Content uploaded by Alliance Kubayi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alliance Kubayi on Jul 04, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rpan20
International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/rpan20
Effect of the away goal rule on the technical
performance of football teams in the UEFA
Champions League
Alliance Kubayi & Joseph A. Stone
To cite this article: Alliance Kubayi & Joseph A. Stone (12 May 2024): Effect of the away
goal rule on the technical performance of football teams in the UEFA Champions League,
International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, DOI: 10.1080/24748668.2024.2354114
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2024.2354114
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa
UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.
Published online: 12 May 2024.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 234
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Eect of the away goal rule on the technical performance of
football teams in the UEFA Champions League
Alliance Kubayi
a
and Joseph A. Stone
b
a
Department of Sport, Rehabilitation and Dental Sciences, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria,
South Africa;
b
Academy of Sport and Physical Activity, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
ABSTRACT
Despite signicant debate surrounding UEFA’s removal of the away
goal rule in 2021, its impact on technical performance has not been
studied. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate how selected
technical performance indicators were impacted by the change in
the away goal rule during the UEFA Champions League. Data were
sourced via the Wyscout platform. The sample consisted of 112
UEFA Champions League games played during the knock-out
stages of the competition, in which 56 games were played during
seasons with an away goal rule (2017–2018 and 2018–2019) and 56
were played in seasons without an away goal rule (2021–2022 and
2022–2023). The ndings showed that the removal of the away goal
rule was accompanied by signicant (p < 0.05) decreases in average
pass length, long passes, progressive passes, passes to the nal
third, osides, duels, duels won, and counterattacks. Furthermore,
a signicant (p < 0.05) interaction was found between the away
goal rule and the leg of competition, aecting the number of
counterattacks with shots. Therefore, UEFA should take cognisant
of the present ndings when considering the use of the away goal
rule in future competitions.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 19 September 2023
Accepted 3 May 2024
KEYWORDS
Tactics; match location;
knock-out stages; passes;
counterattacks
1. Introduction
Match analysis research is increasingly being adopted in football as a tool to provide
coaches and players with crucial feedback and to inform their understanding of the most
effective tactical strategies to guide the coaching process (Pearson et al., 2023). For
example, studies have investigated various performance indicators related to passing
sequences, possession, playing tactics, and contextual variables in football (e.g.
Fernandez-Navarro et al., 2019; Gonzalez-Rodenas et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2022).
Beyond the coaching process, notational analysis can also be used to examine the effects
on the game of rule changes and whether these rule changes achieve the intended
modification (Eaves et al., 2008).
Rule changes are typically implemented for safety, the ethos of the game, game
development, commercial/media pressure, or entertainment (Arias et al., 2011;
CONTACT Alliance Kubayi kubayina@tut.ac.za Department of Sport, Rehabilitation and Dental Sciences,
Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT
https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2024.2354114
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any med-
ium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. The terms on which this article
has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
Williams et al., 2005). The focus of this study is the away goal rule introduced
into UEFA competitions in the 1965/1966 season. The away goal rule decided the
winner of a two-legged knockout match (i.e. two matches with a combined score
where one is played at home and one away) when the two teams had scored an
equal number of goals in aggregate. The rule granted victory to the team that
scored more goals when away, allowing them to progress to the next round of the
competition (UEFA, 2023).
This rule change was designed to encourage away teams to attack the home
team and reduce the benefit of the away team tactic of focusing on defending,
ideally resulting in a more active and entertaining match (Jost, 2021; Patterson,
2020; UEFA, 2021, 2023). However, recent years have seen calls to remove the
away goal rule. For instance, Arsene Wenger, the former manager of Arsenal,
made the following remarks after his team’s elimination from the 2014–2015
UEFA Champions League by AS Monaco: “This rule has been created in the
’60s to encourage the teams to attack away from home. Since that football has
changed. The weight of the away goal is too big today” (Lawrence, 2015).
Furthermore, in case of a tie after regulation time, the home team will be at
a disadvantage, as the away goals rule still applies if the second match goes into
extra time (Jost, 2021). For example, after losing 1–0 in the first match in Spain,
Liverpool F.C. hosted Atletico Madrid for the second match of their round of the
16 UEFA Champions League at Anfield on 11 March 2020. Liverpool scored in
the first half to put the game into extra time. During these extra 30 minutes,
Atletico Madrid scored three goals and won 4–2 in aggregate (Jost, 2021).
Nevertheless, Diego Simeone, the Atletico Madrid coach, offered an unexpected
response: “What I have to say, and will be saying at the next UEFA coaches’
meeting, is what I think is unfair. Today we had 30 minutes of extra time to score.
Liverpool never had that. We had 30 more minutes to score an away goal. The
rule favoured us today but it might go against us in the future. Liverpool had 30
minutes fewer to score an away goal. That’s wrong” (Chomyn, 2020).
To date, few published studies have examined the effect of removing the away
goal rule on technical performance parameters in football. For example, although
Waquil et al. (2020) examined the away goal rule in the Brazil Cup, their
observations considered only matches that included the application of the rule.
Furthermore, Bahamonde Birke’s and Bahamonde Birke (2023) recent examination
of elimination competition in football with and without the away goal implemen-
tation focused solely on match outcomes and goals scored. No data-led investiga-
tions have been conducted into how removing the away goal rule has impacted
match style or technical performance. To address this gap, this study draws on
objective analyses of key match and tactical variables to elucidate how the change
to the away goal rule in the UEFA Champions League has affected various
technical performance indicators. Based on the limited data to date (Bahamonde
Birke & Bahamonde Birke, 2023), it was hypothesised the removal of the away
goal rule would not change the number of goals scored by the away team.
However, it was anticipated that more goals would be scored during the second
leg of the competition than the first, regardless of rule changes.
2A. KUBAYI AND J. A. STONE
2. Methods
2.1. Match sample
The sample included 112 UEFA Champions League games played during the
knock-out stages of the UEFA Champions League − 56 games played during
seasons with an away goal rule (2017–2018 and 2018–2019) and 56 played in
seasons without the rule (2021–2022 and 2022–2023). Games played during the
COVID-19 pandemic (2019–2020 and 2020–2021) were excluded because some
games were played in empty stadiums or neutral locations. The final games of
each competition were removed from the sample because they were held in
neutral locations with one leg, meaning that the away goal rule did not apply.
This study received ethical approval from the institutional research ethics
committee.
2.2. Data source and technical variables
Data were sourced via the Wyscout platform, which gave the researcher permission to
use its data. The study’s technical performance variables included goals, shots, shots on
target, passes, percentage of accurate passes, average passes per possession, average pass
length, long passes, progressive passes, passes to the final third, percentage of ball
possession, fouls, offsides, yellow cards, defensive duels, duels won, counterattacks,
counterattacks with shots, corners, and free kicks. Data from “normal time” (i.e. 90
mins, plus stoppage time) were used in the sample. For matches that went into extra time
(i.e. 30 extra minutes of play), this period of play was excluded from the analysis.
Furthermore, the match outcome (i.e. win, lose, or draw) was based on the final score
reached within regular time (i.e. 90 min plus stoppage time), meaning that matches that
went into extra time and penalties were taken as draws. Table 1 shows the operational
definitions of these technical indicators. Inter-observer reliability using Intraclass corre-
lation was conducted to determine the reliability of the technical performance variables.
One match was randomly chosen, analysed and compared with the data from the
Wyscout platform. The values ranged from 0.93 to 1.00, demonstrating excellent
reliability.
2.3. Data analysis
Data were analysed using SPSS (version 28), and the statistical significance level was set
to p < 0.05. Descriptive statistics are reported as frequency counts, percentages, means,
and standard deviations. The Kolmogorov – Smirnov test indicated that none of the
technical performance indicators were normally distributed (p < 0.05). The Mann-
Whitney U test was used to assess how the technical performance indicators differed
between the competitions with and without the away goal rule. A generalised linear
model (GLM) was calculated to determine whether removing the away goal rule sig-
nificantly affected the teams’ technical performances. The model was specified as follows:
Y
i
= β
0i
+ β
1i
. Away goal rule + β
2i
. Match location + β
3i
. Away goal rule. Match
location + ε
i
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 3
Y
i
refers to all technical performance indicators. The away goal rule is a categorical
variable, assigned a value of one if the rule was implemented and zero if not. Similarly,
match location is a dichotomous variable that equalled one if the team was playing at
home and zero for away matches. Furthermore, as a game’s location may influence the
away goal rule’s impact on technical variables, the interaction term of these two inde-
pendent factors was included to indicate potential association. β
0i
denotes a constant
term, and β
1i,
β
2i,
and β
3i
represent the model coefficients that need to be estimated. ε
i
represents random error.
The second model was specified as follows:
In this model, match location was replaced by leg of competition (0 = first leg, 1 = second
leg). Each technical performance variable was initially fitted with a GLM using a Poisson
Table 1. Operational definitions of the technical variables (further information of each variable can be
found here: https://dataglossary.wyscout.com.).
Variable Definitions
Goals A goal scored as specified in law 10.1 of the IFAB Laws of the Game.
Shots An attempt towards the opposition’s goal with the intention of scoring.
Shots on target A shot is considered successful if it lands on the target of the goal. A shot that hits the
frame of the goal is not considered successful.
Number of passes An attempt to pass the ball to a teammate.
Accurate passes (%) A pass is considered successful if a teammate receives the next touch of the ball.
Average passes per
possession
The mean number of completed passes per possession.
Average pass length Mean pass length in metres.
Long passes (ground 45 or
high 25)
A ground pass longer than 45 metres or a high pass longer than 25 metres.
Progressive passes A forward pass that attempts to move a team significantly closer to the opponent’s goal.
A pass is considered progressive if the distance between the starting point and the next
touch is:
●at least 30 metres closer to the opponent’s goal if the starting and finishing points
are within a team’s own half
●at least 15 metres closer to the opponent’s goal if the starting and finishing points
are in different halves
●at least 10 metres closer to the opponent’s goal if the starting and finishing points
are in the opponent’s half
Passes to final third Any pass that originates outside the final third and where the next ball touch occurs
within the final third.
Fouls An offence committed by a player according to law 12 (1, 3) of the IFAB Laws of the Game.
Offsides As described in law 11 of the IFAB Laws of the Game. Only offsides that are whistled by
the referee and where the game is resumed with an indirect free kick awarded to the
opposite team are labelled as offsides.
Yellow cards Disciplinary action by the referee. Indicated by showing a yellow card according to law
12.3 of the IFAB Laws of the Game.
Duels A challenge between two players to gain control of the ball, progress with the ball, or
change its direction.
Defensive duels When a defender attempts to dispossess an opposition player to stop an attack.
Duels won If the player stopped the progression of the attacking player with the ball and did not
commit a foul, the duel is considered won.
Counterattacks A transition of possession from the opposing team, where the team is transitioning
quickly from a defensive to an attacking phase and trying to catch the opponent out of
their defensive shape.
Counterattacks with shots A counterattack (defined above) that ends in the team taking a shot at the goal.
Corners A corner kick as specified in law 17 of the IFAB Laws of the Game.
Free kicks The execution of a free kick according to law 13 of the IFAB Laws of the Game.
4A. KUBAYI AND J. A. STONE
distribution, and overdispersion was checked (Cameron & Trivedi, 1990). Goals, shots,
shots on target, passes, percentage of accurate passes, fouls, offsides, defensive duels,
duels won, counterattacks, counterattacks with shots, corners, free kicks, percentage of
accurate passes, average passes per possession, average pass length, long passes, progres-
sive passes, and passes to the final third were subjected to a negative binomial distribu-
tion. In contrast, yellow cards were subjected to a Poisson distribution.
3. Results
3.1. Match outcome
The outcomes of the first leg of matches were not affected by the away goal rule. The
home team won 43% of matches, lost 36%, and drew 21% (see Figure 1). However, during
leg two, there was an increase in the number of losses for the home team when the away
goal rule was in place (50%) compared to games when it was not. Five (8.9%) of the
matches played with the away goal rule in place decided which team would progress to
the next stage of the competition.
3.2. Technical performance indicators
Table 2 indicates the change in the technical performance variables between the two
conditions (i.e. when the away goal rule was and was not applied) during the UEFA
Champions League. The results show that the removal of the away goal rule was
followed by significant (p < 0.05) decreases in average pass length, long passes,
progressive passes, passes to the final third, offsides, defensive duels, duels, duels
won, and counterattacks. Table 3 presents the estimated results of the technical
variables’ GLM for the away goal rule, match location, and the interaction between
the two variables. No significant (p > 0.05) differences were found in any of the
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Away Goal: Yes Away Goal: No Away Goal: Yes Away Goal: No
Leg 1 Leg 2
Outcome (%)
Win Draw Lost
Figure 1. Home team outcome across the two legs and away goal implementation.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 5
technical performance variables. Table 4 shows the estimated results of the GLM for
the away goal rule, leg of competition, and the interaction between the two vari-
ables. The results showed significant (p < 0.05) differences in the numbers of
counterattacks and counterattacks with shots depending on the application of the
away goal rule. A further significant (p < 0.05) interaction was found between the
Table 2. Technical performance indicators between when there was away goal and no away goal rule.
Away goal No away goal Z Sig.
Goals 1.60 ± 1.47 1.31 ± 1.45 −1.70 0.90
Shots 12.12 ± 5.24 11.30 ± 4.98 −0.87 0.38
Shots on target 4.46 ± 2.62 4.05 ± 2.55 −1.31 0.19
Passes 480.99 ± 143.64 480.08 ± 130.12 −0.60 0.59
Accurate passes (%) 84.33 ± 4.51 85.20 ± 4.44 −1.80 0.07
Average passes per possession 4.65 ± 1.50 4.93 ± 1.40 −2.37 0.32
Average pass length 19.70 ± 1.58 18.48 ± 1.54 −5.39 0.00**
Long passes (ground 45, or high 25) 47.63 ± 12.23 40.84 ± 9.62 −4.21 0.00**
Progressive passes 83.15 ± 19.40 64.87 ± 14.18 −7.36 0.00**
Passes to final third 60.73 ± 19.70 49.90 ± 20.53 −4.27 0.00**
Fouls 11.69 ± 3.57 11.63 ± 3.65 −0.22 0.83
Offsides 2.34 ± 1.93 1.77 ± 1.53 −2.07 0.03*
Yellow cards 1.98 ± 1.22 1.95 ± 1.35 −0.55 0.58
Defensive duels 75.03 ± 14.14 64.35 ± 13.77 −5.15 0.00**
Duels 222.16 ± 33.21 190.13 ± 31.68 −6.60 0.00**
Duels won 105.78 ± 17.66 91.79 ± 16.66 −5.41 0.00**
Counterattacks 3.49 ± 2.57 2.37 ± 2.02 −3.44 0.00**
Counter attacks with shots 1.21 ± 1.34 0.91 ± 1.02 −1.55 0.12
Corners 4.78 ± 2.63 4.56 ± 2.88 −0.74 0.90
Free kicks 2.12 ± 1.56 2.06 ± 1.38 −0.14 0.38
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Table 3. The introduction of away goal rule on match location using GLM.
Goals Shots Shots on target Passes
Accurate
passes
Away goal rule (β
1
) 0.19 0.07 −0.02 0.02 −0.01
Match location (β
2
) 0.20 −0.27 0.10 0.10 0.01
Away goal rule*Match
location (β
3
)
0.01 0.01 0.21 −0.03 −0.00
Constant term (β
0
) 0.16 2.28** 1.35** 6.12** 4.43**
Long
pass
Passes to final
third
Progressive passes Average passes per
possession
Average pass
length
Away goal rule (β
1
) 0.13 0.22 0.25 0.04 0.02
Match location (β
2
) 0.01 0.19 0.08 0.19 0.03
Away goal rule*Match
location (β
3
)
0.04 −0.05 −0.01 −0.07 0.09
Constant term (β
0
) 3.70** 3.81** 4.13** 5.99** 7.41**
Fouls Offsides Yellow cards Defensive duels Duels
Away goal rule (β
1
) 0.03 0.22 0.11 0.12 0.16
Match location (β
2
) 0.03 0.14 0.00 −0.09 0.00
Away goal rule*Match
location (β
3
)
−0.04 0.10 −0.20 0.06 0.00
Constant term (β
0
) 2.44** 0.50* 0.66** 4.21** 5.25*
Duels
won
Counterattacks Counterattacks
with shots
Corner kicks Free kicks
Away goal rule (β
1
) 0.13 0.32 0.14 0.11 −0.08
Match location (β
2
) 0.01 −0.07 −0.32 0.31 0.25
Away goal rule*Match
location (β
3
)
0.03 0.13 0.30 −0.10 0.19
Constant term (β
0
) 4.51** 0.89** 0.05 1.35** 0.59**
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
6A. KUBAYI AND J. A. STONE
away goal rule and the leg of competition on the number of counterattacks with
shots.
As Figure 2 indicates, when the away goal rule was in play, counterattacks were used
more frequently overall and increased in number from leg one to two. Conversely,
playing without the away goal rule led to a decrease in counterattacks. Figure 2 provides
further descriptive indications of possible metrics which changed across conditions but
were not statistically different. For example, home teams scored the fewest goals when no
away goal rule was in place. While more goals were generally scored in the second leg
than the first, home teams in particular scored most goals in the second leg when the
away goal rule was in place. Home teams also took the most shots; this also increased in
the second leg. Away teams reduced their number of shots in the second leg when the
away goal rule was removed.
4. Discussion
This research has examined how the change to the away goal rule during the UEFA
Champions League has affected technical performance indicators. The findings
showed that the removal of the away goal rule resulted in decreases in average
pass length as well as numbers of long passes, progressive passes, passes to the final
third, offsides, duels, duels won, and counterattacks. Furthermore, a significant
interaction was found between the away goal rule and the leg of competition,
affecting the number of counterattacks with shots. Home teams won slightly more
matches in leg one regardless of whether the away goal rule was in place. However,
Table 4. The introduction of away goal rule on the leg of competition using GLM.
Goals Shots Shots on target Passes
Accurate
passes
Away goal rule (β
1
) 0.24 0.09 0.09 0.01 −0.01
Leg of competition (β
2
) −0.15 0.01 −0.26 0.02 0.01
Away goal rule* Leg of
competition (β
3
)
−0.09 −0.05 −0.01 −0.01 0.00
Constant term (β
0
) 0.05 2.42** 1.41** 6.16** 4.44**
Long
pass
Passes to final
third
Progressive passes Average passes per
possession
Average pass
length
Away goal rule (β
1
) 0.10 0.20 0.23 0.00 0.02
Leg of competition (β
2
) 0.01 0.01 0.02 −0.03 −0.10
Away goal rule* Leg of
competition (β
3
)
0.11 −0.00 0.03 0.00 0.09
Constant term (β
0
) 3.70** 3.91** 4.16** 6.11** 7.47**
Fouls Offsides Yellow cards Defensive duels Duels
Away goal rule (β
1
) 0.01 0.30 0.01 0.17 0.16
Leg of competition (β
2
) −0.02 −0.16 −0.09 0.03 0.02
Away goal rule* Leg of
competition (β
3
)
−0.01 −0.05 0.02 −0.03 −0.01
Constant term (β
0
) 2.46** 0.65** 0.71** 4.15** 5.24**
Duels
won
Counterattacks Counterattacks
with shots
Corner kicks Free kicks
Away goal rule (β
1
) 0.15 0.58** 0.67* 0.10 −0.04
Leg of competition (β
2
) 0.01 0.27 −0.32 0.11 −0.03
Away goal rule* Leg of
competition (β
3
)
−0.01 −0.36 0.75* −0.10 0.12
Constant term (β
0
) 4.51** 0.72** −0.34 1.46** 0.74**
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 7
the home team lost more often in the second leg when the away goal rule was in
place. Since the removal of the away goal rule, home teams now draw more often
than they lose. Bahamonde Birke and Bahamonde Birke (2023) similarly reported
that more goals were scored in the second leg of competition. The descriptive
findings here tentatively support that more goals were scored in the second leg
than in the first leg when the away goal rule was in place (see Figure 2), but this did
not reach statistical significance and thus should be interpreted with caution. This
study’s findings suggest that teams preferred to play more open, end-to-end games
and were more aggressive in their attacks to score goals when the away goal rule
was still in place.
The results demonstrate that the rule change has influenced some of the game’s
performance metrics. The removal of the away goal rule was accompanied by
a significant reduction in the average pass length, progressive passes, passes to the
Figure 2. Technical variables displayed as mean values per match calculated on away goal rule, leg,
and location.
8A. KUBAYI AND J. A. STONE
final third, and long passes. This suggests that teams adopted a more conservative
playing style and more often looked for shorter, less risky passes. Maintaining
possession of the ball through short passing is a more reliable means of moving the
ball into the opposing half to create goal-scoring opportunities than using less
accurate, long passes (Liu et al., 2015; Oberstone, 2009). Hence, without the urgency
to score more goals when playing away, teams may look for more controlled and
“safer” attack options. The reduction in the number of duels prompted by the
removal of the away goal rule indicates that players are taking fewer defensive actions.
This could be linked to the reduction in attacking passes, which results in less need
for defensive actions.
The number of counterattacks decreased after removing the away goal rule,
whereas counterattacks increased between leg one and leg two when the away goal
rule was in place. This finding suggests that the team trailing might “sit back” in the
first leg and hope for a better result in the second using a more positional attack style
in which teams perform more passes and circulate the ball more in width than in
depth, employing a more cadenced play in terms of intensity and ball speed circula-
tion. Whereas the team being outscored is forced to play aggressively in the second leg
to avoid the risk of elimination (Bahamonde Birke & Bahamonde Birke, 2023).
Similarly, the number of counterattacks decreased after the away goal rule was
removed. This seems to suggest that teams are not looking to “push” to win the
match via the away goal rule, but are rather more comfortable playing conservatively
towards extra time.
The significant decrease in the number of offsides since removing the away goal rule
may have been caused by a shift to a less attack-focused style of play that results in teams
having fewer chances to be in an offside position. The reduction in progressive and final
third passes would seem to confirm this. However, this finding could also be linked to the
introduction of Video Assisted Referees (VAR) into the Champions League, which may
have impacted the number of offside decisions taken (some incorrectly). For example,
previous research (Kubayi et al., 2022) has reported a decline in the number of offsides
called by referees following VAR implementation. The authors explained that this may be
because assistant referees have been instructed not to raise their flags for close offside
calls, allowing play to continue. This is because VAR can review an incident and reverse
a goal if an offside occurred before it (Kubayi et al., 2022). Players may also have adjusted
their play to account for VAR.
5. Strengths and limitations of the study and recommendations for future
research
Despite this study’s contribution to understanding how removing the away goal rule
has affected technical performance indicators in the UEFA Champions League, it
does have some limitations that should be considered when interpreting its findings.
The limited number of seasons covered by the study restricts the results’ generali-
sability. However, it should be noted that the away goal rule was in place until the
start of the 2021–2022 season. Future research could examine how technical and
tactical metrics may have changed over time from the introduction of the away goal
rule in 1965 to its removal in 2021. Furthermore, given the lack of research into the
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 9
removal of the away goal rule, there is no basis on which to compare the results of
this study with other recent investigations. Future studies should investigate how the
UEFA Champions League’s removal of the away goal rule has changed the game’s
physical demands. Other research approaches, such as mixed-method design (quan-
titative and qualitative methods), could be used to fully explore coaches’ and fans’
perceptions of the away goal rule to obtain further rich data and in-depth
information.
6. Conclusion
This study has investigated how technical performance metrics have changed following
the UEFA Champions League’s removal of the away goal rule. The results showed that
removing the away goal rule has impacted several of the game’s technical performance
parameters, leading to significant reductions in average pass length, long passes, pro-
gressive passes, passes to the final third, offsides, defensive duels, duels, duels won, and
counterattacks. The results demonstrate that removing the away goal rule has decreased
the technical performance of teams in the UEFA Champions League.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
ORCID
Alliance Kubayi http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8370-3056
Joseph A. Stone http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9861-4443
References
Arias, J. L., Argudo, F. M., & Alonso, J. I. (2011). Review of rule modification in sport. Journal of
Sports Science and Medicine, 10(1), 1.
Bahamonde Birke, F. J., & Bahamonde Birke, R. A. (2023). About the “away goals rule” in
association football. Does scrapping the rule increase the fairness of the game? Journal of
Sports Economics, 24(3), 310–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/15270025221128957
Cameron, A. C., & Trivedi, P. K. (1990). Regression-based tests for overdispersion in the Poisson
model. Journal of Econometrics, 46(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(90)90014-K
Chomyn, N. (2020, March 12). Diego Simeone critical of away goal rule that gave Atletico Madrid
Edge.
Eaves, J. S., Hughes, D. M., & Lamb, L. K. (2008). Assessing the impact of the season and rule
changes on specific match and tactical variables in professional rugby league football in the
United Kingdom. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 8(3), 104–118. https://
doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2008.11868452
Fernandez-Navarro, J., Fradua, L., Zubillaga, A., & McRobert, A. P. (2019). Evaluating the
effectiveness of styles of play in elite soccer. International Journal of Sports Science &
Coaching, 14(4), 514–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954119855361
Gonzalez-Rodenas, J., Mitrotasios, M., Aranda, R., & Armatas, V. (2020). Combined effects of
tactical, technical and contextual factors on shooting effectiveness in European professional
soccer. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 20(2), 280–293. https://doi.org/
10.1080/24748668.2020.1743163
10 A. KUBAYI AND J. A. STONE
Jost, P. J. (2021). Competitive balance and the away goals rule during extra time. Journal of Sports
Economics, 22(7), 823–863. https://doi.org/10.1177/15270025211019082
Kubayi, A., Larkin, P., & Toriola, A. (2022). The impact of video assistant referee (VAR) on match
performance variables at men’s FIFA World Cup tournaments. Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering & Technology, 236(3), 187–191.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1754337121997581
Lawrence, A. (2015, March 19). Arsène Wenger calls for away goals rule to be scrapped in
Champions League. The Gurdian. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/mar/19/arsene-
wenger-away-goals-scrappedchampions-league
Liu, H., Yi, Q., Giménez, J. V., Gómez, M. A., & Lago- PeñPeñAs, C. (2015). Performance profiles
of football teams in the UEFA Champions League considering situational efficiency.
International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 15(1), 371–390. https://doi.org/10.
1080/24748668.2015.11868799
Oberstone, J. (2009). Differentiating the top English premier league football clubs from the rest of
the pack: Identifying the keys to success. Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, 5(3). https://
doi.org/10.2202/1559-0410.1183
Patterson, C. W. (2020). Goal scoring in European soccer: Tournament structure and home field
advantage. Biomex Sports Science.
Pearson, A., Webb, T., Milligan, G., & Miller-Dicks, M. (2023). The use of video feedback as a facet
of performance analysis: An integrative review. International Review of Sport & Exercise
Psychology, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2023.2235700
UEFA. (2021). Abolition of the away goals rule in all UEFA club competitions. https://www.uefa.
com/insideuefa/mediaservices/mediareleases/news/026a-1298aeb73a7a-5b64cb68d920-1000–
abolition-of-the-away-goals-rule-in-all-uefa-club-competitions/
UEFA. (2023). https://www.uefa.com/returntoplay/news/026a-1298aeb73a7a-5b64cb68d920-
1000–abolition-of-the-away-goals-rule-in-all-uefa-club-competi/
Wang, S. H., Qin, Y., Jia, Y., Igor, K. E., & Constantinou, A. C. (2022). A systematic review about
the performance indicators related to ball possession. Public Library of Science ONE, 17(3),
e0265540. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265540
Waquil, A. P., Horta, E., & Moraes, J. C. (2020). Home advantage and away goals rule: An analysis
from Brazil cup. Journal of Sports Analytics, 6(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.3233/JSA-200370
Williams, J., Hughes, M., & O’Donoghue, P. (2005). The effect of rule changes on match and ball in
play time in rugby union. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 5(3), 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2005.11868333
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 11
