26.10.2014 Views

Untitled - the ultimate blog

Untitled - the ultimate blog

Untitled - the ultimate blog

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Football and economics<br />

Game for geeks<br />

Aug 13th 2009<br />

From The Economist print edition<br />

Why England Lose: and O<strong>the</strong>r Curious Football Phenomena Explained. By Simon Kuper and Stefan<br />

Szymanski. HarperSport; 344 pages; £15.99. Buy from Amazon.co.uk<br />

ALL football fans—all sports fans, come to that—are obsessed with numbers. They might not admit it: who<br />

wants to be called a “statto” or a “geek” just for knowing, say, how many league goals Rickie Lambert<br />

scored for Bristol Rovers last season? (Since you ask: 29.) But <strong>the</strong>y are chasing data all <strong>the</strong> time. Scrutiny<br />

of <strong>the</strong> league table; glances at <strong>the</strong> watch as <strong>the</strong> final whistle nears; nervous inquiries about <strong>the</strong> score: all<br />

are quests for numbers.<br />

Yet data do not merely describe. Make <strong>the</strong>m sweat a little, and <strong>the</strong>y will reveal deeper truths about<br />

football (soccer, if you prefer). That is <strong>the</strong> claim of Simon Kuper, a columnist for <strong>the</strong> Financial Times, and<br />

Stefan Szymanski, an economist who specialises in sport. They combine <strong>the</strong>ir skills to entertaining and<br />

mostly convincing effect.<br />

The authors skewer a few pieces of lazily received wisdom. One is that football is “big business”. Hmm.<br />

The turnover of Manchester United is dwarfed by that of BBA Aviation, a British firm that not many<br />

readers may have heard of. Ano<strong>the</strong>r is that fans are loyal die-hards. The authors calculate <strong>the</strong> average<br />

proportion of English fans who are sure to watch <strong>the</strong>ir club next season: about half. People move to o<strong>the</strong>r<br />

towns. They have families. They reward success and shun failure.<br />

A third myth is that clubs cannot buy success. They can, so long as <strong>the</strong>y spend on players’ wages ra<strong>the</strong>r<br />

than on transfers. Almost 90% of <strong>the</strong> variation in <strong>the</strong> positions of leading English teams is explained by<br />

wage bills. Transfer fees contribute little. New managers hoping to make <strong>the</strong>ir mark often waste money.<br />

Stars of recent World Cups or European championships are overrated. So are older players. So, curiously,<br />

are Brazilians and blonds.<br />

It is possible to play <strong>the</strong> market wisely, by treating players in a similar way to stocks and shares: buy<br />

<strong>the</strong>m before <strong>the</strong>ir prime (early 20s is best) and sell <strong>the</strong>m <strong>the</strong> moment ano<strong>the</strong>r club offers more than you<br />

think <strong>the</strong>y are worth. Olympique Lyonnais, champions of France every year from 2002 to 2008, worked<br />

this out. So, earlier, did Arsenal, whose manager, Arsène Wenger, is obsessed with statistics. He also has<br />

a master’s degree in economics.<br />

There is much else in <strong>the</strong> book, such as why staging big tournaments may make countries happy but not<br />

rich; and why provincial cities provide more than <strong>the</strong>ir fair share of Europe’s champion clubs. Perhaps <strong>the</strong><br />

best chapter (for football-obsessed economists, anyway) analyses penalty kicks as public exercises in nonco-operative<br />

game <strong>the</strong>ory: <strong>the</strong> authors speculate that an economist’s advice about Manchester United’s<br />

goalkeeper might, with luck, have won Chelsea <strong>the</strong> European Champions League in 2008. The least<br />

convincing is an attempt to rank countries by <strong>the</strong>ir enthusiasm for football. Norway comes top, which may<br />

be right.<br />

As for <strong>the</strong> title, why do England lose? The answer is that <strong>the</strong>y don’t lose all that often, despite a meagre<br />

tally of one World Cup, 43 years ago, and no European championships. In fact, <strong>the</strong> national team does a<br />

little better than you would expect, given <strong>the</strong> country’s size, wealth and experience in international<br />

football. Fans hope for more. The data, alas, are against <strong>the</strong>m.<br />

Copyright © 2009 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.<br />

-133-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!