2022/06/08 by Łászló Csató, Csató, László · 2 citations
Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Social Sciences · #62F07 #90-10 #90B90 #Applications (stat.AP) #Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies #FOS: Computer and information sciences #FOS: Physical sciences #Physics and Society (physics.soc-ph) #Sports Analytics and Performance #Sports, Gender, and Society
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2206.03961
openalex publication_date 2022/06/08 · openalex created_date 2022/09/21 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
The outcome of some football matches has benefited both teams at the expense of a third team because head-to-head results were used for breaking ties. Inspired by these examples, our mathematical analysis identifies all possible collusion opportunities caused by this particular ranking rule in a single round-robin tournament with four teams. According to a simulation model based on the 2024 UEFA European Football Championship, merely the tie-breaking rule increases the probability of reaching a situation vulnerable to collusion by between 11.5 and 14.8 percentage points. This risk can scarcely be mitigated by a static match schedule. Therefore, tournament organisers are strongly encouraged to choose goal difference as the primary tie-breaking rule, similar to the official policy of FIFA.