Post by jdl on Feb 5, 2014 1:54:35 GMT
This is one of the oft-mentioned criticisms of 3G - that it gives you a home advantage.
This has always struck me as a bit daft because: a) it's normally accepted that teams have a home advantage anyway, and b) surely it also gives you an away disadvantage (when you're used to playing on the wonderful surface of our 3G pitch, how are you supped to adapt to the rutted and pock-marked mud baths we play on away?).
But, I thought I'd have a look at the stats to see if there's any truth in this. We're nearly two-thirds of the way through the season now, so it seems a reasonable time to take stock.
It's no good just looking at our own home and away records, obviously, because we don't know how they differ from the average, non-3G club's stats. So I took the figures for the other 4 top-five clubs and averaged them out as a comparison.
(A note of statistical caution here - the stats for these four clubs actually vary so much - e.g. Kingstonian and Dulwich do better at home, Wealdstone and Hornchurch do better away, but whilst Wealdstone scored more and conceded less at home, for Hornchurch it's very much the other way round - so it's highly doubtful that an average is at all meaningful. But, it's all we've got.)
Firstly, let's have a look at the Stones' stats on their own:
As you might expect, we lose more away from home (none at home, 4 away), but we've actually also won more often away - 9, compared to 8 at home (even though we've played 3 more home games). And oddly, whilst we've had 8 (!) draws at home, we've yet to register a single one away. So very much a mixed picture - we're more likely to win or lose away, but we only ever draw at home! How exactly does a 3G pitch produce those results?
Our current form (last 6 games) is much better at home - 12 points, compared to 9 - but if you look at the home and away tables separately, we're doing just as well in each - both 4th. And, if you take the number of games played home and way into account, our average points/game is actually slightly better away (2.1 to 2.0). So, just how much home advantage is the 3G pitch giving us??
Compared to the average performance of the other 4 top 5 clubs (i.e. the ones without 3G pitches), the picture is slightly different (bearing in mind the caveat above):
On average, the other four clubs have won 2 more games at home than away, but have lost and drawn about the same number of games, home and away. So, they appear to have a definite home advantage, compared to us, when it comes to winning games (but we lose more often away from home, and only draw at home!). We have scored 8 more goals at home than away, whilst their average is only 4, but, whilst we have conceded 3 more away, they have only conceded 1 more on average. (NB: the recent 7-2 result has skewed these figures more than slightly.)
Averaging the form of four clubs, home and away, is practically meaningless, but for what it's worth, it's pretty much the same - on average, over the last 6 games, the other four clubs have done about as well away as at home - whereas we are 3 points better at home. As for the 'true' form (i.e. the whole season so far), their average points per game is slightly better at home (2.1 compared to 1.9), whilst ours is the other way round (2.0 to 2.1) - we play slightly better away.
So what, if anything, does all this prove?
Looking at our results alone, we seem to actually do slightly better away from home - mainly because we have a tendency to draw at home (exactly half our games!). How that ties in with having a 3G pitch, is utterly beyond me - especially as we have actually scored more goals at home (36/28) and conceded fewer (14/17).
But the real argument is not about our results in isolation, but how we compare to similar teams. And the answer seems to be the opposite of what we might expect - they are doing better at home than we are (bearing in mind, again, the caveat about averaging such wildly diverse results). So, again, the results appear to show that, if the 3G pitch is having any effect at all, it's certainly NOT giving us a home advantage.
So, I think we can safely say that there is certainly no proof whatsoever that a 3G pitch gives a club home advantage (from this season's stats, at any rate).
But, in conclusion, I'm not sure that these stats really tell us anything about a 3G pitch at all. My analysis assumes that the only factor involved in our home and away form is the home pitch, when, of course, we know that there are many other factors which might or might not give teams a home advantage. In our particular case, I suspect the fact that we are one of the challengers for the title, and play to such large crowds probably affects our performance and results far more than the type of pitch we play on.
Every home game for us is effectively a 'cup final' for the visiting team - their only chance to play in front of a big crowd, in a full stadium (and on an excellent surface), and their chance to prove themselves against one of the top clubs. How many times this season have we seen mediocre teams step up their game in order to beat the club everybody wants to play against? And of course, our team has to cope with the double whammy of the home crowd's huge (and often unreasonable) expectations, and the other side stepping up their game. Much as they like playing in front of a home crowd and on a decent pitch, I suspect that many Maidstone players secretly breath a sigh of relief when they are playing away from all that pressure!
Whether the home pitch is plastic or grass is probably largely irrelevant, compared to the many other factors that affect a team's performance - especially in our case.
(NB: I'm writing this late at night and don't have the time or inclination to go back and check my figures before posting. So, if I've got any wrong, please let me know - but please be gentle!)
This has always struck me as a bit daft because: a) it's normally accepted that teams have a home advantage anyway, and b) surely it also gives you an away disadvantage (when you're used to playing on the wonderful surface of our 3G pitch, how are you supped to adapt to the rutted and pock-marked mud baths we play on away?).
But, I thought I'd have a look at the stats to see if there's any truth in this. We're nearly two-thirds of the way through the season now, so it seems a reasonable time to take stock.
It's no good just looking at our own home and away records, obviously, because we don't know how they differ from the average, non-3G club's stats. So I took the figures for the other 4 top-five clubs and averaged them out as a comparison.
(A note of statistical caution here - the stats for these four clubs actually vary so much - e.g. Kingstonian and Dulwich do better at home, Wealdstone and Hornchurch do better away, but whilst Wealdstone scored more and conceded less at home, for Hornchurch it's very much the other way round - so it's highly doubtful that an average is at all meaningful. But, it's all we've got.)
Firstly, let's have a look at the Stones' stats on their own:
As you might expect, we lose more away from home (none at home, 4 away), but we've actually also won more often away - 9, compared to 8 at home (even though we've played 3 more home games). And oddly, whilst we've had 8 (!) draws at home, we've yet to register a single one away. So very much a mixed picture - we're more likely to win or lose away, but we only ever draw at home! How exactly does a 3G pitch produce those results?
Our current form (last 6 games) is much better at home - 12 points, compared to 9 - but if you look at the home and away tables separately, we're doing just as well in each - both 4th. And, if you take the number of games played home and way into account, our average points/game is actually slightly better away (2.1 to 2.0). So, just how much home advantage is the 3G pitch giving us??
Compared to the average performance of the other 4 top 5 clubs (i.e. the ones without 3G pitches), the picture is slightly different (bearing in mind the caveat above):
On average, the other four clubs have won 2 more games at home than away, but have lost and drawn about the same number of games, home and away. So, they appear to have a definite home advantage, compared to us, when it comes to winning games (but we lose more often away from home, and only draw at home!). We have scored 8 more goals at home than away, whilst their average is only 4, but, whilst we have conceded 3 more away, they have only conceded 1 more on average. (NB: the recent 7-2 result has skewed these figures more than slightly.)
Averaging the form of four clubs, home and away, is practically meaningless, but for what it's worth, it's pretty much the same - on average, over the last 6 games, the other four clubs have done about as well away as at home - whereas we are 3 points better at home. As for the 'true' form (i.e. the whole season so far), their average points per game is slightly better at home (2.1 compared to 1.9), whilst ours is the other way round (2.0 to 2.1) - we play slightly better away.
So what, if anything, does all this prove?
Looking at our results alone, we seem to actually do slightly better away from home - mainly because we have a tendency to draw at home (exactly half our games!). How that ties in with having a 3G pitch, is utterly beyond me - especially as we have actually scored more goals at home (36/28) and conceded fewer (14/17).
But the real argument is not about our results in isolation, but how we compare to similar teams. And the answer seems to be the opposite of what we might expect - they are doing better at home than we are (bearing in mind, again, the caveat about averaging such wildly diverse results). So, again, the results appear to show that, if the 3G pitch is having any effect at all, it's certainly NOT giving us a home advantage.
So, I think we can safely say that there is certainly no proof whatsoever that a 3G pitch gives a club home advantage (from this season's stats, at any rate).
But, in conclusion, I'm not sure that these stats really tell us anything about a 3G pitch at all. My analysis assumes that the only factor involved in our home and away form is the home pitch, when, of course, we know that there are many other factors which might or might not give teams a home advantage. In our particular case, I suspect the fact that we are one of the challengers for the title, and play to such large crowds probably affects our performance and results far more than the type of pitch we play on.
Every home game for us is effectively a 'cup final' for the visiting team - their only chance to play in front of a big crowd, in a full stadium (and on an excellent surface), and their chance to prove themselves against one of the top clubs. How many times this season have we seen mediocre teams step up their game in order to beat the club everybody wants to play against? And of course, our team has to cope with the double whammy of the home crowd's huge (and often unreasonable) expectations, and the other side stepping up their game. Much as they like playing in front of a home crowd and on a decent pitch, I suspect that many Maidstone players secretly breath a sigh of relief when they are playing away from all that pressure!
Whether the home pitch is plastic or grass is probably largely irrelevant, compared to the many other factors that affect a team's performance - especially in our case.
(NB: I'm writing this late at night and don't have the time or inclination to go back and check my figures before posting. So, if I've got any wrong, please let me know - but please be gentle!)
