On Friday it will be determined in a ceremony in Goteborg how the 4 groups of 6 teams each will be composed. This tends to be the moment where the speculation about the outcome of the Championship gets started in a serious way. We in THN also intend to ‘stick our necks out’ and offer our early predictions.

While media love this kind of speculation, in fact even now before the draw has taken place, the coaches of the participating teams tend to prefer to downplay the importance of the seeding and the draw. Media talk about potential ‘dream groups’ and ‘groups of death’, while the coaches note that ‘in the end we will need to be able to beat all the strong teams to become champions’.

Yet there is some debate: for instance, is it more important for a top team to avoid a strong ‘number 4’ team in the group, so that the risk for an early elimination is reduced? But who is then a strong ‘number 4’ (or ‘number 5’) team? This is sometimes very hard to predict, especially when it involves the better non-European teams. And is it perhaps more important to avoid certain other top teams in the neighboring group, the one that will be combined with your group in the main round etc. We will come back to this after the draw!

Sweden has organized the Men’s World Championship three times before, in 1954, 1967 and 1993. I should know, as I was there on all three occasions, but the reality is that the first time I was too young to have any memories. On the second occasion, I already had a few years experience as a local referee, and in 1993 I came to Sweden as a member of the IHF Rules & Referees Commission. So I certainly hope to be there next January…

But it may be more relevant to you to be reminded about the results in the past, and the evolution it shows. In 1954 there were only six teams, and Sweden used the home court advantage to get the gold medals ahead of Germany and Czechoslovakia. The 1967 event took place during a strong period for the Czechs, so they moved up to the top position. Denmark and Romania got the other medals. There were a total of 16 teams, with Canada, Japan and Tunisia representing their respective continents; but only Japan managed to win a game, against Norway.

In 1993, the Russians fielded a very strong team and won the final easily against France. Sweden got the bronze medals ahead of Switzerland. Spain had then joined the top group and won 5th place against Germany. Egypt got the 12th and final place in the main round, while Korea and USA (with a certain John Ryan on the team) found themselves at the bottom of the rankings. Well, let’s not blame that entirely on John… But at least I can say that I watched him and the USA team play against Sweden in my old home town.

Goteborg will again be supporting the Swedish team in the preliminary round, in the now aging but large Scandinavium arena. Another group will be split between the ‘twin cities’ of Norrkoping and Linkoping, boasting relatively large and modern arenas , which admittedly exist thanks to presence of icehockey teams and not because these cities are handball hotbeds. It is worth noting that Stockholm is not among the host cities this time. It remains the capital of Sweden, so that’s where royal weddings take place and so on, but it is hardly the handball capital.

Handball has stronger traditions in the very south, where moreover three classic old handball locations now have new and modern arenas. Those in Lund and Kristianstad are smaller, whereas Malmo’s arena can hold over 12.000 spectators. This is where the final and one of the semi-finals will be played. And, much to the delight of the Danish team and their supporters, this is where they will play their matches in the preliminary round, just across the bridge from Copenhagen.

So pay attention to the draw, and we will be back and join you in the speculation afterwards!

We reported earlier in the year that actions by the current IHF regime had brought the very experienced and highly regarded Ekke Hoffmann to resign from the important position as Head of Sports. https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.920 This caused bewilderment around the handball world, as Ekke Hoffmann is widely known as a strong manager and instructor, apart from his top-level career in coaching. He combines the coaching side with a great affinity also for the refereeing, something that is a great combination for any federation that needs to bring up its top referees to a level where they also appreciate the finer points of the tactics and techniques on the part of teams and players.

Therefore, it does not exactly come as a surprise, when it is now reported that the EHF has begun to use Ekke Hoffmann for important functions as an instructor in the EHF’s program for the development of talented referees. It is great to see that someone is sensible enough to ensure that the qualities of such a highly competent person are not lost for the world of handball. Clearly this collaboration will be beneficial for the new generation of talented referees in Europe. They are to be congratulated and Ekke Hoffmann is wished the best of luck in his new endeavors.

Sometimes it is a bit frustrating to find the enthusiasm for writing about something, even if I feel strongly about it, simply because I am so sure that those who must to be convinced about the need for a change will not listen. Only two days ago, after the devastating mistakes by referees and linesmen in high-profile matches in the football World Cup, I insisted on the need for a renewed investigation of the feasibility of introducing some form of a video review system, that would enable referees to get some help in making a decision or in reviewing a preliminary decision that they had taken. If you read my article, you noticed that my focus was on getting [u]handbal[/u]l and IHF to learn from the mistakes of football and FIFA, by moving on with the investigation that has been discussed for some time (also during my years as IHF Chief Referee) and that I wrote about more in detail some months ago.

Of course, a major reason why I wrote about video review in the context of handball is that handball is the main focus of our web site, But the other reason was that it never really occurred to me that FIFA, being stubborn and arrogant and full of prestige, would suddenly change its attitude, after having publicly and firmly 'slammed the door' on any kind of use of technology. Instead, the suggestion a few months ago, when that statement of principles and policies was announced, was that the only new approach to be considered would be the experimenting with additional goal-line referees. The human factor must prevail, was the slogan repeatedly used.

So a lot of people around the world of football must have thought there was some kind of mistake, when earlier today a bulletin was issued by the FIFA president, where he essentially admitted that the FIFA's old insistence on accepting human errors as an unavoidable, or even positive(!), part of the game could no longer be defended in light of what happened in the Germany-England and Argentina-Mexico games. He even issued apologies to the disadvantaged teams. http://www.aipsmedia.com/index.php?page=news&cod=4805&tp=n

It would be nice to be able to take credit for this sudden and unexpected development; but I was obviously not alone in the last couple of days in pointing out the absurdity and demanding action. FIFA's top management may not have much appreciation for the finer points of refereeing or concern for protecting their top referees, but they do have a very strong sense for the protection of their own political and financial well-being. Getting on the wrong side of some of the top countries of the football world, and letting the entire global audience see the effect of their poor decision-making, that could become just a bit too costly also for the self-suffiicient FIFA. At the same time, FIFA also decided to show off their newly found decisiveness by also publicly making scapegoats out of a group of their World Cup referees. As only eight games remain, they clearly do not need to keep all the 29 referees around, so they sent home ten of them.

This included those five who had only served as reserves and '4th referee'. Then the search for politically suitable scapegoats was on. Of course the two referees from the fatal Sunday matches had to be sacrificed conspicuously. The others included the referee from Mali who seemingly 'stole a goal' from the U.S team. Also sent packing was the French referee who had the nerve to give a red card to an unsportsmanlike 'star' on the Brazilian team. You just do not do that. And then the Swiss referee, who was one of the favorites for the final or at least a semifinal, because it was seen as his 'fault' that the home team was eliminated early. This involved a correct interpretation of a rule that FIFA knows is untenable but decided to leave in place until after the World Cup! By contrast, several referees with performances that were clearly weaker from a technical standpoint are now allowed to stay on, because their weaknesses were not so conspicuous from a PR or political standpoint…

So when I now, one hopes, close the chapter on football/handball refereeing and video review for this time, then of course I do it with my main point: now that even FIFA has 'seen the light', surely handball and the IHF must be prepared to move ahead without delay. I am not asking for the sudden and poorly founded implementation of technological aspects, such as video review and goal-line technology, but I am urging that a serious investigation get started immediately! This should be so much easier now that it is clear that, after all, FIFA is indeed taking the lead. But please do not follow FIFA's example of making some top referees into scapegoats in the meantime, just because you are not doing everything possible to support them!

Not so long ago I wrote an article https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.977 urging that the feasibility and desirability of different forms of ‘video review’ in handball should begin to be investigated. I do not see it as a foregone conclusion that such reviews should be introduced, because there are certainly arguments both for and against, but at least an investigation should be initiated as soon as possible. In my article I commented on FIFA’s refusal to consider introducing technology in any form for the purpose of assisting the referees or allowing for a review, and I was suggesting that this must not be an argument for the IHF to be against changes.

Today, when football should have celebrated a great day at the World Cup with two exciting match-ups, Germany-England and Argentina-Mexico, we saw instead the pleasure and the fairness ruined by two terrible mistakes that it would have been possible to correct. The only positive thing was that in both matches the team that was given a one-goal advantage was in any case superior and won with a larger margin. I am also pleased to see that the teams/federations who lost were ready to admit that the opponents were better, but clearly they were also agonizing over the injustices they had suffered.

In Argentina-Mexico, the first goal for Argentina was scored from an off-side position that was very obvious also without waiting for any replay. The excuse could be made for the linesman that the goalkeeper position was somewhat unusual for a situation where off-side needs to be checked. But this is not the point; mistakes are human and will be made, and in this sense FIFA is right. Whether they are right in insisting that we should ignore mistakes that can be discovered and corrected, that is another story. Here we now had a situation where the Mexican players could point to the video screen in the stadium and immediately show the referee that the decision was wrong. But this evidence had to be ignored. (At least we can be content in handball that off-side is not an issue for us…).

In Germany-England, it is now unfortunate that some first-rate action by the German players will seem diminished by a terrible mistake in a critical moment. Germany had taken a 2-0 lead, whereupon England first narrowed the lead and then scored a goal that would have been the equalizer. But what was instantly clear to many and became 110% clear from the replay, this was not clear to the linesman. He had been caught out of position and somehow thought that the ball rebounded from the crossbar outside the goal-line, when in fact it was very clearly inside. If the goal had been correctly given, leading to a 2-2 score, the rest of the game could have developed very differently. What is intriguing is that the incorrect decision in some absurd sense amounted to a late revenge for the World Cup 1966, where England in the final defeated Germany largely thanks to a ‘goal’ that a linesman invented. (I know because I was there, in a better position than the linesman!)

One aspect that deserves highlighting is the awkward combination of making the referee aware of his mistake during the game but still preventing him from doing something about it. In the GER-ENG game, the referee saw his mistake on TV at half-time; in the ARG-MEX game, the referee could see it on the video screen even before the game had restarted after the incorrect decision. How might this, however subconsciously, affect the referee and linesmen during the rest of the game?

Also, FIFA argues that video review in a World Cup is inappropriate because ‘the rules must be the same at all levels’, and clearly it is only in the international and national top events where adequate equipment would be available. But we are not talking about different rules; a goal is a goal and the off-side rule is the same everywhere. It just does not seem reasonable that FIFA shows off the benefits of technology by showing replays of all the questionable decisions on the stadium screens and on TV, while the referees are prevented from being helped by similar technology. At least in handball the IHF regulations prevent such replays from being shown in the arenas…

There is a cynical expression that it is always better to learn from someone else’s mistakes. So the question is now: [u]is handball prepared to learn, at least to the point of seriously and thoroughly investigating the concept of video review[/u]?? I do not want to push for a particular outcome, but I eagerly await the result of an urgent study! After all, as some of our readers might be aware, I was the match supervisor in the 2008 Olympic semifinal Korea-Norway; and I would have loved to have had access to a goal camera replay at that time. As it now is, I assume I will never know the right answer: I have one still photo showing ‘goal’ and another showing ‘no goal’…

Some interesting links regarding the incidents in GER-ENG and ARG-MEX:

From the web site of Jens Weinreich, where he offers commentary but also includes a video clip from the 1966 ENG-GER game and a humorous take on why the linesmen did not give a goal:

„1966 in reverse“: von Wembley nach Bloemfontein

Then a more truthful rendering of the disallowed English goal, together with the player's call for goal-line technology to be introduced: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2010/8766423.stm

And finally a photo from the sports paper Ole' in Argentina that clearly shows the off-side 'goal': http://www.ole.com.ar/mundial/vio-mundo_0_287971338.html

There are many who want to describe the football World Cup as the main sports event in the world. Perhaps this is because it involves the one sport that virtually every country in the world takes an interest in. By contrast, the Olympic Games include a lot of events that are rather unknown in many parts of the world. Of course, many patriotic observers in the U.S. will keep insisting that everyone should know that the real football is the sport that is played primarily with the hands… But when an unfortunate football referee from Mali becomes a front page figure in the U.S., then it seems that football=soccer finally has gained some prominence also in this country.

Unfortunately, it seems that the enormous focus on this one event every four years has its drawbacks. It seems that this contributes to the many negative aspects that dominate the reporting and the reactions. Perhaps we are better off in handball having our World Championships more often, so that it is not a world disaster if a team fails. Perhaps it is the knowledge that the next chance does not come until four years from now, that makes coaches and players throw their sense of sportsmanship, decency and fair play overboard!!??

Yes, there have been several nice and exciting matches among the first 34 played; there have been many fantastic goals scored, and we have seen many great individual performances. But this has been almost overshadowed by the many negative incidents. To some extent it almost seems to be a matter of tradition or culture. The same teams, even when they are winning easily, are the ones guilty of provocations and unsportsmanlike action. Often it seems to be related to star status and arrogance; some players and teams somehow expect to be getting special treatment when they are up against some more ‘obscure’ opponents. This tendency is, regrettably, not totally unknown in handball.

The most irritating element has probably been the faking or ‘theater’. Referees are rightly criticized when the show the ‘red card’ for something that the TV replays confirm as being much less serious. And the criticism is also rampant when a player seems to have deserved a penalty-kick but the referee waves ‘play on’. But in reality the players are the ones who create most of the difficulties by constantly resorting to major ‘drama’, totally exaggerating the impact of minor body contact or pretending to have been fouled when nothing really happened. Such behavior should be punished more strongly, because if the players have nothing to lose by using such methods, they will never be discouraged. But being certain enough to be ready to punish is a difficult situation for the referee. I hope our top referees in handball see how damaging such methods can be and therefore feel encouraged to be alert in observing the theater and strong in punishing it.

Another disputed situation involves ‘handball’. Even the expert commentators seem confused about the rules and do not know how to distinguish between ‘intention’ and ‘advantage’. The concept of ‘natural body position’ also enters into the equation. We probably have a clearer or simpler situation in handball, but it also seems that recent rules changes have helped reduce the controversy in our case. Moreover, the punishment for ‘hands’ in football can be more drastic than what is typical in the case of ‘foot’ in handball.

Overall, the main observation concerning the refereeing involves a lack of consistency. There has not been a ‘clear and common line’ among the whole group of referees, especially as regards the personal punishments given. One would have thought that the group of 24 referees who are used in South Africa would be more synchronized, as they have been used over and over in youth World Championships and in other international events in recent years. We do not want to see ‘robots’ but, just like in handball, major differences between referees cause major problems for the teams who do not know what to expect and have a hard time adapting quickly in each game. The IHF and the continents are increasingly working continuously with selected groups of referee couples, so one would hope that the difficult aspect of consistency will gradually see improvements in handball, but as recently as in EURO 2010 it was a definite issue, so it will present the IHF with a challenge for the 2011 WCh.

Finally, I feel I need to point to one particular situation where we now for many years have been better off in handball, and where I find it absurd that our counterparts in football are too stubborn to follow our example. This involves a situation where a player is injured on the field also in the absence of a foul and a free-kick. To avoid the ‘drop ball’ restart, the players feel obliged to send the ball out over the side line, whereupon the opponents are expected to use the throw-in to get the ball back to the team that had it. This act of ‘sportsmanship’ is typically applauded by the spectators. In handball, in similar circumstances, we simply let the team keep the ball after a restart with a free-throw, and a restart with an indirect free-kick would clearly be a feasible solution in football. FIFA seems to agree, but they find it ‘too strange’ on grounds of principle to use a free-kick if there has been no infraction…

Good luck FIFA with the rest of the World Cup, and please try to set us a better example during the remainder of the event!!!

As we reported in advance of the meeting, https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.1014 the Forum of Club Handball (for men’s clubs in Europe) and the EHF met recently in connection with the EHF ‘Final Four’ and, as expected, there was mutual approval of the ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ that had been prepared for this meeting.

This means that there is mutual recognition of the roles of the two parties and their sharing of certain values and principles, and more concretely there is now agreement that work will proceed on a number of key issues: the competition calendar; the issue of compensation for clubs when players are used by their national teams; and insurance to provide compensation in the case of injuries in such situations. It is also clear that the EHF formally recognizes the FCH as representing the interests of European men’s clubs and that the FCH will be officially represented on specific EHF organs.

This is obviously a welcome indication of substantial progress; [b]but[/b], it must be kept in mind that it is limited to the area of the EHF’s jurisdiction and it is, for the moment, encompassing only the men’s clubs. Clearly, the EHF and FCH are hoping that the new ‘understanding’ will make it clear also to the IHF that no further delay is realistic as regards the establishment of a similar agreement on a global basis. And indeed, we now have it from ‘sources close to the IHF president’ that the pressure seems to have worked, as the IHF Calendar Working Group has suddenly been called in to a meeting in the next few weeks. At the same time there will apparently be a meeting between the IHF Executive Committee and its EHF counterparts. Let us hope that this creates the necessary momentum for an expansion, so that an ‘understanding’ based on the EHF/FCH model can promptly be established at the global level.

But we hope we are correct in assuming that it is just a matter of a brief period of time until the corresponding measures are also being put in place also for women’s handball. It could be argued that there is, in some very specific respects, more urgency for action on the men’s side, but surely it must be accepted that the whole spectrum of issues regarding competition calendar, release and compensation, and insurance applies also to the women. In fact, it is somewhat surprising that there have no been no pointed reassurances expressed by the EHF, which tends to be rather non-discriminatory in its approach, that the ‘understanding’ with the FCH will soon be extended to the women’s clubs. Perhaps this has something to do with the fact that the FCH has no direct counterpart for the women, and with the seeming reality that the women’s clubs have not been as vocal and cohesive in their demand for equal attention. Why is that?