Fair play and utility maximization Coen de Heus Sho Takaki I.

Abstract Over the years Football Association's (Soccer) governing bodies have put an emphasis on fair play. This concept of fair play stems from the early stages of professionalism to ensure that athletes participated for the right reasons and to ensure that gamblers weren't cheated out of their money. Currently fair play embodies proper conduct on the field, which is ranked by a point system in the English Premier League. This also begs the question whether fair play leads to single game results. This study shows that the effect of wage on single game outcome is amplified by fair play.

II. Literature Review The application of economic thinking to the business of sports has been increasing in the last few years. While the economics of North American sports like baseball, basketball, and American football has been analyzed since the 1950s, the economics of soccer are still in their infancy. Despite the fact millions of fans go watch soccer matches every week, academic economists have devoted relatively little attention to professional soccer (Torgler and Schmidt 2007). European soccer leagues and competitions tend to give out awards for fair play. When soccer is analyzed in an economic sense, it usually focuses on utility maximization. Over the course of years the European sports model has been named as a utility maximizing model, where profits are minimized, and increased revenues are generally sought to increase spending on player wages (Sloane 1969; Kesenne 2007). All of this is done to win games. So if the European clubs

put an emphasis on winning over profit generation, does that mean that fair play leads to more wins?

Fair play is the attribute of sportsmen in games as following the rules consistently and consciously. The term of fair play in sport has its origin in ancient ages Olympics, middle ages knight tournaments, and socio cultural structure of 19th centuries England. It originally has something to do with amateur rules. The Rugby College director Thomas Arnold recognized sport as a motivation tool to bring up students. These students managed to spread the fair play term by going different colleges and countries. Fair play does not accept the unfair advantages to save opportunity equality with the understanding that a competitor is not a rival but a partner having the same right to play the game. Under the fair play spirit, it is the desire of sportsmen to be at the same conditions with their competitors, refusing the benefit from their bad conditions (Goral 2008).

Violence in sports can be defined as a physical assault or physically harmful actions by players that happen in a sports context and cause physical pain or injury to others, such as players, coaches, game officials, where such harmful actions bear no direct relationship to the rules and associated competitive goals of the sport. There are a number of factors leading players to be violence in games, such as questionable calls made by the officials, players frustration, and fans who heckle players (Goral 2008).

The lack of sportsmanship has been a serious problem in in youth sports. It is claimed that participants in youth sports can develop personal qualities like fair play, which help operate in

and contribute to society, they are supposed to experience both positive and negative experiences. Negative experiences include low morality reasoning, aggression, violence, and poor sportsmanship (Wells et al. 2005; Holt 2008). It is believed that negative experiences contribute to children ceasing participation in the sport. As a matter of fact, 70% out of 20 million participants quit before reaching the age of 13 every year. These children who drop out are not likely to participate in physically active lifestyles. Inactive lifestyles have a possibility of increasing the risk of developing health problems such as obesity, Type II diabetes, and limiting the quality of their lives. Nowadays, a win-at-all costs atmosphere is present in youth sports. Arguably, youth sport leagues have been too competitive. Nearly half of children in youth sports have an experience of being yelled at or insulted (Wells et al. 2005). Children tend to try and imitate their favorite players when they see them on TV. For instance, when they watch professional players slide tackling dangerously, they learn it from that play. Hence, professional players' behavior would be important to reinforce the fair play behavior (Chastain and Averbuch 2004; Goral 2008).

Social disorder relating to soccer has been present since the end of nineteenth century. Hooliganism though began being perceived as a major social problem in the UK and other European countries in the 1960s (Reilly and Williams 2003). Although there are hooligan groups in other countries, including Netherlands, Germany, Denmark and Belgium, these countries are not at as dangerous level as it is in England. (Goral 2008). Soccer hooliganism includes not only the swearing and unruly behavior but also more serious pitch invasions, the fighting on and around soccer grounds and clashes with the police in the centers of cities or in transit to games. It can be described that hooligans seek social dramas, giving them a sense of excitement, honor,

and belonging. They want to experience something they cannot find in everyday life, such as sharing emotions of joy and sadness, excitement and risk (Reilly and Williams 2003).

After the disaster in 1989, where 96 Liverpool fans were killed in a crush on the terraces and after the publication of the Taylor Report, hooliganism was actively combated with success. A new football disorder act, improved stadium environment, and management of crowds helped the English Premier League eradicate the problem of hooliganism and increase attendance. The problem of hooliganism is still present, but the experience of fans today is definitely different from that of 15 years ago (Reilly and Williams 2003).

It is historically shown that soccer fans tend to become emotional about soccer at stadium. Hence, it is predicted that judgments of referees that they do not think right might cause them to behave unethically. Referees are inclined to behave differently, depending on how players and coaches approach to them. When a player approached to referees in an amenable fashion, a referee would become quite reasonable. For instance, if a player comes up and politely asks the referee to explain the call, he or she would be likely to answer the question. On the other hands, when players approached in an unacceptable way, referees would not be interested in talking to players and might simply walk away to avoid the conversation with them. For example, if a player uses some nasty language, a referee will probably give the player a card. Depending on how players approach to referees, the referees responses would vary (1999).

Without doubt, soccer can be considered to be one of the most aggressive sports both on and off the pitch. Violence in soccer reaps publicity through spectators and the media, and some types of

aggressive behavior are sometimes applauded and encouraged. Television programs and newspapers commentators tend to highlight violence on the pitch in an effort to attract more viewer and readers. It is known that newspapers try to create melodramatic headlines and brand soccer games between rival countries as a replication of previous wars. Some fans actually look forward to clashes of players on the pitch. Then these forms of aggressive behavior reinforce the perception of a fierce and brutal game. Studies have shown that there is an increase in cautions and dismissals from play in the English soccer leagues. The average number of illegitimate physical tackles in professional soccer league is about 30 per game. If the number of fouls is multiplied by 16,000 (the number of professional games governed by the Football Association in 2002), it is estimated that there would be about 480,000 incidents per year (Reilly and Williams 2003).

Fair play is an important concept for FIFA and the UEFA, the latter even using it in its statutes. Fair play to these institutions is the promotion of equality in opportunity, integrity of the game, and even opposing the pursuit for winning at any price (Renson 2009). This focus on fair play stems from the mid to late 1800s when sports in England were predominantly amateur. It was thought that the higher purposes of the sport could only be served if a player did not earn money. When a player did not play for money, he had less incentives to purposely lose the game. This of course ensured that gamblers knew that they would not be cheated out of the money they gambled on sports (Renson 2009).

When sports grew in popularity, professionalism started to prevail. This was because many athletes did not have the funds to play a sport without being rewarded for it, especially since

playing and practicing sports took time away from their employers, thus risking being fired. Soccer became professional in the late 1800s, other sports only became professionalized in the late 1980s. At the same time gambling on games did not let up (in fact the data of this study are from a gambling database). It was thus critical for gamblers to assure that players kept on playing for ultimate purposes of winning, without giving in to outside pressures (Renson 2009).

It is often mentioned that cheating started as early as the Greeks, cheating however was not one of the virtues that the British educational institutes were aiming for in their public schools. At these institutions fair play was not yet know in the way we know it today. Fair play was not so much the emphasis on ethical play, rather it was the focus on when enough was enough (Renson 2009). This is still somewhat reflected in the fair play statement by UEFA that it is not about winning at all costs. Critically one can say it is just about winning.

The problem with sports is that because of the need for highly standardized actions across a group of individual, in effect playing within the rules, leads to the possibility of a single player to gain from not adhering to these rules. By outperforming other individuals, or even focusing on individual goals rather than team goals it is possible to reap more gains for a single player. When these economic rents are available, it can be expected that individuals will try to capture these. And if the way to capture these would mean cheating, it becomes a cost benefit analysis. In this analysis the individual will assess what is the likelihood of success and failure, and what the cost of failure and the gains of success would be. If this is significantly positive to the individual, one will take the risk, and to aim for the benefits not yet captured by the general market (Preston and Szymanski 2003). It is thus logical that athletes will cheat in sports.

Eber (2009) uses a modified prisoners dilemma model to show that if fair play is instilled in athletes, the use of doping will be less. The value that society puts on fair play is therefore critically important. The prisoners dilemma suggests that if signals reach an athlete that the opposition will not play fair, then the athlete is also less likely to play fair. This is in contrast with Maening (2009) who suggests that level playing fields can only be achieved by excessive financial penalties on the athlete that gets caught cheating. Most studies so far have analyzed cheating and fairplay as a prisoners dilemma, where the utility for the players lies solely in winning (Eber 2009). What both Maennig (2009) and Eber (2009) agree upon is that this utility has to be changed in order to find the desired effect of competition in athletes.

It is critical for sports that fair play is promoted consistently, for fans and gamblers alike. Most people understand that behavior on the field does not reflect behavior of the field (Huizinga 1950). However for the core foundations of a sport to compete can be tarnished by unfair or cheating competition. It seems that fans have a certain idea of which is unfair, and which is being smart with the rules. The risk with allowing cheating play is that is pushes this boundary to a position where it might fundamentally tarnish players so that fans lose interest (Leaman 2007). It thus makes economic sense for governing bodies to allow some minor unfair play, but in general promote fair play in order to maintain or increase fan interest into the game.

However it would be close minded to look at the relations between winning and fair play on its own. The labor market for football players in Europe is fairly liberal, with minimal interventions by the particular leagues (Gerrard 2010). This leads to a gap between those able to spend on

international class players and players of a lesser advantage. In an efficient market it is to be expected that the wealthiest team can hire the best players, and the best players combined should therefore lead to wins. In the English Premier League it appears that this relationship holds, though it is important to mention that an efficient use of resources is important as well (Gerrard 2010). This efficient use of resources could indicate the skill of coaches, or other parts of management.

Our concept of fair play is often related to the skills that we want to aesthetically see in sports. When one looks at cheating as merely breaking the rules of the game, then there are many behaviors that are perfectly rational for an athlete to do, yet the audience would not want to see this behavior (Leaman 2007). It can therefore be expected that rules slope towards stimulating fair play. Most importantly though is to state that fair play is deeply rooted in the eye of the beholder.

An influence in soccer and fair play that has not been researched enough is the referee. Referees are influential in fair play in multiple aspects. The fair play standings used in this study are based on the free kicks, yellow, and red cards given. These are all decision by the referee and assistants. It will be fairly difficult to establish whether referees are susceptible to teams that they perceive as fair. Still, this study can give some insight on whether a referee might be influenced by the perceived fair play of a team.

Referees naturally have a high variability in most of the measures that can naturally be thought of, such as distances ran and fouls called in a game (Weston et al. 2011). However this variability

in data does not only suggest a difficulty in measuring referees, it could also indicate that some of the variation is not accounted for by current indicator variables. Most of the current research into referees has looked at physiological inputs (Weston et al. 2011; Ghasemi et al. 2011). Fair play might be a factor in the referees state of mind, thus a psychological factor. These physiological measurements are important, as especially in the last 15 minutes of a half these can be critical as to whether a referee makes the right decision (De Oliveira, Orbetelli, and Neto 2011).

Recently though more research has been done into the psychology of referees. Referees in soccer are affected by their expertise, but also their expectation of their own performance (Catteeuw, et al. 2010). Furthermore referees seem to be affected by the size of the players involved (Van Quaquebeke and Giessner 2010). But one of the most interesting effects found is a relation between referee accuracy and home crowds. It appears that in neutral locations, crowd noise has a direct effect on the severeness of penalties judged by referees. At non-neutral sights this effect does not change dramatically (Unkelbach and Memmert 2010). So while home advantage has always been part of sports, it apparently strengthened by referee decisions. We suggest a similar influence for fair play. While fair play in itself may or may not present a team with an advantage, it may lead to improved perceptions of the referee, which could then lead to more positive referee decisions, and to better performance.

In analyzing which team is better, or should win a game, in soccer, lately the focus has shifted from the available statistics to more dynamic approaches. Geenens (2010) suggests a semiparametric test, which should predict the winner over a large number of games and

outcomes. For this study we argue to stay with goals as the dependent variable. Goal difference generally does indicate who is stronger, specifically higher goal differences show bigger differences between teams (Geenens 2010). Geenens (2010) argues specifically that low scoring games might be affected by events of chance. We argue that part of this chance factor is at least partially explained by the fair play reputation of a team. Finally it is suggested that goal difference is an unbiased indicator, so while at times the less fair team will win, other times, this will be negated by a larger difference for the fair team. Goal difference should therefore still be seen as the best indicator of team performance.

III. Methods In European soccer the disparity among teams can be relatively large and stable over time (Gerard 2010). A longstanding and proven factor in predicting game outcomes is the disparity in wage between teams. Furthermore the disparity in the year ending league standings can be expected to be an unbiased predictor of game outcomes. Together these two variables can be expected to be a significant model of single game outcomes. In this study it is argued that fair play mediates this relation. Thus the suggestion is that fair play affects the strengths of the relation, but not necessarily the direction of the relation (Baron and Kenny 1986). For a mediator model to hold, the direct effect, between wage and standings on single game outcomes should be significant when tested in a regression, but non-significant when the fair play variable is added.

The data used contains all single game outcomes from the English Premier League 2009-2010 season. Fair play standings were used as an aggregate indicator of team fair play. It was specifically chosen not to use single game scores of fair play, as this study is looking at the

reputation of a team as 'fair' on the outcome of games. Finally wage is used as another indicator of team strength, taking that generally wealthier teams should win more games (Gerard 2010). A total of 380 games was played over the season, each of the 20 premier league teams played 38 games, home and away against all other teams. As single game outcome, goals scored was used. The suggestion is that a bigger difference in goals generally is a better result, even though the difference between one goal and five still yields the same result, three points in the league table. The data was tested in six regression models. The three general models were the general outcome, the outcome for the home team, and the outcome for the away team. These three models were then first tested on a direct effect, and subsequently on the effect of the mediator.

The fair play variable is the only variable which might need a little more explanation. Fair play points are constructed for each team, for each game, throughout the season. The fair play standings are an aggregation of fair play scores for the games played. The teams are striving for the highest score possible. Points are deducted for rule infractions, specifically those penalized by a yellow or red card. Other factors pertaining fair play are the respect towards referee and towards opponents. A final factor is the behavior of those not on the pitch. Each game a team can earn a maximum of 40 points. For the season the teams ranged between 1303 points and 1159 points, with an average of 1234.4 (SD = 41.6). This meant that teams on average gained 32.48 points out of the 40 points maximum. The mean wage for a team was 61.9 Million Pounds (SD = 38.3). IV. Result The first regression analysis revealed a significant relationship between the independent variable (difference wage) and the dependent variable (goal difference), F (1, 378) = 146.21, p > .001. So,

there was a direct causal relationship between wage difference and goal difference. This model could explain about 28% of variance in goal difference. When the fair play variable was added, it was shown that the regression model including the fair play variable was still significant, F (2, 377) = 80.77, p > .001. The fair play variable was significant, and improved the model to explain 30% variance in goal difference (Table 1). Yet the wage difference remained significant, so indirect causal relationship between the fair play variable and the dependent variable could not be found.

Unstandardize Standardized Model t d Coefficients Coefficients B Std. Error (Constant) ,624 1 Difference Wage ,019 ,624 (Constant) 2 Difference Wage Difference Fair Play Table 1: Regression (Difference) ,016 ,005 Beta ,084 ,002 ,083 ,002 ,002 ,453 ,163 ,528 7,431 12,092 7,532 9,338 3,366 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,001 Sig.

The second regression analysis was conducted by using data regarding home teams. The result of home teams also revealed a significant relationship between the wage variable and the goal variable, F (1, 378) = 85.16, p > .001. So, there was a direct causal relationship between wage and goals of home teams. This model could explain about 18% of variance in goals of home teams. When the fair play variable was added, it was shown that the regression model including the fair play variable remained significant, F (2, 377) = 43.40, p > .001. However, the improvement from the first model to second model was not significant. The fair play barely

helped the second regression model explain about 19% of variance in goals of home teams. In fact, the result showed that the fair play variable was not a significant predictor (Table 2). Therefore, indirect causal relationship between the fair play variable and the dependent variable could not be found.

Unstandardize Standardized Model t d Coefficients Coefficients B Std. Error (Constant) ,655 1 Home Wage ,017 -2,149 2 (Constant) Home Wage Home Fair Play Table 2: Regression (Home Teams) ,016 ,002 Beta ,132 ,002 2,278 ,002 ,002 ,399 ,064 ,429 4,971 9,228 -,944 7,635 1,233 ,000 ,000 ,346 ,000 ,218 Sig.

The third regression analysis was conducted by using data regarding away teams. Again, there was a significant relationship between the wage variable and goals, F (1, 378) = 30.02, p > .001. So, there was a direct causal relationship between wage and goals of away teams as well. Yet this model can explain only about 7% of variance in goals of away teams. When the fair play variable was added, it was shown that the regression model including the fair play variable remained significant, F (2, 377) = 19.39, p > .001. The fair play variable was significant, but it helped the second model explain only about 9% of variance in goals of away teams (Table 3). Hence, indirect causal relationship between the fair play variable and the dependent variable could not be found in this model like the other models.

Unstandardize Standardized Model t d Coefficients Coefficients B Std. Error (Constant) ,569 1 Away Wage ,008 -4,687 2 (Constant) Away Wage Away Fair Play Table 3: Regression (Away Teams) ,006 ,004 Beta ,108 ,001 1,841 ,002 ,002 ,199 ,158 ,271 5,296 5,479 -2,546 3,598 2,860 ,000 ,000 ,011 ,000 ,004 Sig.

As explained above, the fair play variable did not play a significant role as a mediator for all tested models because the direct relationship between the wage variable and the dependent variable always existed, although the fair play variable was significant in all the models except home teams model.

A final regression was done to analyze the relation between wage and fair play. This model showed a high correlation between the variables (r = .46) and a high variance explained by the independent variable on the dependent variable (R2 = .21). The model fit the data significantly (F = 101.21, p < .01). For an increase of 1 million pound of difference in wage between the teams, the difference in fair play went up by a half point (B = .50, p < .01). A half point may not seem much but as the difference in wage between the richest and poorest team is about 150 million pounds, this leads to an expected 75 points difference in fair play score.

V. Discussion It was suggested that fair play mediates the relation between wage and single game performance. The multiple regression analysis could not provide evidence for such a relationship. Rather it

suggests that fair play is part of the model. While the model did not hold as expected, it does show some effect of fair play reputation on individual game outcomes. It was previously known that wage has a direct effect on games, it appears that fair play strengthens this effect.

When looking at the differential in goals, which is used as a predictor of game performance, the model gave the strongest significance. It was suggested that in addition to the difference cause by wage, each fair play point difference led to .005 extra goals differential per game. Again this difference might seem fairly futile, however consider the following. There is about a 144 points difference in the fair play standings between the top team and the bottom team, this means an added .72 goals differential per game. Home teams in 2010 on average scored .62 more goals than their opponents. The difference found in this study might help a fair team minimize the home field advantage. As football is a game where a single decision could influence the game, such a difference is huge, and could lead to an amount of extra league points per year. This study thus suggests that fair play is an influential part of the game in the English Premier League.

As for home teams, the fair play variable did not work as a mediator. Furthermore, the fair play variable was not significant in the model for home teams. Yet the direct causal relationship between the wage variable and goal variable did exist in this model as well. The equation of the regression model was: y (goal) = 0.0017*x (wage) + 0.655. If you put actual wage data into this equation, you would get a 0.876 goal score for the lowest salary team (Burnley) and a 3.39 goal score for the highest salary team (Chelsea). As this case illustrates, there is a huge difference in goal between the highest wage team and lowest wage team. Teams with high wage are able to score many goals at their home stadiums. Again, however, the fair play variable did not give

effect on this model, since the variable was not significant. Hence it can be said that goal of home teams is primarily decided by wage of teams, which is an indication of their talent level.

As for away teams, there was a significant direct causal relationship between the wage variable and the goal variable, but the fair play variable did not play a mediator role in this model as well. As shown in the previous paragraph, we could find an equation for away teams: y (goal) = 0.008*x (wage) + 0.569. When putting actual wage into this model, you will get 0.673 for the lowest salary team (Burnley) and 1.905 for the highest salary team (Chelsea). There is still an effect of wage on goal, but the effect of wage for away teams was much lower than the effect for home teams. So, it can be argued that wage amplifies home team advantage. Yet, unlike the model of home teams, the fair play variable showed significance when the variable was added in the model for away teams. The coefficient value was just 0.004, but we cannot underestimate the impact of fair play on goal, considering that the highest fair play point was 1303 (Arsenal). For instance, Arsenal would be able to get a goal of 0.525, while Sunderland (lowest fair play point) would get a goal of -0.051. Hence, it seems that fair play reputation can lead to more goals on the road.

A final interesting effect was found between wage and fair play. Teams with a higher wage have in general a higher standing in fair play. For future studies this would be an interesting area to study. Anecdotal evidence from European television commentators will suggest that this is because low wage teams are less talented, and therefore will try to be more physical with the talented team. The suggestion is that for talent to flourish it should be less of a contact game, and more of a finesse game. However the question here should also be the impact on referees. It is

clear that the messages in the media consistently show which teams are rich, and thus should have better players. Referees, no matter how well trained could thus subconsciously be protecting the talented and richer players from their poorer opponents. Future research should focus on referee effects and analyze what influences their subconscious decisions.

VI. Conclusion Our regression analysis indicated that fair play contributed to single game outcomes in the English Premier League, but not within the proposed mediator model. Rather our analysis suggests it should be part of any predictor model, just as wage is used to predict game outcomes. It seems that the beta coefficient value is small, but the effect of fair play on single game outcomes is actually significant for the English Premier League. For home games, fair play was not a significant factor, but for away games, the fair play variable was significant. This might suggest that fair play is a way to negate home field advantage. Furthermore it was found that teams with a higher wage have a better standing in fair play. It is thus worth looking at what influences referees subconscious decisions since it is possible that referees are subconsciously protecting talented and richer players from those in poorer teams. Finally we recommend an analysis of fair play using multiple years of data, as this study focused on only one season.

VII. References Catteeuw, Peter; Bart Gilis; Jose-Maria Garcia-Aranda; Fernando Tresaco; Johan Wagemans and Werner Helsen. Offside decision making in the 2002 and 2006 FIFA World Cups. Journal of Sports Sciences, 2010, 28(10), pp. 1027-1032.

Chastain, Brandi and Gloria Averbuch. It's not about the bra: play hard, play fair, and put the fun back into competitive sports. HarperCollins, 2004.

De Oliveira, Marcus Cesar; Rogerio Orbetelli and Turibio Leite de Barros Neto. Call Accuracy and Distance from the Play: A Study with Brazilian Soccer Referees. International Journal of Exercise Science, 2001, 4(1), pp. 287-295.

Eber, Nicolas. Doping and Fair Play. Economic Analysis and Policy, December 2009, 39(3), pp. 345-347.

Geenens, Gery. Who Deserved the 2008-2009 Belgian Football Champion Title? A Semiparametric Answer. Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, 2010, 6(4), art.4.

Gerrard, Bill. Analysing Sporting Efficiency Using Standardised Win Cost: Evidence from the FA Premier League, 1995 2007. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 2010, 5(1). pp. 13-35.

Ghasemi, Abdollah; Maryam Momeni; Ebrahim Jafarzadehpur; Meysam Rezaee and Hamid Taheri. Visual Skills Involved in Decision Making by Expert Referees. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2011, 112(1), pp. 161-171.

Goral, Mehmet. Violence and fair play in sport. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 2008, 5 (6), 502-513.

How to Talk to the Soccer Official. Coach & Athletic Director, 1999, 69(5), pp. 44.

Holt, Nicholas L. Positive youth development through sport. Psychology Press, 2008.

Huizinga, Johan. Homo Ludens. Beacon, 1950.

Kesenne, Stefan. The Peculiar International Economics of Professional Football in Europe. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, July 2007, 54(3), pp. 388399.

Leaman, Oliver. Cheating and Fair Play in Sports. In Ethics in Sports, ed. William J. Morgan. Human Kinetics, 2007.

Maening, Wolfgang. Pecuniary Disincentives in the Anti-Doping Fight. Economic Analysis and Policy, December 2009, 39(3), pp. 349-351.

Preston, Ian and Stefan Szymanski. Cheating in contests. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 2003, 19, pp. 612-62.

Reilly, Thomas, and A. Mark Williams. Science and soccer. Psychology Press, 2003.

Renson, Roland. Fair Play: Its Origins and Meanings in Sport and Society. Kinesiology, 2009, 41(1), pp. 5-18.

Sloane, Peter J. The labour market in professional football. British Journal of Industrial Relations, July 1969, 7(2), pp. 181199.

Torgler, Benno and Sascha L. Schmidt. What Shapes Players' Performance in Soccer? Empirical Findings from a Panel Analysis. Applied Economics, 2007, 39, pp. 2355-2369.

Unkelbach, Christian and Daniel Memmert. Crowd Noise as a Cue in Referee Decisions Contributes to the Home Advantage. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 2010, 32, pp. 483-498.

Van Quaquebeke, Niels and Steffen R. Giessner. How Embodied Cognitions Affect Judgments: Height-Related Attribution Bias in Football Foul Calls. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 2010, 32, pp. 3-22.

Wells, Mary Sara; Gary D. Ellis; Karen P. Paisley and Skye G. Arthur-Banning. Development and Evaluation of a Program to Promote Sportsmanship in Youth Sports. Journal of Park & Recreation Administration, 2005, 23(1), pp. 1-17.

Weston, M.; B. Drust; G. Atkinson and W. Gregson. Variability of Soccer Referees' Match Performance. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 2011, 32(2), pp. 190-194.