Summary and Fast Informame
Listen to this article
Audio generated with Google
They recently announced in Spain that the League would take one of its games to Miami. The Villareal – Barcelona match would be played at the Hard Rock Stadium on December 20. The central idea is to universalize the league and sell it better in North American territory. In the absence of UEFA and FIFA approval, it seemed an innovative idea, without greater impact, more than the commercial. Surprise or not, the rest of the league teams reject the idea. Because?
When the news came out, the president of Villarreal, Fernando Roig showed his happiness for the event. With 12 yellow submarine soccer schools in the United States, the game seems an ideal way to promote the brand there. He even affirmed that, since Villareal would be local, Miami could go the fan who wanted it for free.
The next day, however, Real Madrid rejected in the most energetic tone possible such possibility. It was not just Madrid, soon practically all clubs disagreed with that possibility. Undoubtedly, part of that rejection is the envy that causes it to be another and not they who have that possibility. This is particularly true for Real Madrid that for years has sought to have a greater presence in the North American market.
But there are other background reasons, which at least partially prove the opponents of the idea. They argue that the League is misrepresented if they do not play all of local and visitor to each other. They would pass out, of course, if they knew that in the Colombian league there are no round trip matches, but only of the first semester.
The advantage of playing local is well known. Advantage that, although it has been falling, it is still important. In England, there in the middle of the 20th century, local teams earned between 55% and 60% of the matches. That figure has fallen to less than half of the matches. Local teams in the five major European leagues earn around 45% of the matches. Considering the draws (around 25%) the victory of the visitor is still a minority.
Since the 2000/01 season, Villarreal has played, for League, 24 local games against Barcelona. He won 33% and tied 29% of them. Taking into account the strength of Barça, it is natural that their numbers are lower than the average. They are, however, important, 1 in 3 games is won by Villarreal.
Understanding that the public plays a relevant role, in addition to the fact that in Miami both are visitors at the facilities, it seems natural that Madrid votes against letting Barça play with public in favor, and without the pressure of the trip to the city of the rival. The probability that Barcelona loses in the ceramic stadium seems greater than it does in the hard rock, where practically the entire stadium would be Barça. White complaints are justified.
🚴🏻⚽🏀 The latest in sports?: Everything you should know about world sport is in the spectator
