later. Journal of Sports Sciences, 23(4), 395–407. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Carron, A.V., & Paradis, K.F. (2014). Home advantage. In R. C. Eklund G. Tenenbaum (Eds.), Encyclopedia of sport and exercise psychology (pp. 351–355). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  • Courneya, K.S., & Carron, A.V. (1992). The home advantage in sport competitions − a literature review. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 14(1), 13–27. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Downward, P., & Jones, M. (2007). Effects of crowd size on referee decisions: analysis of the FA Cup. Journal of Sports Sciences, 25(14), 1541–1545. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dunning, E. (1999). Sport matters: Sociological studies of sport, violence and civilization. London and New-York: Routlege, Taylor and Francis. [Google Scholar]
  • Edwards, J., & Archambault, D. (1989). The home-field advantage. In J.H. Goldstein (Ed.), Sports, games, and play: social and psychological viewpoints. 2nd ed. (pp. 333–370). Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar]
  • Epting, L.K., Riggs, K.N., Knowles, J.D., & Hanky, J.J. (2011). Cheers vs. jeers: effects of audience feedback on individual athletic performance. North American Journal of Psychology, 13(2), 299–312. [Google Scholar]
  • Fabre, J. (2007). Football et rugby, ces jeux qui viennent du nord. Pouvoirs, 121(2), 63–76. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gayton, W.F., Broida, J., & Elgee, L. (2001). An investigation of coaches’ perceptions of the causes of home advantage. Perceptual and Motor Skills,92(3 Pt 1), 933–936. [Google Scholar]
  • Glamser, F.D. (1990). Contest location, player misconduct and race- a case from english soccer. Journal of Sport Behavior, 13, 41–49. [Google Scholar]
  • Goumas, C. (2013). Home advantage and crowd size in Soccer: a worldwide study. Journal of Sport Behavior, 36(4), 387–399. [Google Scholar]
  • Goumas, C. (2014a). Home advantage and referee bias in European football. European Journal of Sport Science, 14, S243– S249. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Goumas, C. (2014b). How does crowd support contribute to Home advantage in Soccer? Journal of Sport Behavior, 37(3), 236–250. [Google Scholar]
  • Greer, D.L. (1983). Spectator booing and the Home advantage: a study of social influence in the Basketball arena. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46(3), 252–261. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hill, Y., & Van Yperen, N.W. (2021). Losing the Home field advantage when playing behind closed doors during COVID-19: change or chance? Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 658452. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ille, A., Selin, I., Do, M.-C., & Thon, B. (2013). Attentional focus effects on sprint start performance as a function of skill level. Journal of Sports Sciences, 31(15), 1705–1712. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Inan, T. (2020). The effect of crowd support on Home-field advantage: evidence from European football. Annals of Applied Sport Science, 8(3), e806. [Google Scholar]
  • Jackson, A. (2021). No fans, no home advantage? Significance, 18(4), 4–5. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Jaguszewski, M. (2021). Is crowd support a significant factor in home advantage on the highest level of competition in football? Trends in Sport Sciences, 28(1), 55–60. [Google Scholar]
  • Johnston, R. (2008). On referee bias, crowd size, and home advantage in the English soccer Premiership. Journal of Sports Sciences, 26(6), 563–568. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lago-Peñas, C., & Gómez-López, M. (2016). The influence of referee bias on extra time in elite soccer matches. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 122(2), 666–677. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lo, L.-C., Hatfield, B.D., Wu, C.-T., Chang, C.-C., & Hung, T.-M. (2019). Elevated state anxiety alters cerebral cortical dynamics and degrades precision cognitive-motor performance. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 8(1), 21–37. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lovell, G.P., & Parker, J.K. (2014). Referees’ decision making behavior and the sport home advantage phenomenon. Research in Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, 2(1), 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  • Makaruk, H., Porter, J.M., Czaplicki, A., Sadowski, J., & Sacewicz, T. (2012). The role of attentional focus in plyometric training. Journal of Sports Medicine & Physical Fitness, 52(3), 319–327. [Google Scholar]
  • Marchant, D.C., Greig, M., & Scott, C. (2009). Attentional focusing instructions influence force production and muscular activity during isokinetic elbow flexions. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 23(8), 2358–2366. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Matos, R., Amaro, N., & Pollard, R. (2020). How best to quantify home advantage in team sports: an investigation involving male senior handball leagues in Portugal and Spain. RICYDE. Revista Internacional de Ciencias del Deporte, 59(16), 12–23. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Matos, R., Monteiro, D., Antunes, R., Mendes, D., Botas, J., Clemente, J., & Amaro, N. (2021). Home-advantage during COVID-19: an analysis in Portuguese Football League. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 3761 doi: 10.3390/ijerph18073761 [Google Scholar]
  • McCarrick, D., Bilalic, M., Neave, N., & Wolfson, S. (2021). Home advantage during the COVID-19 pandemic: analyses of European football leagues. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 56, 102013. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • McNevin, N.H., & Wulf, G. (2002). Attentional focus on supra-postural tasks affects postural control. Human Movement Science, 21(2), 187–202. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Morton, R.H. (2006). Home advantage in southern hemisphere rugby union: national and international. Journal of Sports Science, 24(5), 495–499. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Murat, B., & Martin, P. (2007). Faut-il avoir peur des supporters ? Paris: Sénat Français. [Google Scholar]
  • Nazmul, I., Peter, L., & Nicholas, C. (2021). An econometric analysis of home field advantage in the World’s largest sports: pre and post COVID-19 outbreak. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 18(1). doi: 10.3844/ajassp.2021.165.193 [Google Scholar]
  • Neave, N., & Wolfson, S. (2003). Testosterone, territoriality, and the ’home advantage’. Physiology and Behavior, 78(2), 269–275. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Nevill, A.M., Balmer, N.J., & Williams, A.M. (2002). The influence of crowd noise and experience upon refereeing decisions in football. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 3, 261–272. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Nevill, A.M., & Holder, R.L. (1999). Home advantage in sport: an overview of studies on the advantage of playing at home. Sports Medicine, 28(4), 221–236. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Nevill, A.M., Newell, S.M., & Gale, S. (1996). Factors associated with home advantage in English and Scottish soccer matches. Journal of Sports Sciences, 14(2), 181–186. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Pollard, R. (1986). Home advantage in soccer: a retrospective analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 4(3), 237–248. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Pollard, R. (2006). Worldwide regional variations in home advantage in association football. Journal of Sports Sciences, 24(3), 231–240. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Pollard, R. (2008). Home advantage in football: a current review of an unsolved puzzle. The Open Sports Sciences Journal, 1, 12–14. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pollard, R., & Gómez, M. (2009). Home advantage in football in South-West Europe: Long-term trends, regional variation, and team differences. European Journal of Sport Science, 9(6), 341–352. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pollard, R., & Pollard, G. (2005). Long-term trends in home advantage in professionel team sports in North America and England (1876-2003). Journal of Sports Sciences, 23 (4), 351–364. [Google Scholar]
  • Pollard, R., Prieto, J., & Gomez, M.A. (2017). Global differences in home advantage by country, sport and sex. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 17(4), 586–599. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ponzo, M., & Scoppa, V. (2018). Does the home advantage depend on crowd support? Evidence from same-stadium derbies. Journal of Sports Economics, 19(4), 562–582. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Poolton, J., Siu, C.M., & Masters, R. (2011). The home team advantage gives Football referees something to ruminate about. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 6(4), 545–552. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Reade, J.J., Schreyer, D., & Singleton, C. (2021). Eliminating supportive crowds reduces referee bias. Economic Inquiry. [Google Scholar]
  • Riedl, D., Bernd, S., Heuer, A., & Rubner, O. (2015). Finale furioso: referee-biased injury times and their effects on home advantage in football. Journal of Sports Sciences, 33(4), 327–336. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Santana, H.A.P., Bettega, O.B., & Dellagrana, R. (2021). An analysis of Bundesliga matches before and after social distancing by COVID-19. Science and Medicine in Football, 5(sup1), 17–21. [Google Scholar]
  • Schwartz, B., & Barsky, S.F. (1977). The home advantage. Social Forces, 55, 641–661. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sedeaud, A., De Larochelambert, Q., Schipman, J., & Toussaint, J.-F. (2021). The COVID-19 pandemic impact on away and home victories in soccer and Rugby union. [Original Research]. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 3 doi: 10.3389/fspor.2021.695922 [Google Scholar]
  • Slabbert, A., & Ukpere, W. (2010). A preliminary comparative study of rugby and football spectators’ attitudes towards violence. African Journal of Business Management, 4, 459–466. [Google Scholar]
  • Sors, F., Grassi, M., Agostini, T., & Murgia, M. (2020). The sound of silence in association football: Home advantage and referee bias decrease in matches played without spectators. European Journal of Sport Science, 21(12), 1597–1605. [Google Scholar]
  • Thirer, J., & Rampey, M. (1979). Effects of abusive spectator behavior on the performance of home and visiting intercollegiate basketball teams. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 48, 1047–1053. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Thomas, D., & Carmichael, F. (2005). Home-field effect and team performance: Evidence from English premiership football. Journal of Sports Economics, 6 doi: 10.1177/1527002504266154 [Google Scholar]
  • Thomas, S., Reeves, C., & Bell, A. (2008). Home advantage in the Six Nations Rugby Union tournament. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 106(1), 113–116. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Thon, B., Doutreloux, J.P., & Sparrow, W.A. (2000). Influence du lieu de la rencontre sur les performances des équipes dans le championnat de France de rugby (Home advantage in the french rugby championship). Paper presented at the Congrès International de la Société Française de Psychologie du Sport, Paris (France). [Google Scholar]
  • Unkelbach, C., & Memmert, D. (2010). Crowd noise as a cue in referee decisions contributes to the home advantage. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 32(4), 483–498. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Vickers, J.N., & Williams, A.M. (2007). Performing under pressure: the effects of physiological arousal, cognitive anxiety, and gaze control in biathlon. Journal of Motor Behavior, 39(5), 381–394. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wulf, G. (2007). Attention and motor skill learning. Champaign, Il: Human Kinetics. [Google Scholar]
  • Wulf, G., & Dufek, J.S. (2009). Increased jump height with an external focus due to enhanced lower extremity joint kinetics. Journal of Motor Behavior, 41(5), 401–409. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wunderlich, F., Weigelt, M., Rein, R., & Memmert, D. (2021). How does spectator presence affect football? Home advantage remains in European top-class football matches played without spectators during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE, 16(3), e0248590. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Young, K. (1991). Sport and collective violence. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews, 19, 539–586. [Google Scholar]
  • Zachry, T., Wulf, G., Mercer, J., & Bezodis, N. (2005). Increased movement accuracy and reduced EMG activity as the result of adopting an external focus of attention. Brain Research Bulletin, 67(4), 304–309. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Cite this article as: Thon B, Doutreloux J-P (2024) Influence of audience on the home advantage: a comparative study in French Rugby union and Football championships before and during Covid-19 pandemic. Mov Sport Sci/Sci Mot, 124, 61–68

All Tables

Table 1

Winning percentage at home (H-W%) and away (A-W%), Home goals and trials percentage (H-G%), mean number of yellow cards per match at home (H-YC) and away (A-YC) for each club involved in the higher level of competition of the French championships of Rugby union and Football.

In the text
Table 2

Means and Standard deviations (SD) of winning percentage, home goals and trials percentage, and number of yellow cards per match (same conventions as in Tab. 1).

In the text

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.