Search

Several recent studies suggest that the home advantage, that is, the benefit competitors accrue from performing in familiar surroundings, was—at least temporarily—reduced in games played without spectators due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. These games played without fans during the Pandemic have been dubbed 'ghost games'. However, the majority of the research to date focus on soccer and no contributions have been provided for indoor sports, where the effect of the support of the fans might have a stronger impact than in outdoor arenas. In this paper, we try to fill this gap by investigating the effect of ghost games in basketball with a special focus on the possible reduction of the home advantage due to the absence of spectators inside the arena. In particular, we test (i) for the reduction of the home advantage in basketball, (ii) whether such reduction tends to disappear over time, (iii) if the bookmakers promptly adapt to such structural change or whether mispricing was created on the betting market. The results from a large data set covering all seasons since 2004 for the ten most popular and followed basketball leagues in Europe show, on the one hand, an overall significant reduction of the home advantage of around 5% and no evidence that suggests that this effect has been reduced at as teams became more accustomed to playing without fans; on the other hand, bookmakers appear to have anticipated such effect and priced home win in basketball matches accordingly, thus avoiding creating mispricing on betting markets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using a five-year data set including the crowd-less games in the 2020 English, Spanish, Italian, and German first division football leagues and multivariate regression analysis, this paper estimated how fans influence home field advantage. Consistent with previous studies, the estimates showed that in games with crowds, referees gave fewer fouls, yellow cards, and red cards but more penalty kicks to the home team than to the away team. Removing the fans from the stadium eliminated these home advantages coming through referee decisions. Removing fans reduced yellow and red cards given to away teams but did not change cards given to home teams. There was not a similar asymmetry for fouls and penalty kicks. These results suggest that crowds influenced referee judgments about how severe an infraction was more than they influenced decisions about whether a foul occurred. The addition of VAR had little impact on referee decisions and no effect on the home advantage in goal differential. Despite the home bias in referee decisions when crowds were in the stadium, fouls, cards, and penalty kicks played a relatively small role in determining home advantage in game outcomes and most of the home advantage remained after fans were removed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]