• Handball Game Rules

Am I my brother’s keeper? Nikola and Luka together on the court, and in court!John Ryan has been a keen follower of the career of Nikola Karabatic for a long time now, so John is gearing up to offer his comments primarily from that perspective. In the meantime, as the story continues to develop, I will offer some further thoughts on some aspects of the surrounding framework.Of course, the handball season has not come to a standstill for Montpellier (or for Paris-St.G who now has two of Montpellier’s players from last year). Montpellier played a league game in Toulouse yesterday and lost. They had to do that without the five players (the Karabatic brothers, Gajic, Prost and Tej) who had been released from police custody but were still being interviewed, and moreover had been prohibited from having contact with their teammates. Montpellier lost 29-34, drawing on a mixture of experienced players (Accambray, Mamelund, Hmam and Metlicic) together with a group of young talents.

Manager Canayer commented after the game that it was remarkable to see that the crowds now applauded the depleted team, rather than treating them as the invincible villains. On Sunday, Montpellier has a home game in the EHF Champions League against Ademar Leon.I should again emphasize something that does not seem to be clear in the many media reports around Europe: we are dealing with two really separate actions, the betting on their own game, which goes against the regulations of the French league, the French federation (and, for that matter, their counterparts in most other established handball countries), and the accusation that they lost the game intentionally.

The betting is exclusively a matter for the handball/sports authorities, as this goes against their ethics codes and regulations, and it has nothing to do with French law which treats all citizens the same way. By contrast, I do not know of any federation that has a regulation explicitly dealing with the notion of losing intentionally; there may be some more vague expectation that a team should ‘always do its best’.

And of course, losing a game, even if it is done intentionally, would not be a crime under French law, if it was not for the link to gambling. Because then you commit fraud against other bettors. The police is attempting to confirm the betting, as it provides evidence for the intention to lose the game, and then remains the more difficult issue of proving that the loss actually was intentional.So the only excuse for the federation and the league, in their preference to wait quietly for the police to conclude their investigation, is that they prefer to have the police establish the evidence for the prohibited betting. Karabatic first had his lawyer admit to his own betting, then he used his facebook page to deny it, but now that denial has been removed.

It seems the defense will be focused on what I noted a few days ago: the loss was plausible because of the many injured players, the betting was done by the family and friends who inevitably knew about the injuries and the fact that Montpellier had already secured the league title, and the notion that players who did not actually play in the game of Cresson somehow, by definition, could not be accused of manipulation. But the legal authorities are smarter than that. They understand that key players such as the Karabatic brothers could easily influence their teammates about how the game should proceed, even if those who played had not been involved in the betting. And now it may be getting worse, because media have just released the idea of suspicions regarding another game that Montpellier lost late last situation, against local rivals Nimes.Going back to the responsibility of clubs, leagues and federations, it was interesting to see that the National Association of the French sports gambling syndicates issued a scathing accusation. They noted that, when sports gambling became legal in France, they had urged the federations and the clubs to collaborate with them in a special effort to educate and warn the athletes about the potential risks and consequences.

However, the statement suggested that there had been no interest in collaboration on the part of federations and clubs. So it is really a considerable hypocrisy, when the federations now express great surprise and the clubs complain about the hardships caused by the loss of access to their expensive key players. I have suggested that the FCH, the umbrella organization for the top European handball clubs, could use its neutral but prestigious position to urge clubs across Europe to open their eyes to the dangers and to help coordinate an educational effort.Finally, an interesting twist: after I wrote my initial article, it has become clear that most of the betting was in fact in the half-time result, not the final result.

This is a concept known as ‘spot betting’, meaning that it involves some detail within the game rather than the final outcome. I wrote about this a few months ago, and I underscored the dangers of such betting. Because it may involve some aspect that has no real connection to the final result (such as who got the first yellow card, or who scored on the first 7-meter throw), it is more obscure and less likely to draw attention. It may even seem more harmless, because it has nothing to do with losing intentionally, but it could still involve big money and clear manipulation.

And I noted that there is more scope for this in handball, compared with for instance football. Intentionally being behind by one goal at half-time in handball involves no real risk for a superior team, but the same thing in football is considerably more dangerous.Posted in. More competition, better communication and increased discipline are key objectives for the PATHFDuring the recent Congress of the PanAmerican Team Handball Federation, some important changes were made in the Statutes and in the Competition Regulations (in addition to the Competition System, as previously reported). Similarly, it was decided to introduce Regulation, including a Disciplinary and Ethics Tribunal.The key change in the Statutes amounted to a clear separation between the function of the Executive Committee and the Council.

The Executive Committee now has only five members and is set up to be able to function in a true executive capacity with frequent meetings and communications, especially regarding operational matters. The Council, which includes the Executive members, 4 Vice-Presidents elected by the four regions, the Representative to the IHF Council, and the Presidents of the Commission for Organizing and Competition and the Commission for Rules and Refereeing. The Council will have more of role in policy matters, and it also ensures a wide representation of all parts of the Continent. In addition, an Office attached to the President, with a General Manager, should be able to ensure a major improvement in communications related to competitions and other operational matters.The Competition Regulations also were firmed up on some points.

It is now clear that the member federations can count on as many as 10 participants in each PanAmerican Championship. (The PanAmerican Games are beyond the control of the PATHF and have their own rules on this point).

This means that federations cannot push for a larger number for a specific event, nor do they run the risk that an organizer declines to handle this size. It is a different matter that for the junior and youth categories we might conceivably find that there are sometimes less than 10 teams entered.Strong emphasis has been added to provisions under which federations register teams for a PanAmerican competition. The deadlines are now firm, and there are strong penalties for late withdrawal or non-appearance, as this generally causes great problems and wasted resources for both organizers and other participants. It was also decided that, in an effort to encourage a broader spectrum of member federations to volunteer as organizers, the organizers will now be able to charge up to US$30 per person and day to cover food and lodging.

Previously this was supposed to be covered through the participation fees.Finally, on the basis of the negative experience with the handling of disciplinary matters in the absence of a solid regulation, and therefore with a risk of inconsistencies in decisions and procedural flaws, it was agreed that the PATHF must establish formal and comprehensive regulations. These will cover violence, misconduct and other offenses related to games and competitions, but also administrative violations in the relations of member federations with the PATHF and regarding their obligations in the area of competition. There will also be a separate segment focusing on ethical conduct and possible violations. The key body in this area is the independent Disciplinary and Ethics Tribunal.

During the course of a competition, there will the traditional ‘Disciplinary Committee’ as the first level, typically with a member of the Tribunal serving as ‘Jury’ in the case of appeals. For situations outside competitions, the Tribunal is the first and the last entity to handle reports of violations. Its decisions will then be without scope for appeal.Posted in. For the entire group to improve and succeed: the stronger ones need to help the others to join them at the top!One of the main topics during the PATHF Congress was the discussion of a new system for the qualifying to the PanAmerican Championships in the different categories (men, women, juniors and youth). If one goes back to the ‘old days’ it was simpler.

There were essentially only five member nations down in the ‘cone’ of South America, the Central America rarely participated outside their region, Mexico and Puerto Rico were regulars, with Cuba joining on a capricious basis, and then we had USA and Canada before Greenland joined the fun. So a major qualification system was not really needed, and the main Championship was THE regular competition.But now the irony is that there are more interested participants and nevertheless less competition opportunities for them. Most of the other South Americans have become active, the Dominican Republic is a force to be reckoned with, and the Central Americans want to measure themselves against their more advanced colleagues. However, the size of the continent and the lack of resources on the part of most federations create a dilemma. If you need to travel from North to South in the qualifying process and are successful, then you soon need the money to travel again to the main Championship, perhaps again in the South.

So imagine that you then try to go back to government, sponsors and player families and find the money if you actually get a slot in the World Championship in another continent!For some short period, the idea was to create a ‘second division’, as a way of eliminating qualification tournaments. This meant that the only duplication of events was for those who moved up from one level to the next for the coming year. Important new developments in a united PanAmerican Team Handball FederationDuring the weekend, PATHF organized the combination of an Extraordinary Congress and a Regular Congress in Panama City. The event was attended by 23 of the 26 PATHF member federations.

This included nine of the ten from South America, all the six Central American members, five from the Caribbean region (CUB, DOM,HAI, MEX and PUR) and then the Northern trio Canada, Greenland and USA.The proceedings were characterized by harmony and a good meeting of minds on all the major issues. This was particularly remarkable inasmuch as the agenda included the revision of the Statutes, the Competition Regulations, and the introduction of a first-ever regulation for a Disciplinary and Ethics Tribunal. I will come back to these issues in a separate article.But, apart from the elections, the ‘hot topic’ was the revamping of the overall competition structure, especially as regards the system for qualifying to the different categories of PanAmerican Championships. The reality has been that only a small proportion of the PATHF federations have participated regularly in the Championships or in the qualifying leading up to them.

Clearly, an effort needs to be made to encourage or ‘force’ more competition, especially on a regional basis among teams of relatively equal strength. This is the key to raising the level across the continent. I will came back to the details of the new system in a couple of days.For the moment, I will just comment on the election results. The big change was that, after 16 years, there was a consensus that new leadership through a new President was needed, and the unanimous choice was the former Vice President Mario Moccia (ARG). In this team on the Executive Committee, we also have Julio Noveri (URU) as 1st Vice President and Rafael Sepulveda (PUR) as 2nd VP with special responsibilities for development. Hector Fernandez (CHI) moved over to the position of Secretary, making room for Carlos Ferrea (ARG) as Treasurer. Mario Garcia de la Torre (MEX) remains as Representative to the IHF.The Council has six additional members, including four Regional Vice Presidents: Brian Hayes (CAN – North), Jose Duval (DOM – Caribbean), Carlos Morales (GUA – Central) and Geraldo Paniagua (PAR-South).

The two other members are Carlos Gonzales (CUB – Pres. Of the Competition Committee and Salvio Sedrez (BRA – Pres. Of the Referees Committee).A new important arrangement is the establishment of an Office with a General Manager function connected to the President; this will be occupied by Miguel Zaworotny (ARG).

Finally, the brand new, independent Tribunal for Disciplinary and Ethics matters also had a President named. My ‘modesty’ prevents me from indicating who was placed in that positionPosted in. The London Games were in the Closing Ceremony declared “happy and glorious”, and this was illustrated already in the Opening Ceremony through the image of a ‘happy and glorious’ Queen!It would be silly to think that Olympic organizers simply are self-less ‘philanthropists’, who go to the effort and expense of organizing the Games just for the sake of the athletes, visitors and TV audiences. Of course they believe that, in one way or the other, it is going to be so beneficial to them that they will turn out to be justified in having made the sacrifices. Their precise motivation may differ from one occasion to another. For instance, much was made of China’s determination to show the world four years ago that they had ‘arrived’ on the world scene in a major way. But that, I believe, is to some extent always part of the picture.

The British government clearly made statements somewhat along the same lines. Being able to organize the Olympics in a competent and friendly manner is always going to be a matter of prestige.And as I see it, as long as we want the Olympic tradition to continue, we should be grateful that there are countries and cities who are willing and able to help us keep it going. It is a totally different matter that some organizers will obviously miscalculate, in their belief that it will all be worth it. Beyond the prestige, there has to be a more tangible, longer-term benefit.

Showing off a host city as a place that deserves a major increase in its ability to attract tourists is one calculation. Making a case for being a modern, strong and reliable business partner is another one. Those potential gains are always hard to pin down, but the sense it that reputation of Britain and London surely got a valuable boost.Therefore, it tends to be more common to point to the benefits for the country’s and the city’s own population.

This typically includes the notion that a major redevelopment of a previously lagging part of the city will always be worthwhile. One hopes that this will come true in the long run, because the initial, inevitable upheaval may seem more like a negative to some, even if the approach in London may have been much more considerate than the seemingly ruthless one in Beijing. The construction of new stadiums and arenas is a more double-edged issue. While to some extent new facilities may in fact become useful additions for the locals, more and more the concern has been that the Olympic Games tend to leave behind ‘white elephants’ that will never again be fully utilized. But London seems to have found a good approach, with a clear plan for ‘recycling’ (with Rio 2016 as the beneficiary) or remodeling into more usable facilities.During the Closing Ceremony, IOC President Rogge referred to the London games as “happy and glorious”. Organizers always hold their collective breath at that moment, hoping for an expression of high praise.

Now that, for the first time in a very long while I was not present myself, I still came away with a sense that ‘happy’ was a very appropriate label. The atmosphere around the events and in London seemed to match that.

And many of the potential problems that had been discussed in advance did not materialize. There was no crime wave, let alone any hints of the Games being a target for terrorism.

Traffic is inevitably going to be a cause for complaints, but how could it not be, considering the huge number of visitors who are not used to finding their way in London. And even the weather cooperated, which may be the most remarkable achievement for a place like London.Going back to what I said before, it seems more of a concern that the Olympic Games have become a rather overwhelming affair for both host country and host city. So instead of demanding perfection and complaining when we do not get it, we should be appreciative when someone manages to pull it off in an efficient and attractive manner. But one wonders, particularly given the tendency that nobody wants to come across as being less impressive than a predecessor, how realistic it is going to be to find willing and successful organizers in the future, notwithstanding the prestige involved. What countries will be willing to take the risk, and what cities will have the infrastructure and resources to make it work? Of course, some countries may have the political situation and the attitude that ‘the end justifies the means’ and that the will of the people matters less. But it would be sad and dangerous to see such a trend develop, so the question is: what could and should be done to bring the Games down to a scale that would make the demands on an organizer more reasonable!?

The options of reserving the opportunity for a handful of locations or else encouraging potential hosts for whom the effort and expense would be unconscionable, seem equally undesirable.Posted in. British referees Battlett and Stokes had a game during the Olympic tournamentIn two pre-Olympic articles, I commented on refereeing. First I noted that the group of referees nominated for London was almost completely lacking in Olympic experience, and then I previewed the issues and instructions that would need to be discussed with the Olympic handball referees to get them to maintain a correct and uniform line. It now seems inevitable that I offer some comments on my observations and evaluation.Although I watched, through high-quality TV broadcasts or live streaming, 49 complete games and 15 at least half games (making me miss only 12 games of 76), which provides me with a very solid basis, it is of course conceivable that the official IHF evaluation will differ somewhat from my own informal effort. But I am reassured to know that the IHF Referee Commission, strongly supported by the Coaching and Methods Commission, has collected a wealth of information to be able to come up with a solid analysis in due course.I noted in my article about the nominated group of referees that this is group that I have reason to trust as a serious and honest team, who will do their utmost to handle the games with integrity and to protect their own reputation as unbiased officials.

Nothing that I saw from London makes me modify that evaluation in the slightest. To the extent that, in some games, the refereeing may have given the impression of being a bit lop-sided, it was more a result of an inability to recognize, in that particular game, that one of the two teams was much more cynical than the other, in terms of acting outside the rules. And if they did not get caught, some unfairness may have been created.From a technical standpoint, it was clear that the areas of emphasis, which the referees heard about from the IHF before the start of the event, and which were basically also the ones that I commented on a month ago, were indeed the ones creating the main challenges during the Olympics. This is obviously not because the referees ‘refused to listen’; it simply confirms that there are some specific aspects of the game that always tend to be the more difficult ones and that, despite the reminder and the support from the IHF, these will still be the ones that cause problems and lead to criticism.It may be frustrating to point it out, but the key issue was most likely the frequently shifting line in individual punishments. There were tendencies to differences between referee couples, but also for the same couple from one game to the next. Even more awkwardly, there was a general trend towards more leniency as we moved toward the later stages of the event and, similarly, the referees sometimes became too soft and ‘diplomatic’ during the critical final stage of a game. Also, direct 2-minute suspensions and direct ‘red cards’ were used too sparingly.In many games it seemed that the players on the offense could do nothing wrong, as almost all the decisions went against the defenders.

And unfortunately, this did not quite match the reality, so it led instead to an escalation of the methods by the desperate defenders. But in individual games, it was suddenly turned around so that all the attention seemed to be on infringements by the attackers. Of course, this tended to cause confusion.As so often in the past, many of the problem situations occurred around the 6-meter line. Often this was in the sense that a ‘wrestling’ or ‘shoving’ match was taking place, without any action from the referees. And another issue involved the well-known trend of ‘detecting’ defenders inside the goal-area and awarding a 7-meter-throw, even when this was not really the situation. It would be a major break-through if, one day, one could get a consistently more accurate observation by the referees about this.And the final realization was that too many of our top referees are not used to, and comfortable with, refereeing women’s matches. So precisely in the Olympic Games, which is the only time when we have simultaneous men’s and women’s competition, it was noticeable that the judgment of body contact in the women’s games often was flawed or at least inconsistent.This year’s Olympic handball tournaments may not have been of the absolute top level that one might have hoped.

But the speed, dynamics and physicality were nevertheless sufficient to make observers begin to wonder if we have reached the stage where it is beyond the capacity of TWO pairs of eyes to register everything that is happening on the court. Or alternatively, what are the scientific methods that have not yet been tried, in the area of helping the referees to maintain the concentration, focus, recognition and interpretation that is needed?More generally, most of the referees in London will also by appearing in the Men’s World Championship in just five months time.

On the basis of the observations now made, will the IHF, in collaboration with the continental federations, be able to apply the resources needed to follow these referees in the meantime, offering feedback, mentoring and practical advice? As I have commented, these referees are not ‘beginners’, but they also are not ‘ready’ in the sense that can be left to their own devices.

They constitute a key resource for our elite handball, who need and deserve constant support and nurturing!Posted in. So what does a medal tell you?Already during the two Olympic weeks, but even more after the completion of the event, there has been an absolute hysteria around the discussion about ‘the best Olympic athlete of all times’. What caused this particular focus was of course the ability of Michael Phelps to add to his medal collection so that he has now, after three Olympic Games, 18 gold medals and four ‘lesser’ ones. This is obviously much more than anyone else gained throughout a career.This causes some people to proclaim that the mere numbers make it obvious that Phelps is the best athlete who has ever existed. Let me say that I happily recognize his great achievements, his efforts, and his ability to persist over a considerable period of time. But in my opinion, ANY attempts to use medal counts, or any other method, to try to establish who is the best ever, are completely flawed and really undesirable. I know that it is in the human nature to want to make such comparisons and proclamation, so nothing I say will put a stop to it, but I still want to make my arguments.I have some appreciation for the desire to make comparison over time within one and the same sport.

For instance, who is the best handball player ever? And I understand that it is both tempting and interesting to compare performances in different sports and then try to establish who has made the greatest accomplishments, whose achievement requires the broadest skill set, the strongest talent, or the greatest effort. But for me personally, it is a rather futile exercise, in part because most of us understand too little about each event to be able to compare, and mainly because there are no meaningful criteria by which comparisons across sports can be made.Presumably that is part of the reason why it is so tempting, and so supposedly convincing, to use medal counts as a basis.

But it should be rather obvious that this does not tell us a lot. What is the real reason that Phelps can win so many medals; is it really that he is superior to a boxer, runner, rower, shooter, wrestler or fencer? Well, of course not! Even after I leave out the team sports, it is clear that most other athletes have only ONE chance to win a medal, while a few have a realistic opportunity to win two or more.In some sports you have different distances or variations that require such similar skill sets that it is realistic to be a multiple medal winner. A runner or kayaker could combine two distances, a tennis or badminton player could win in singles and doubles, and in some individual sports there is a separate medal chance for teams, simply by aggregating the results of individuals. (This latter approach is in my opinion unfortunate, as it goes against the spirit of the Olympic Charter which de-emphasizes such aggregating of results by nation).Then of course you have a few sports that are designed to be testing the capacity to handle totally different activities, viz., decathlon/heptathlon, modern pentathlon and triathlon.

I think it is a good illustration that even the most outstanding participant in decathlon never really has the skills to compete for the medals in one of the ten individual events. To my mind, such versatile athlete would have every reason to wonder why it is possible for others, such as Phelps, to use a much narrower set of skills to win a multitude of medals.Put differently, again without taking issue with the achievements of Phelps, his ability to win so many medals really speaks more about a clearly inappropriate generosity in the number of very similar medal events in swimming.

The ability to win medals in different styles plus in individual medley suggests that there is clear an excess of events, and if you then add the relays it really has gone too far. Authentic success robert holden pdf files. To start with, one could surely eliminate one distance for each of three ‘special’ strokes and individual medley and two of the distances for freestyle, without creating any unfairness for the participants, if one compares with other sports.

And two forms of relays seems to be at least one too many.The IOC is generally striving to modernize the Olympic Games by inserting new sports, and the efforts and experiments in the Youth Olympic Games seem to be a step in the right direction. Apart from the apparent excesses in swimming, there are other team competitions in individual sports that add very little (except space for additional participants) and there are entire sports that are no longer as ‘modern’ as even their explicit names suggest. As I was noting in an earlier article, a major purpose of the Olympic Games is to be a source of INSPIRATION. But this means that, to get the attention of younger generations, the program of the Games has be constantly renewed, so the IOC would be wise to speed up this effort. And this cannot happen unless some cuts in the current program are made!Posted in. Their gift to mankind.In connection with their hosting of the Olympic Games, the British have been very quick and proud to use a lot of media articles to proclaim that they are the ones who ‘invented’ a large proportion of the sports in the Games and a whole lot of other sports as well. The lists vary from source to source, but they often include sports which some other countries have been in the habit of claiming as theirs.Most people are ready to accept that soccer/football originated in Britain, but the lists generally also tend to include archery, badminton, boxing, field hockey, rowing, sailing, swimming, table tennis, tennis, track & field and water polo.

If you disagree, please do not blame me; I am just passing on the consensus of British media! Of course, they also want to take credit for some (currently) non-Olympic sports, such as cricket, croquet, golf, rugby and squash.

I think they probably also have the rights to some other strange things such as netball.But they are quite prepared to accept that, by contrast, other countries deserve the credit for a small number of Olympic events, such as the U.S. Inventions of basketball, volleyball and triathlon. Similarly, they are willing to admit that the Germans seem to be the ones who started gymnastics. And in some footnotes there are references to the competing claims for the obscure sport of handball from Denmark and Germany. The British seem quite content not to have anything do with that ‘un-British activity’.And yes, this confirms what I have always noted, both in conversations with British friends and with people from around the ‘Anglo part’ of various continents: it is really the ‘fault’ of the British that our revered handball has had such a scattered emergence around the globe.

In Africa, for instance, it is very clear that North Africa and some francophone countries on the West Coast keep dominating, together with the special case of Angola. By contrast, I remember asking government officials about handball during visits to Kenya and Ghana, former British colonies, and I was met by a blank stare.The same fate was generally bestowed upon Commonwealth nations in Asia, so this is why handball has always had this awkwardly polarized situation in Asia, with strongholds around the Persian Gulf and in China, Japan, and Korea. India is only recently beginning to participate in handball, but at a very modest level. Similarly, the Australians were, and mainly remain, handball novices when they were hosting the Olympic Games in the year 2000.Another interesting twist involves the French overseas ‘regions’ of Guadeloupe, Martinique and Reunion, which you could say have amounted to ‘secret weapons’ for France in the international competition, producing world-class talents such as retired stars Richardson and Abati, together with current top players Dinart, Narcisse and Sorhaindo. I bet the British team would not have minded having some reinforcements like that on their team in the London Olympics.The early starters in PanAmerica were Canada and USA in the north and Mexico and Argentina in Latin America.

But this certainly had nothing to do with a British (or Spanish) influence. Migration and contacts related to specific ethnic groups provide more of an explanation. As I noted in one of my recent articles, the lack of immigrants from regions with handball background to this day remains a handicap for handball in the U.S., compared with the steady and natural inflow of newcomers who have grown up with soccer. So when we ponder this reality, let us remember that, essentially, the blame for handball’s difficulties in the U.S. Really lies with the British and their lack of appreciation for handballAs a ‘footnote’, while it has been very nice to see the enthusiasm of British spectators for a sport which has no background in their country, and while the preparations and competitive spirit of the British handball teams were admirable, there are already signs that handball in Britain may not be able to count on a sustained boost in the aftermath of the Olympic Games. Quite surprisingly, it was already reported shortly before the start of the Olympics that the participation of the British women’s team in the upcoming World Championship qualifying had been cancelled. And now we are finding media reports to the effect that the government is already bringing the British handballers down to earth after their Olympic excitement.

Much in line with the situation in the U.S., the government has declared that funding will only be provided for sports with genuine chances for an Olympic medal!!!Posted in. Not even the younger French players Accambray and Barachet would be eligible for an 'under-23' teamAs most of you are likely to be aware, the IOC and FIFA have worked out a special deal under which the Olympic football tournament is essentially available only to players under the age of 23.

Three players per team are allowed to be above that age. This particular rule came into effect in 1992.

In 1984, the previous prohibition against participation by ‘professional’ players was lifted, and the rule for 1984 and 1988 limited the participation on European and South American teams to players who had no previous World Cup experience, whereas no such limit existed for the rest of the world. The 1984 ruling was disliked, inasmuch as it created an inconsistency between countries, so this led to the change in 1992.The reason behind the current rule is that FIFA absolutely does not want the Olympic tournament to compete with FIFA’s own World Cup, while on the other hand the IOC really does not want FIFA to withdraw from the Olympic Games. So this is what causes IOC to allow this unique compromise.

It has led to relatively interesting Olympic football tournaments, with a considerably more balanced strength between continents, as compared with the World Cup. African nations have benefitted in the past, and now in London we saw a final between Brazil and Mexico, while Korea and Japan played for the bronze medals. In other words, not one single European team, including the host country, managed to qualify for the semifinals, but the quality of the tournament was still relatively good.Among some of our readers, it raised the question whether a similar arrangement could be feasible, beneficial and allowed also in handball, and I decided to get the reactions of a number of handball friends from around the world.

Handball Game Rules

Perspective, it had been suggested that some form of age limit would lead to a ‘more equal playing field’, with better opportunities for non-traditional handball nations. Similarly, it was suggested that in such countries one could hope that this kind of rule could spur an increased emphasis on youth development in handball. And the benefit for the traditional handball powers in handball would be that it would remove the Olympic Games as an additional burden in the competition calendar, which in Europe already entails four other major events in every four-year period. Right now we hear top club teams in Europe complaining that many of their players are coming back tired from London.But, not surprisingly, I have quickly been overwhelmed by skepticism or, more bluntly, sharply negative reactions during my inquiry. It appears that, as one could sense from the enthusiasm with which even the most experienced players seem to embrace the Olympic opportunity, that this would absolutely not be the way in which the top players would want to have their burden reduced. They would instead want to cut back on World Championships or continental events.

Moreover, there is no expectation that the IOC would ever be prepared to discuss such an arrangement for handball. Football is unique in its power base to ‘get away with’ such an arrangement, and IHF would probably be told that if the best players were not be made available, then the IOC would be happy to drop handball and replace us with some other sport(s).Moreover, as many have noted, the level of a handball tournament for, say, ‘under-23’ would be so vastly inferior to a full-strength tournament that handball would ‘shoot itself in the foot’ from an image and PR standpoint, under the hypothesis that the IOC would allow it. And it is clear that if one looks at the quality of the World Junior Championships, and also reviews what players would in fact remain on the Olympic rosters from London, then the depletion would really be quite dramatic. The top teams in the Olympic soccer tournament had emerging stars who knew how to dazzle the crowds, but we could not count on the same situation in handball.Several of my sources even doubted the premise that there would be more of a ‘nivellation’ between continents and nations.

In fact, I heard the suggestion that the traditional handball countries would be even more likely to have the upper hand if one moved down in the age brackets. And indeed the results from recent years of Junior World Championships seem to confirm such an assumption, especially on the women’s side. To the extent that the ‘other’ continents may have seemed to have had a relatively better chance on the men’s junior side, this is in fact more related to a deliberately more generous allocation of slots to the other continents.

So, all in all, the notion of an age limit clearly seems to fail to create any enthusiasm!Posted in. Also a handball novice may easily get excited during a game, as demonstrated here by the 'outspoken' Swedish KingAs I mentioned in my first post-Olympic comments, I spent time during the second week of the Games in the company of Americans sports fans watching handball on TV.

Almost without exception, it was their first opportunity to get familiar with our sport. So it entailed an opportunity to do some ‘preaching’ and explaining, while also listening to often quite amusing comments from the handball novices around me.The comments included a mixture of the type of reactions that I have constantly encountered during my soon 40 years in the U.S. And some more surprising observations. Generally speaking, handball met with the approval of the people around me, and their reactions showed that this was not just the result of politeness. As often happens, people got excited even without having any prior knowledge of the teams and without being able to appreciate the fine points. “This is such a typically American sport”, was a comment that I have become used to over the years. And “why are we not good at this”, is then the obvious follow-up question.What people tended to appreciate was the amount of physical contact, especially the fact that this is very much part also of the women’s handball.

“This would be something for women who like American football”, was one comment, and “it is nice to see a ball game where you can be successful without being extremely tall”, was the reaction of someone watching the Koreans. Having a goalkeeper, instead of just a basket, was a feature that some viewers felt added a dimension. And the continuous action, without a lot of time-outs, met with approval, as did the existence of the ‘advantage rule’, which some recognized from soccer.It was also seen as helpful that the structure and action of the game is so straight-forward that it is easy to follow and enjoy also for a beginner. As someone commented, you can easily anticipate when a critical moment is coming up so that you have to focus a bit extra. But then some felt a bit lost in their appreciation for what constitutes an ‘offensive foul’, and I had to admit that the referees did not always manage to show the desired consistency.

Similarly, I got comments to the effect that “the decisions about when to give a 2-minute punishment seemed a bit capricious”. This came from basketball or icehockey fans, who are more used to the notion that ‘a foul is a foul’.Several of my ’emerging handball fans’ seemed to assume that an Olympic sport such as handball “surely already was well established in the U.S.” and that it was their ‘fault’ for not having gotten to know it before.

But they assumed it must be a relatively new sport at the Olympics, such as BMX or beach volleyball. They were astonished when I explained the longstanding traditions in Europe but also the comparatively feeble evolution in our country.Someone offered the astute reflection that “of course soccer has a huge advantage, because so many of our immigrants these days bring that sport with them, while that does not seem to apply to handball”.

I also heard the observation that the name ‘handball’ is a problem and ought to be changed. I gently reminded that this might not be so appropriate for Americans to suggest, considering our stubborn insistence on confusing people by referring to a certain sport as ‘football’ although 98% of the ball handling is with the hands Others noted that the size of the court is a handicap, “as it does not fit into school gyms and would discourage schools from picking it up”. But ultimately, some of my new recruits noted that “as usual, it is likely to be a matter of money and good management”. Perhaps it will one day appear that at least one of my fellow viewers turns out to be a major philanthropist with a weak spot for handball!Posted in. Bojana Popovic, literally head and shoulders above the rest of the players in the finalYou may recall that my main reaction to the men’s handball competition was one of disappointment.

Unfortunately, I must say very much the same thing about the women’s tournament. In fact, the similarities are quite amazing. The 2008 champions, on the women’s side Norway, managed to defend the title without really impressing anyone while doing so. Just like in the case of the men, it happened because none of the other team’s showed their normal strength, which would have been enough to deserve to win and to manage to do so. Just like the French men, the Norwegian women were on their way to disaster in the quarterfinal, but their opponents kindly let them off the hook!The main difference was perhaps that the final for the women had more real drama and excitement, in comparison with the men.

Once they managed to qualify for the final, it was not surprising that the team from Montenegro would put up a real fight for the gold. In fact, they were a bit unlucky in losing the final, and it is my background in refereeing that inhibits me when it comes to explaining why I think so Women’s handball in Montenegro is perhaps the best parallel to men’s handball on Iceland. The population is twice that of Iceland, moving towards 700.000, but the pool of talented handball players is small.The focus in Montenegro is on team sports, but football and basketball are clearly ahead of handball, and even volleyball is a strong rival for athletes and spectators. But in recent time it is handball that has given the headlines.

Buducnost won the EHF Champions League just a few months ago, and now Bojana Popovic, their perennial world-class player led them to the silver in the final match of her career. She had previously won World Championship bronze with Yugoslavia in 2001 and five earlier Champions League titles for Danish clubs.

Montenegro hardly looked like a team for the final in the early going. They lost to both Brazil and Croatia, before they managed to tie Russia.

But the breakthrough came in the quarterfinal, where they knocked out the equally tough and combative French team, one of the favorites.The Koreans are always giving priority to the Olympic Games, so they tend to build up their team in four-year cycles. This time, the team showed many of their traditional strengths in terms of speed, energy and tenacity. But somehow they never looked as sturdy as their colleagues from the past, so their style combined with injury problems seemed to make them run out of steam after they knocked out Russia in the quarterfinals. Talking about Russia, their veteran coach Trefilov urged them on during the games in his well-known loud and ‘desperate’ style. But this time his team did not respond to his emotions and efforts. At times they seemed to play in ‘autopilot’ fashion, without their usual spark. So Trefilov was bitter afterwards, announcing his retirement and predicting a bleak future for Russian women’s handball.

Indeed, handball is a much more modest sport at the national level in Russia than their international achievements over the years would suggest.The Spanish team never looked like a candidate for the gold. They were solid and consistent, just as their performances in recent years have suggested, with a third and a fourth place in the 2011 and 2009 World Championships. But there seems to be some ingredient missing that would get them to the top. By contrast, Brazil lived up to the expectations that they might be the ‘dark horse’ this time. They had the advantage of fielding a team that has been playing together for a while now, also through the agreement with the Austrian club team Hypo.

They seemed ready and determined to battle for a medal and the performance in group play was impressive. While they lost to Russia, the wins against Croatia and Montenegro were enough to put them at the top of the group standings. They appeared to be riding this wave initially in the quarterfinal, having an amazing 15-9 lead against Norway after about 38 minutes. But it seems they got carried away, suddenly feeling too confident and losing concentration. After too many mistakes and a seemingly casual attitude, they lost the game they almost had won.Finally, before the event, one of the discussions involved the lop-sided draw resulting from the strange seeding. Who would be the two teams, among six strong ones, who would not make the quarterfinals from the ‘group of death?’ Not so unexpectedly, this fate was shared by Denmark and Sweden. In the past year, Denmark’s women had suddenly but clearly come down from their traditional level, missing out on a medal in 2011 and not being very impressive in the preparation games this year.

Sweden got a direct path to London, not because of their performance in 2011 but as runner-up in EURO 2010. But there were doubts about their team strength that now became confirmed. It seems that Sweden may need to rely on reinforcements from a new crop of talents, the winners of this year’s junior world championships.Posted in.

. = Russia to compute the Bronze medal in 1992 with the Unified Team. Medal table RankNationGoldSilverBronzeTotal1(URS)41162(DEN)40043(YUG)31154(KOR)24175(NOR)22266(FRA)22157(RUS)21148(CRO)20139(GER)121410(GDR)111311(EUN)101212(SWE)040413(ROU)013414(HUN)012315(AUT)0101(TCH)0101(ISL)0101(MNE)010119(ESP)004420(CHN)0011(POL)0011(SUI)0011(UKR)0011Totals (23 nations)24242472Nations Total Only players who participated in at least one game are counted.In 1936 the competition was.