I was present a year ago, when the announcement was made that the IHF Council had decided to award the hosting of the 2015 Men’s World Championship to Qatar. France had hoped to gain those rights and expressed disappointment in many ways. From one journalist came the question: “for what purpose do they want to be the host; after all, everyone knows that the countries who fight to become organizers are typically top medal contenders who want to improve their chances to win the gold by playing at home!”. I responded, half-jokingly, “do not worry, because by 2015 perhaps Qatar will have managed to acquire a strong team”.

A little bit I had in mind the habit of teams from the Middle East to make a mockery of the ‘Super Globe’, the event touted by the IHF as ‘the World Championship for clubs’, where they borrow prominent players from other clubs on short-term contracts in order to become suddenly competitive. But I was also aware that the IHF eligibility regulations allow a player to change from one national team to another, after a change in citizenship and three years of ‘quarantaine’., i.e. not playing for the former country in an official competition.

This has worked to the advantage of, for instance, Germany and Spain in recent years, when key players from Eastern Europe were naturalized. Germany and Spain do not exactly have a shortage of young, talented players who could work their way into their national teams, but there was no outcry when these actions took place. And going further back, the systematic approach of the Austrian women’s team to acquire a team full of stars from the Balkans and the former Soviet Union barely tended to cause some mild irritation or indignation, when the Austrian team became a bit ‘too strong’ through this method.

But these developments never caused an outcry from handball countries, demanding that the IHF change its regulations and prohibit such changes in eligibility, more along the lines of the strict rules of FIFA. However, now suddenly, when the issue involves Qatar, the protests can be heard. Is the situation somehow different because it involves a non-European country, moreover a country with seemingly unlimited resources to build up an image as a prominent country in the world of sports, especially through the organization of major events, including the football world championship in 2022!?

I fully appreciate that one can have different views on this special way of building a national team. But I think there needs to be some consistency. Why have there never been any complaints about this IHF regulation before, until now suddenly Qatar openly states its intention to take advantage of it in a systematic and large-scale fashion? Why were the traditional handball powers asleep or silent until now? Being European-born, I fully appreciate the strong excitement caused by the victories and defeats of the respective national teams. Even if most of the star players from around Europe play for club teams outside their ‘home’ countries almost the entire year, it is a big deal when they come and play for their country of citizenship, with flags and anthems reflecting the feelings of nationalism. But please be consistent!

We are right now at a critical moment apropos this issue. I mentioned about a three-year waiting period. This means that players taking part in the European, African or Asian Championships this month cause themselves to be ineligible to play for a another country in the early part of 2015 when the World Championship in Qatar is scheduled to take place. So when we have now seen, just as in the case of the recent Women’s World Championship, that some top players have declined participation due to sudden injuries or a lack of motivation, then the speculation is beginning. Are they perhaps instead ensuring their ability to transfer in time for 2015?? This is really creating an awkward atmosphere!

And there have even been suspicions quietly expressed to the effect that the IHF Council or Congress, both dominated by the non-Europeans, might come up with the idea to shorten the waiting period to, say, two years, thus making all the top players available for transfers even if the played in the top events this month. I will refrain from taking a view on this speculation. Instead I will say that this is one more issue where the traditional handball powers in Europe, to my taste, tend to take a very passive or naïve stance. You are entitled to protect your interests and have your views on what is fair and proper, but then you must be prepared to be proactive and handle things in a political, strategic and coordinated fashion. Indignation and uncoordinated protests is not the way to go…

During a holiday visit to London, I took the opportunity to look for indications that the Olympic Games are only seven months ago. Amazingly, it was absolutely impossible to find any Olympic souvenirs, a sharp contrast to the situation in previous Olympic cities at the corresponding time. But I did have a chance to catch glimpses of existing or emerging venues and, above all, the New Year’s period caused a major spike in media coverage.

Lord (Sebastian) Coe, former champion runner over 800 and 1500 meters, now Chair of the London Organizing Committee, and Jeremy Hunt, Minister of Culture, Media and Sport, were constantly appearing in TV and newspaper interviews. As always in connection with the Olympic Games, there are major differences in public opinion regarding the propriety of spending so much money and creating such upheaval for a one-time event. And to put it mildly, the world economic situation and the competition for resources have changed drastically since 2005, when London was awarded the rights for 2012.

So there have been voices suggesting very strongly that London should yet again, just like in 1948 right after World War II, inevitably find it necessary host what was then dubbed the ‘austerity Olympics’. In other words, everything from arena construction, infrastructure improvements and events such as the Opening Ceremonies should be scaled back; London should not try to compete for the sought-after label ‘best ever’. But both Minister Hunt, on behalf of the government, and Lord Coe for the Organizing Committee (LOCOG) see it differently.

They understand the arguments, but they really feel that a world-class event, in the eyes not just of participants and spectators but especially as observed by the vast TV and other media audiences around the world, is just what Britain needs at this point in time. And they are not talking just about the prestige and PR involved in showing the rest of the world what Britain can do, both as an organizer in sports and also in terms of culture, history and creativity. So the aim is to “make an extraordinary statement” and there is a sense that “people in Britain would not really forgive us if we did not make the absolutely most of this moment”.

Indeed, Hunt sees the Olympics as an event that, notwithstanding the enormous investments and expenses, could have the positive economic impact of being a key factor in avoiding a double-dip recession. It is also emphasized that the LOCOC budget of around US$ 3.5 billion is essentially based on private capital being raised. The government’s share is a more ‘modest’ US$ 9 million, apart from the traditional guarantee that any losses must be covered. Of course, this does not convince and quiet all skeptics.

On the basis of a sad history from many previous Olympic cities, there is a special concern about the ‘white elephant’ phenomenon, i.e., the all too common experience that huge stadiums and a vast spectrum of other arenas will become decaying and unused monuments to wasteful one-time spending. London, learning from its predecessors, is trying to take measures to counter this trend. Similarly, there are worries that London will feel obliged to outdo Beijing and others in putting on an ‘absurdly’ lavish and expensive Opening Ceremony. After all, this is often the measuring rod for the Olympic hosts.

It is also somewhat ironic, after the heavy criticism of the Chinese government for its cynical evacuation of citizens, through bull-dozing of entire neighborhoods, to make room for facilities and roads, that similar comments can now be heard in London. There is hope that, on balance, the development in dilapidated areas of East London will have a positive long-term effect, thanks to major new construction of housing, infrastructure especially in the form of public transportation, and major shopping centers. But the reality also seems to be that those who have been evicted from the areas of low-income housing now find it difficult or impossible to acquire new affordable housing.

As always, it is easy to speculate ahead of time, and the actual impact will not really become clear until much later. We can only hope that the optimists in Britain will turn out to be proven right.

Just recently I wrote about the tragic and fatal accident of the Methe brothers. This event quickly caused speculation about the stressful existence of top referees. A few days later, there was the sad story of the Bundesliga football referee, Babak Rafati, who was found by his linesmen, just barely alive, after having tried to commit suicide hours before their game in Cologne. Here, of course, the speculation really took off quickly: did it happen for personal or family reasons, or was it related to the refereeing? Precisely to put a stop to such awkward speculation, Rafati bravely went out with a press statement soon after he was in shape enough to do so. Here he made it clear that the depression leading to his action was indeed caused by the stress of the refereeing.

In his statement, Rafati referred to the constant fear of making a major mistake and the pressure caused by the scrutiny in media. This had begun to affect him in his personal life to such an extent that even small problems started to seem insurmountable. It should be noted that Rafati had progressed to the level of international (FIFA) referee, but that his performances in the last couple of years had caused him to be rated lowly in unofficial media rankings, involving the opinions of players. Moreover, he had recently been informed by the German federation that he would be removed from the FIFA list in 2012.

During my many years in international handball, I always took a special interest in the psychological aspects of refereeing and their personal situation. Perhaps this came naturally to me, given my professional career in personnel management and international recruitment. As I see it, this field is considerably ignored, as regards both the ability of referees to handle the pressure during the games and the way the task can impact their personal life. The focus tends to be on technical skills, rules knowledge, fitness, and social skills in the handling of the teams. At the most, one tends to evaluate the courage in the decision-making during the game. But the job takes a toll that can have a heavy impact away from the games. So the personal strengths and characteristics of the elite referees become critically important.

The causes of stress

Whether you are talking about handball or football (or similar sports), there are several reasons for this: 1. the games at the top level have become much more demanding due to their intensity and complexity – so it is much tougher to avoid mistakes; 2. through TV and technology, with replays, close-ups and slow motion – so the mistakes become clear not just to a few players but to thousands of spectators and millions of viewers; 3. it is no longer ‘just’ a matter of pride and prestige to win matches and championships, because enormous amounts of money are involved — so a mistake that effects the result can have huge consequences. Talk about pressure…!

While it may sound strange to an outsider, the pressure may not typically manifest itself primarily during the game; because then the referee is fully concentrated and immersed, so the task may seem more concrete and manageable, and the extraneous worries may be less obvious or immediate. The adrenaline is flowing and the physical action and the excitement of being part of the game may overshadow everything else for the moment. Indeed, the duration of the game is likely to be the most satisfying part of the overall situation of the referee.

Instead, the anticipation of an important game, the determination to be optimally prepared, and the sense that one may never feel sufficiently prepared, may be factors that create real pressure. Similarly, the self-doubts, the second-guessing after a game, even in the absence of any problems or controversies, may be what prevent a conscientious referee from having peace of mind. If one then adds reactions to criticism, whether justified or not, from media or team representatives, the pressure can really mount.

With very rare exceptions, our elite referees in handball (and for the most part in football) are not professionals in the sense that they do not have any other job. So apart from family responsibilities, they must also handle the refereeing in competition with their ‘real’ job and career. Indeed, there is then a risk for a negative influence in both directions, between the refereeing and the job/family. I will not sidetrack too much into this topic, and in fact I am not necessary arguing that professional referees in handball or football is the way to go, at least not until the number of games would fully justify it (as in NHL/NBA). (Also, giving up another career for a risky refereeing career might become an additional stress factor, and an exclusive focus on the refereeing might not be the right kind of approach for everyone).

But there is a major handicap that is normally overlooked: elite teams and also top-level individual athletes have an impressive support structure, consisting of a coaching staff, administrators, physicians, physiotherapists, psychologists, nutritionists etc etc. Normally, none of that is directly available to the elite referees on an ongoing basis, so they must deal with all their different forms of preparations and their pre- and post-game concerns alone. The only burden sharing they can count on is with their partner (or assistants, in football). [By the way, this is a strong reason why the system of ‘fixed couples’ (or teams) is so important at the top level].

There is another important comparison that may not always be so obvious: the teams have the advantages of playing half of their games at home. Not just does it reduce travel for them, whereas for the referees every game is an ‘away’ game. But it also has its psychological advantages. The home crowd provides a strong and loud support for the team and the players they adore. Clearly, this is a special thrill and boost. By contrast, the best our referees can hope for is to go unnoticed or to find a reluctant tolerance for their efforts. But more likely they have to be prepared for the wrath and the insults of a partisan crowd! Similarly, successful teams and players get to experience the satisfaction of winning, but there are no similar rewards for strong referee performances.

What needs to be done

At this point, perhaps some readers will wonder why I go to such length in painting a negative picture. Or you may wonder how it is possible to recruit referees for this kind of ‘torture’. But the reality is, of course, that refereeing, to some extent precisely because of the difficulties, has its rewards. Referees thrive on the challenges and are proud of how they overcome them! It is not an occupation for masochists. So I am not asking you to feel sorry for them! But my objective is in part to
create a more widespread appreciation for some of the problems. And even more important, while most of the challenges are an inevitable part of the job, the typical lack of an adequate support structure is neither inevitable nor excusable!

The elite referees are such a vital part of the game and contribute in such an important way that they clearly both need and deserve strong support, not just for their sake but for the sake of the game. We need them, moreover in top form, and we cannot have a large attrition after we have managed to recruit and train suitable persons. Part of the problem is that most educators and administrators in refereeing do not have all the specialized skills needed. So most national federations have neither the personnel nor the resources to acquire the added expertise.

This means that for what is essentially a relatively small and select group of elite referees, the international federations (IHF in the case of handball) and the continental federations, who are the ones who really depend on this group of referees, simply must assume the responsibility for putting in place the necessary support structure. This involves much closer contacts and monitoring, modern support with technical and physical preparations, but also continuous access to expertise on psychological and social aspects. Generally speaking, a network is needed that creates a sense of making the referees part of a team, not just on paper or as a cliché but in a very practical sense. The national federations and clubs are fully capable of taking care of their teams; now it is time to take care of the referee team!

The preliminary round of the women’s Olympic test event was completed today in the main handball arena for the Olympic Games. These test events generally do not matter much in terms of results, and the main thing is to check that everything in the arena, including the technical staff, seems to be functioning in a way that holds out promise for an impeccable show in the ‘real’ event nine months from now.

However, on this occasion, with the Olympics taking place in a country without handball traditions, there was a special interest in observing how competitive the team of the home country might be. In the build-up for the Olympics, the British team has made remarkable progress in recent years. While there is clearly no expectation that either one of the teams, women or men, will be in serious competition for the medals in August 2012, it is always important to feel that the home teams are capable of putting on respectable performances.

And the British women offered a pleasant surprise in the opening game two days ago. They played Angola, African champions in recent years and normally competitive also in World Championships. The Brits were not timid and took the lead in the early going. They managed to stay even throughout the game, but it looked ominous when they were behind by two goals 10 minutes from the end. But four straight goals, combined with a strong goalie performance, allowed Britain to win by 22-20.

Yesterday, Angola beat Austria by 35-33, so the British objective today was to avoid a worse result than a one-goal loss. However, the performance today was not equally inspired, so the more experienced Austrians could win comfortably by 31-23. This meant that Austria and Angola qualified for the semi-finals, while Great Britain will play for fifth place against Slovakia tomorrow. The other semifinalists are China and Poland, who played to a 30-30 tie against each other and both beat Slovakia.

While many among both media and spectators seemed to have a rather confused idea of handball at the start of this event, one can hope that both the good showing of the British team and the seemingly good performance of the event staff have now helped create some added interest in the Olympic handball tournaments. And it seems that the home crowd will not have to worry about embarrassing results.