Jaume Fort had a long and distinguished career as a national team goalkeeper in Spain, partly during a period, when Spain had not yet become a ‘world power’. Unlike most players of that caliber, he stayed in handball in a role where he could put his experience to good use for the next generation of players around the world. His peers elected him as ‘Athlete representative’ to the IHF, and he has gone on to become the Head of the European Handball Players’ Union. Jaume agreed to share with our readers some background information about handball in Spain, and later on, in Part 2 of this interview about issues related to his role as a player representative.

[i]CA: Jaume, I remember meeting you for the first time when you were the goalkeeper on the Spanish team in the Goodwill Games in 1990 and I was one of the referees; but could you summarize how you first got involved in handball, and how your career as a goalkeeper progressed![/i]

JF: I started playing in my hometown Cardedeu at the age of 6. My two brothers played handball and so did most of my friends, so that the chances of me getting involved in handball were pretty high. At first I kept playing both handball and baseball simultaneously, but at the age of 14 I made up my mind for handball. One year later I changed to Granollers, where I grew up as a handball player. The peak of my career was in 1996 with the silver medal in the European Championship in Sevilla and the bronze medal in Olympic Games. These were the first medals ever in such competitions for the Spanish handball. I am also very proud of having participated on the Spanish team in all major international competitions during twelve years, from 1988 to 2000.

When I started playing I never thought about becoming a professional sportsman and now I feel very fortunate because for almost 20 years I could play professional handball in the strongest leagues of the world. I spent the last 5 years of my active career in Germany; playing in the Bundesliga was a great experience both personally and professionally. I would encourage Spanish players to take the opportunity and do the same (traditionally, there are very few Spanish players who decide to play in Germany…)

[i]CA: Both the men’s and the women’s national teams from Spain have become well established at the elite level; but it was not always like that; could you explain how and when handball really took off in Spain! [/i]

JF: If we look at the final standings of the major official competitions, we’ll see that for many years the men’s national team could not break the barrier of a 5th place, but we were always very close to the top teams. In 1996, three months before the Atlanta Olympic Games, Spain was not even qualified for the Olympics. but the silver medals in the European Championship gave us the last ticket for Atlanta, where we in the end won the bronze medal. From that moment on, the national team played with more self-confidence and all rivals have considered Spain to be among the favorites in every competition. Definitely, the gold medal at the 2005 WC in Tunisia was the icing on the cake.

In the recent competitions, Spanish women have proven that they also belong to the best teams in the world. Our women’s team won the silver medal at the 2008 EC. However, women’s handball is not so popular as in northern European countries like Denmark or Norway.

It is interesting to note that in 1997 one of the most successful handball players in Spain, Iñaki Urdangarín, married the youngest daughter of King Juan Carlos and Queen Sofia of Spain, and became the Duke of Palma de Mallorca. Never before had handball in Spain obtained such a great media interest, but more than a decade later, it is clear that we did not take advantage and thus missed a unique chance to make our sport become more popular.

[i]CA: The top league in Spain, ASOBAL, really shows strength in European competition and attracts star players from all over the world; but how do you see the strength and depth of the league, how is the financial stability, the spectator and media interests?[/i]

JF: Together with the Bundesliga, ASOBAL is the strongest league in the world. The European competitions have been Spain’s reign in modern handball, especially in the nineties, where different Spanish teams were able to win all different European competitions. Nowadays, there are just two Spanish clubs that can keep up with the powerful German teams: FC Barcelona and BM Ciudad Real. The solid financial and structural situation of the German teams makes it more and more difficult for Spanish teams to reach the final rounds. Most teams in ASOBAL have cut down their budgets in the last two years. As a result of this, the international handball stars feel more attracted by the Bundesliga, where the difference between the strongest and the weakest teams is not so big. This season Ciudad Real has won all their 21 matches in the ASOBAL league up to this point; something similar is very unlikely to happen in the Bundesliga. Spectator and media interest is also much bigger in Germany, where Handball is clearly sport Nr 2 behind soccer. The average spectators’ attendance in the Bundesliga doubles that of the ASOBAL league.

From the organizational and spectators point of view, the 2007 WC held in Germany is, beyond any doubt, the best major handball competition ever organized (outside the Olympic Games). This can only happen in a country like Germany, where one finds a great economic potential together with a high spectator and media interest. Another important difference is that Spanish clubs have a much bigger dependence on the money they get from local governments than German clubs do. To put it in a graphic way, many Spanish clubs are financially in the Intensive Care Unit whereas German clubs are going through a small cold.

[i]CA: What about the ‘grassroots’ level? Is there a strong ‘pyramid’ with competitive leagues and well-organized clubs also below the top?[/i]

JF: We do have grassroots competition in every region. But if we ask the coaches at the top of the pyramid, they will claim that young players have important technical, tactical and physical deficits which should have been acquired at an early stage. As I see it, this can be partially explained because youth trainers lack technical preparation. Related to this, most top clubs invest little time and effort in grassroots handball and this will inevitably backfire in the near future. It can be said that the distance between elite and grassroots handball is getting bigger and bigger, so that the chances of young Spanish players bursting into the ASOBAL League are really small. Another bad symptom is that national youth and junior teams are doing poorly at the major events.

[i]CA: Leaving aside football, how does handball in Spain compare with other team sports, for instance basketball and volleyball?[/i]

JF: If we look at the total number of licenses issued by sport federations, handball is ranked at the eighth place with almost 3% of the licenses. Needless to say, football is by far the most popular sport in Spain (22,7%), followed by basketball (10,8 %), the leading indoor team sport. Although Spanish basketball clubs and national teams have a level of success at the major international competitions similar to that of handball, basketball enjoys a much higher media and spectator interest than handball. Considered to be the absolute basketball paradise, the NBA is the ultimate reference. Spanish basketball has succeeded in selling the idea that Spain is the alternative to the NBA dominance. To illustrate this, we can recall the huge media attention in recent matches between Spain and USA and the fact that we have several Spanish players competing in the NBA. Apart from basketball, there are other sports which are in direct competition with handball to draw the interest of media and spectators, like indoor football (five-a-side), which has become very popular in the last decade.

[i]CA: So overall, how do you assess the longer-term future of handball in Spain? [/i]

JF: In Spain we have seen how some traditional handball clubs have disappeared or are in a very delicate situation. Atlético de Madrid, Teka Santander and Bidasoa Irun (former European top clubs) are the most significant examples. The current economic crisis does not help at all since all the teams have big problems with their budgets. Competition from other sports is constantly growing. Top clubs generally invest little time and effort in grassroots sport, so that the responsibility falls on the small clubs, whose trainers do not always have the necessary training. I wish I could say I was more optimistic about the future…

CA: On this slightly worrisome note, we thank Jaume for his ‘behind the scenes’ insights about Spanish handball. In the near future, in a ‘Part 2’, Jaume will tell us about issue related to his current role as player representative.

Did you notice that there was a worldwide celebration of International Women’s Day earlier this week? And did you realize that it was the 100th anniversary of this event?

Superficially, one might think that we have gender equality in handball; after all, at the international level we have the same events for both men and women, and we now finally after years of struggle also have the same number of men’s and women’s teams playing in the Olympics. But I really do not think that this suggests we do not have any issues!

In fact, I continue to be surprised that one hears relatively little debate about gender issues in our sport. Is there not much discussion going on, or is just not loud enough? Through this article and a second part in the near future, I would want to [u]encourage more debate[/u]. Because surely there are realities that give us reason to have opinions and to discuss ways of improving. For instance:

— Why is the spectator interest in women’s handball much smaller than that for men’s handball in the large majority of countries?

— Why are most top level women’s teams coached by men, while it is almost unthinkable to see men’s teams coached by women?

— Why is there only 1 woman among 17 persons on the IHF Council (and why is the situation almost as bad in many national federations)?

— Why do the newspapers and web pages tend to write so much less about women’s handball compared with men’s handball?

— Why are the top women’s players of the world paid clearly less than the top men’s players?

— Why are there so few women referees at both the international level and in most national federations?

— Why do more sponsors seem to prefer to support men’s clubs and men’s championships instead of women’s clubs and women’s events?

— Why, in the current discussion about the international competition calendar and the excessive demands on the players, is all the focus on the men’s side?

* * *

Gender issues in sports tend to be a reflection of gender issues in society at large: the continuing impact of traditions, concerns about unequal opportunities, biases in evaluation and appreciation of performances, limited participation in governance, prejudices in public opinion and in media treatment etc.

However, one might think that gender issues in sports should be less dramatic or less serious than in other aspects of life, because in sports they do not involve matters of life and death, they do not involve violence and abuse, and they do not typically involve fundamental human rights.

But there are reasons why gender issues may, in fact, be seen as more sensitive in sports than elsewhere. To some extent this may be because there are expectations regarding sports that are not quite realistic. As an analogy, people who view corruption or unfairness as a normal, albeit regrettable, part of life in politics and business, somehow are almost unwilling to believe that sport is not free from similar attitudes and behaviors. In other words, people expect sports to be above what is the norm elsewhere.

Another consideration is that when one discusses gender issues in sports, it is natural (or almost inevitable) to think of it in an international context. After all, many decisions that impact participants in sports at the national or local level are taken at a higher, i.e., global level. And there are many aspects, e.g., culture or religion, directly affecting the gender issues, which are viewed very differently in different environments. What is a ‘hot issue’ for some may be normal and uncontroversial to another group.

Also, in business and politics the decision-makers and the key ‘players’ tend to be from the same generation. In sports, the key players, the athletes, are often one, or even two, generations removed from the top decision-makers. So how can one expect that the viewpoints of the two groups are the same!?

After these statements as background, you may believe that I am about to enter into a lengthy ‘philosophical’ discussion that will make you want to tune out quickly. But that is not the case. However, before I stop for the moment: I venture to believe that in handball we [u]should[/u] be better off than some other sports. We do not have the problems of icehockey (not enough top countries), ski jumping (too new and not enough athletes yet), or softball (inadequate global coverage). In fact, we are well ahead of football/soccer and basketball, in terms of longstanding traditions for the women’s game.

Also, we are not one of those sports that need to adapt its entire format or its basic rules to suit the women. All that differs in handball is the size of the ball. There is nothing about handball that makes it a ‘strange’ sport for women, and it is not the type of sport, like swimming or track & field (athletics), where measurable results could imply that the women’s game is inferior. A high-quality and evenly matched women’s game is just as exciting.

I will give you a few days to think about your experience and ideas regarding gender issues in handball. Then, in Part 2, you will hear from a number of women with different roles in handball (and also some men…) about their views on issues and possible solutions. And in the meantime, it would be really nice if some of you decided to volunteer [u]your[/u] input!!!

Editor's Note: Join in on the discussion at our Facebook Fanpage: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Team-Handball-News/108817968908?ref=ts

Like other similar sports, handball has rules with provisions that state that “decisions made by the referees on the basis of their observations of facts or their judgments are final”. By contrast, “appeals can be lodged only against decisions that are not in compliance with the rules”. The latter category applies to situations that, fortunately, do not occur in the great majority of matches.

Also sports (such as NBA, NHL and NFL) that for a long time have been used to a high-tech environment that goes beyond what is the case at most top level handball matches, have come to realize that the human factor must remain fundamental to the decision-making in the matches and that excessive recourse to high technology is not advantageous to the proper running of the game. In other words, these sports use “instant replay” or “video review” very [u]cautiously[/u] and only in situations (and for purposes) that are carefully specified and highly [u]regulated[/u].

Football/soccer, through its International Football Association Board (IFAB), just a few days ago took an amazing decision to remain completely conservative. IFAB decided that further experiments with goal-line cameras or balls with computer chips will not be pursued. This was not due to problems with the technology; it was simply a decision taken ‘on grounds of principle’. It was noted that the introduction of such methods would “open the door for video review, something that we absolutely do not want”. http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/federation/administration/releases/newsid=1177755.html#ifab+decides+pursue+goal+line+technology

As some IFAB members put it: “the human aspect of football is essential” and “the big moments [ed.: meaning mistakes or controversies] get the supporters talking and this is what makes the game so vibrant…” In other words, it is implied that mistakes and controversy are good for the popularity of football!!! But at the same time, IFAB left the door open for ‘other (=human) ways of helping the referees make the right decision’. This would involve an expansion of the role of the ‘4th official’ and the possible introduction of two more officials, along the lines of what is now being tested by UEFA.

One might hope that the strange preference for the ‘excitement of serious and import mistakes’ is not shared by handball. Presumably, also in handball we all want a match to run smoothly, without excessive interruptions. But handball is different from football, as there are more stoppages and as we use time-outs, even though it does not go as far as in basketball. Moreover, video review could only exist in handball at those levels where there is adequate availability of cameras and other equipment. Nevertheless, for that elite level, [u]it behooves us at least to consider whether video review is desirable on grounds of principle and, if so, feasible in a practical sense[/u]. To make such determinations, one needs to have an idea of what methods and what procedures would be involved. The text below is intended to provide some ‘food for thought,’ and not as a way of prejudging the whole matter.

[u]Possible situations[/u]

1. As valid protests can be lodged against decisions that “are not in compliance with the rules”, it follows that it would be important to use available replays to avoid suspected non-compliance immediately when it occurs (so that if possible it could be corrected before the game is continued) or at least to determine the reality after the fact. In the latter case, it could be done in response to a protest lodged.

(For illustrative purposes, some examples of decisions “not in compliance with the rules” are: (i) giving possession of the ball to the wrong team, after the game has been interrupted due to a faulty substitution; (ii) not giving time-out in a situation where it is obligatory; (iii) allowing a suspended player to remain on the court. By contrast, subjective referee judgments regarding offensive fouls or 7-meters, or observations of facts such as ‘stepping on the line or not’, ‘goal or no goal’ or faulty substitutions etc, basically must not be subject to review).

2. While ‘goal or no goal’ was just mentioned as an example of decisions that, on grounds of principle, must not be subject to review, there is one specific situation that fully warrants an exception. This is the situation where the real issue is not whether the ball entered the goal or not, but as to whether it did so before the end of a half, or before a whistle signal (for some other reason) from the time/scorekeeping table. In such a case it is conceivable that the referees may not have a clear opinion, and it would be legitimate to resort to video review.

3. A similar exception would also be prudent, for the sake of the image of our sport, in cases where serious violations occur “behind the back” of the referees, and would go unpunished unless the relevant managers of the competition could act on the basis of video evidence. It would only involve very serious forms of fouls or misconduct, i.e., those types that according to the playing rules require reporting for further action.

[u]Procedures[/u]

It is important to note that it is not enough, from the standpoint of adequate legal safeguards and practical reliability of the video review approach, to determine exactly [u]when[/u] such review may be used. It is equally important to ensure that solid [u]procedures[/u] exist for [u]how[/u] it should be used.

This obviously involves reliable access to a video monitor, staffed by a neutral and competent person under the control of the match supervisor, and equipped to handle the retrieval and playback with the sophistication needed, for instance slow-motion and comparison of image and sound. Quickness is also a major consideration in making a review viable, particularly one that involves situations where the game cannot be restarted until a result is available.

Moreover, it has to be absolutely clear who is responsible for the decisions to use the video replay and who has the final word on the evaluation of the replay. The rule book is clear about the normal authority of the referees, but it seems that in connection with a video review all authority essentially must pass to the senior official who is supervising the match. This person would also have to decide whether the video really is conclusive.

While bureaucracy must be kept to a minimum, these issues about [u]how[/u] video review is to be used must be regulated in detail. However, there is little point in getting further into the details for such procedures until, hypothetically, it is agreed that the implementation of video review is being seriously considered.

With my review of the issue, I am just hoping to provide a basis for a further debate about the desirability and the feasibility of video review at the higher levels in handball, and perhaps it could give the IHF and other interested parties an impetus for moving ahead with a serious discussion.

Laszlo Sinka is one of the most well-known handball profiles in Europe. In addition to having been the key figure in Hungarian handball for many years, he is also a member of the EHF Executive Committee (and also the Chair of the EHF Beach Handball Commission).

[i]CA: Laszlo, could you tell our readers a bit about your handball background, before you moved into these top positions in the HHF and the EHF![/i]

LS: I played as an “all-round player” for nearly two decades at different levels in my home town, Százhalombatta. My wife was also a handball player, in the Hungarian 1st division. After my retirement, I played at charity matches, often representing the Hungarian Masters Selections. If I could, I would still like to train and play ,but due to chronic injuries I had to stop.

[i]CA: Hungary is not one of the largest countries in Europe, but it has always had great sports traditions; and for a long time, handball has been able to stay at a high level, both with the national teams and the club teams; what is the secret to this success? [/i]

LS: Yes, we are proud of our handball history (nearly 80 years old) and we try to pass on this great heritage to the upcoming generations. But we are also looking ahead and working hard to keep up with the world’s elite. The HHF is a well respected body and has working relations with domestic and foreign associations. Handball is the second most popular sport in Hungary (after soccer of course); last year a total of 83 million viewers watched matches on TV.

[i]CA: in some European countries, the men’s side dominates very strongly, but in Hungary the women’s handball has perhaps remained even more stabile and strong at the international level; what is the reason for this?[/i]

LS: Handball is the most popular team sport for women in Hungary and plays an important part in our entire education system. Based on the large quantity, we have an extensive competition system at the developmental level with different age categories. This nurtures quality players for our strong National League from which our national players are mostly selected.

[i]CA:. I would imagine that you were not entirely happy with the result of your men’s team in the EURO2010; what do you see as the main reasons for this result, and what are your expectations for the near future? [/i]

LS: I could not identify one main reason for the result. Rather, the team’s performance was greatly influenced by the coincidence of a few components: the relatively short preparation time, a lack of tournament fitness, injuries and late rehabilitation, unavailability of some key players, and perhaps mental weakness hampered us. Yes, it was a painful experience for us but at the same time the early exit from the ECh provided us with the opportunity to analyze, regroup and work out a strategy in order to qualify for the WCh, by winning tough games against Slovenia.

[i]CA: when one follows Hungarian club teams in Champions League on the webcasts, it is always apparent that there is a very enthusiastic spectator support; what is it that leads to this strong support and does it exist also for the lower levels of matches?[/i]

LS; Handball provides excellent entertainment for the majority of the population. In certain areas of Hungary, generations have grown up with handball and pass this passion onto their children. Of course, our National Men’s and Woman’s Teams are the most popular and always play in front of a full capacity crowd, at home. Many spectators are watching the 1st division matches for both genders, and our Champions League teams from Veszprém and Győri attract the most supporters. But generally speaking we have a good attendance even in the lower divisions.

[i]CA: it seems that many of the best teams come from cities and town around the country and not from Budapest; does this have a special explanation?[/i]

LS: The most successful clubs were situated in Budapest until the last two decades. After the changing of the political system at the end of the 1980’s, the big Budapest clubs lost their government supported “mother companies” and there was not enough private enterprise replace the financing. But in the smaller cities around Hungary people are more fanatic about their ‘home’ teams and there is less competition with other sports for local support. So places like Debrecen, Győr, Veszprém, Békéscsaba and Székesfehérvár became our ‘strongholds.’.

[i]CA: over the years I have observed that you have always been able to come up with new strong coaches for your teams; what programs and efforts do you have in place to be so successful in the area of coaching?[/i]

Coaching education is an important part of our organization and has a special place in the long-term strategic plan of the HHF. We have a good working cooperation with different institutes and organize coaching education courses along with them. We have a strict licensing system. It is part of our strategy that we encourage our retired yet experienced payers to continue their activity in handball, as coaches or referees.

[i]CA: yes, what about the area of refereeing? you have strong traditions in Hungary; what do you do to encourage young talents to get interested in refereeing?[/i]

LS: We think the referees’ education is just as important as that for coaches. In fact, we strongly believe that the two can and should go hand in hand. It is based on our philosophy that tries to keep everybody within the game. So we encourage retired players to do a referee course and start whistling. Talented young couples with enthusiasm and desire then can take a step forward, entering the EHF Young Referee Project. We also test other referees every year.

[i]CA: there is currently an intensive debate about the pressures on the top players, due to the competition calendar for clubs and national teams; what solutions do you see to this problem?[/i]

LS: Everybody agrees that the number of matches top players have to play are already too many and to put more matches into the schedule is almost impossible. On the other hand, the media – TV in particular – and sponsors need these high quality matches in order to maintain the momentum of the sport, and this is in our common interest. So within the field of sports administration very little can be done… One area for improvement is perhaps the application of the most up to date sport science for players rehabilitation and better impact of training sessions.

[i]CA: of course, handball must compete with other sports and other activities in order to remain attractive for new young players, spectators, media and sponsors; how do you see the ability of handball to remain competitive in Hungary and more globally?[/i]

LS: A decreasing population results in less children and more new age attractions reduce the interest in sport. So the competition amongst the different sports for potential players becomes tougher and more aggressive. Our philosophy is to make handball accessible to everybody. So we start with mini – or as we named it after the ball they are playing with – “sponge” handball even at kindergarten level. We even organize competitions for the +45 age categories. Then we have the growing off-shoot of our sport, Beach Handball. It also depends on the game itself: we are lucky, because handball is a fast and spectacular team sport with lots of excitement and passion, – and this makes promotion easier.

[i]CA: from your long experience, do you have any specific suggestions for how handball could be made even more attractive?[/i]

LS: I think the existing playing rules are good, suitable for the public and fulfill the requirements of a game of the 21st century. However, there is room for improvement: the better application of the rules by the referees and the better utilization of the rules by the coaches and players. This is a natural process and it will bring the game forward until another change of the rules becomes necessary to adapt to how the game develops.

CA: On behalf of our readers, I want to thank Laszlo Sinka for making himself available for this very interesting and optimistic commentary on both the background and the future of Hungarian handball!

A few weeks ago I read with interest an article in the German handball web site handball-world.com. http://www.handball-world.com/o.red.c/news.php?auswahl=24182&GID=1 In summary, people interviewed in the article argued for the idea that retiring top players could quickly become top referees on the basis of their practical sense for the game at the top level and their personal experience with the many complex situations on the court that are difficult for the referees to evaluate. So many judgments in a game are based on the knowledge of tactics and the ability to anticipate action, to see correctly what happens and to ‘feel’ what this means. Handball refereeing [u]is[/u] a demanding job.

My reactions to the comments in the article were of course generally positive. Who could be against the idea of improving the recruitment of candidates for the elite referee level!? It was also nice to see that several well-known players, coaches and federation representatives were so supportive. In order to convince former top players to become referees, this is the attitude that is needed. But I also had to smile a little bit at some of the comments.

For instance, one could get the impression that this is a brand new idea that nobody had thought of or tried before. Clearly this is not the case, as I am aware of such efforts both from a large number of traditional handball countries and also some new handball countries that do not have a cadre of experienced referees. In fact, I have myself been involved with such efforts both internationally and at the national level during the last 30-40 years (Sweden and USA). It was suggested that candidates could easily be found and that the main obstacle would be their reluctance to start at the bottom and move their way to the top very slowly. And I also suspect that it is easy to underestimate the difficulties involved in making the transition from a top player to a top referee.

First of all, despite encouragement from federations and coaches, it would not be realistic to think that suddenly large quantities of top players would become interested in refereeing. They are likely to continue to prefer other roles, including coaching, if they want to stay involved when retiring as players. So it could never become the main source for the elite referee category. But [u]even a small increase would be helpful[/u], so there is no reason to be negative. Then the argument about being treated as all other beginners, without any chance to start higher and/or move up faster is likely to be flawed. In my experience this is not what happens. Smart national federations realize that they have to be flexible and give credit for the experience and talent they want to draw on. So they are likely to make whatever exceptions that are warranted [u]in the individual case[/u], depending on the ability demonstrated.

Although it is now beyond my influence, I dare assume that also the IHF would set aside normal age limits and happily receive ‘special’ candidates outside the normal programs and progressions. I could even imagine that the IHF/PRC would give clear signals to encourage national federations to strengthen their efforts in this respect. Indeed, instead of just waiting passively for possible candidates to come forward, such efforts should be proactive, in the sense that players with the right attitude and personality should be sought out and approached. Also, I would not limit the search to national team players; 1st and 2nd division players in major handball countries would clearly be able to bring the relevant experience. In any case, it is doubtful that the absolute star players would be the first ones to volunteer, and personally I am not so sure that their standing as stars would be an advantage.

It was also correct and useful that some of the contributors emphasized that the ‘status’ of the refereeing job would be an inhibiting factor in attracting former top players. Indeed, the same applies to [u]all[/u] recruitment for the refereeing function. And here the national federations have a heavy responsibility. I do not think that financial compensation is the main issue, although it is certainly a factor. There are many other things that are important: better educational and mentoring capacity, combined with the availability of stronger match delegates, would make a big difference; but a general increase in the priority, support, and protection given to the referee function is also needed.

Millions of people around the world put in endless hours of hard work for the purpose of enabling athletes at all levels to enjoy the pleasures and benefits of sports. For most of them it is either their hobby as a coach, manager or referee, or it is a part of the ‘job’ of being a parent. The overwhelming majority do not get any tangible compensation for their efforts; for some perhaps it is mainly a sacrifice, but for most – one hopes – it is a pleasure with its own intrinsic rewards. A minority, however, have it as their job or their career in some other sense. They earn a living from it, and some earn more than that. For yet others it is not the money, or just the money, it is the power and prestige, an ego trip in the world of sports.

But the Olympic Games, like now in Vancouver, tend to offer a healthy reminder: sport is – and should be – primarily for the athletes; and in a secondary way for all those who find it stimulating to watch. As many before me have more eloquently expressed, sport is not just enjoyable to do and to see, it teaches lessons for life and about life. I have had the great privilege to be part of the Olympics on many occasions. It was exciting but it required hard work, almost around the clock; one gets immersed, almost to the point of losing perspective. So, in a strange way, it is somehow a bit special, like for me now during the last couple of weeks, to be able to watch, if only on TV, the Olympics without being involved and just take it all in. Enjoying the fantastic performances, the struggles, the victories and the narrow defeats; and of course hearing and thinking about the personal stories and efforts that lead up to these performances.

So I am going back to those who in an unselfish and idealistic way make the performances of the athletes and the organization of such wonderful events possible: [u]they[/u] surely do not need any reminders about what sport is all about. [u]But[/u], then there are those who, directly or indirectly, earn their money, their positions, their power, their comfortable lives ‘on the backs of’ the athletes, often without much concern for fair play and good sportsmanship. Do [u]they[/u] not need some kind of reminder about what is, and what is not, expected from them? Some are found in business and politics surrounding the sport. But many are of course directly involved in the management of sport in one way or the other.

You know that in the Opening Ceremony of the Olympic Games, there is always [u]an athlete and a judge swearing oaths[/u] about ‘abiding by the rules,’ ‘impartiality,’ ‘true spirit of sportsmanship’ and ‘for the glory of sport.’ This seems entirely appropriate and may serve as a useful reminder. But what I think is [u]missing[/u] is that, in every Closing Ceremony the [u]IOC President, on behalf of the IOC and all sports federations around the world[/u], and by extension all those doing business with them, should be asked to [u]swear an oath that the same principles will be upheld, as these sports federations do their work for the athletes and sports[/u] until the next Olympic Games!

A few days ago, THN offered a translation of an internet article in the German magazine Der Spiegel. https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.964 We also offered some brief clarifications of the concepts involved. The key numbers according to Der Spiegel were that the President’s remuneration had been changed from an honorarium of 30,000 Sw.Frs. to a salary of 500,000 per year, and that, in aggregate, the remaining 16 Council members had had their honorariums increased from 174,000 Sw.Frs. per year to 825,000. This suggests an average increase from around 10,000 per year to more than 50,000 per year. (Around that average, I suspect there is a wide range, from Executive Committee members through Commission Presidents to the second-tier continental representatives).

Not surprisingly, the revelations in Der Spiegel have caused people to react. I have received feedback essentially of two types: “this is really outrageous; how can it be allowed to happen!?” and “I am not sure how to react; is this out of line or not?” I can fully understand both reactions, but perhaps the latter one is more to the point: while it is easy to react spontaneously, it is more difficult to have a clear opinion unless one has a frame of reference. In other words: to sense whether something is ‘out of line’, one must ask: “[u]in relation to what[/u]”?

The way I see it, there are really at least [u]five[/u] separate questions one could ask: 1. do other international sports federations pay such compensation and of the same magnitude? 2. how does one justify a sudden, huge increase? 3. how do the compensation figures compare with other IHF expenditure? 4. do the positions and the incumbents in the case of the IHF deserve what they get? and then 5. the [u]fundamental[/u] question: is the [u]decision-making process[/u] for these payments and arrangements transparent and appropriate?

On the first question, some federations provide numbers for a few key employees and elected official, while the majority are not transparent and either keep their numbers secret (also internally) or make it very hard to obtain firm and reliable figures. But the main problem is the relevance of the comparisons. Differences in organization size, financial circumstances, and management structure make it impossible or inappropriate to compare directly. Suffice it to say that most federations provide some kind of honorariums or allowances, varying from enormous amounts for a very large number of people (FIFA) to quite modest amounts in some smaller and less wealthy federations. The IHF’s [u]pre[/u]-increase figures, having gradually moved up during Moustafa’s regime from 0 to the 10,000 average for Council members mentioned above, seem to be more in line with most numbers I have heard.

In a sense, this also answers my second question: the [u]new[/u] IHF figures do seem very high by most comparisons. And there is really nothing in the IHF’s situation that suggests a basis for a brand new compensation philosophy. There is no drastic expansion of activities and duties, no newly found wealth has been announced, and no achievements worthy of major rewards can be pointed to. It is doubtful that IHF member nations would find any arguments either.

The IHF budget has tended to be rather static in terms of size, main income sources and major lines of expenditure. There have been no entirely new forms of revenue. The budget document is dutifully presented on an annual basis, but there is no real debate within the IHF or with the member federations. While some budget items are not easy to define in practice, at least it is clear that the share spent on operations as compared with administration is not impressive. And the 1.325.000 Sw.Frs. amount now reportedly being paid out to the President and the Council members is roughly of the same magnitude as the [u]entire[/u] budget line for development aid!

It is a delicate matter to evaluate jobs and performance, but IHF insiders are well aware that some of those who now will receive average annual amounts in the order of 50,000 Sw.Frs. do [u]not[/u] have the competence or inclination to accomplish very much for the IHF. As I discussed some months ago, in a commentary on necessary By-Law changes and current IHF management practices, https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.857 it is also clear that most continental representatives in the IHF focus almost exclusively on the narrow and selfish interests of [u]their own[/u] constituencies, and spend very little time as true managers of the [u]IHF[/u]. Moreover, the current regime simply does not allow the IHF Council and most of its individual members to play an important role and carry out demanding tasks, and the attention to matters involving strategies and objectives is any case lacking.

If the President is so autocratic, and the Council is largely impotent in the overall decision-making process, then this could in a sense be used as an argument for the President’s conversion from a volunteer elected official to the position of full-time employed chief executive. The arrangement is certainly not without precedent in the world of sports, and a suitable high-level executive will demand a commensurate compensation. The questions are, however, [u]whether the IHF is really best served[/u] by an arrangement where an autocratic president’s role is intensified, whether Moustafa is the best one for such a job, and whether it is money well spent from the IHF’s limited resources. We know the President’s own answers to these questions, but what does the rest of the handball world think, including the poor developing handball countries who depend on the IHF for support? As someone asked: “what are all the miracles that the President now will perform in return for his salary, that he was not able to perform in the past?”

Many would have looked differently at the whole issue and the specific factors just discussed, if the compensation decisions had gone through the careful scrutiny of the member federations in the form of a Congress, and the Congress had given its blessing, not just for the compensation increases but for the notion of a president as a highly-paid full-time employee. Yes, there are parliaments and politicians who are in a position to decide on their own remuneration (although they do it openly), but is that the example to follow for an international sports federation? In 2004, when I became President of the IHF Rules & Referees Commission for 2004-08, I innocently raised this question, when I was surprised to find that the Council was being asked to vote on what was at that time a small increase in a more modest amount. I can assure you that this intervention from a newcomer was ‘not popular’. But for me it remains a matter of concern, on grounds of principle.

Finally, to echo some comments I have received: there is another real danger involved in the new, high level of remuneration of the IHF Council members: if we already have a situation where the President wishes to be autocratic, as he feels he knows best and therefore simply wants the Council to go along with his decisions, what are then the likely implications of his insistence on paying the Council members such large amounts? The President demands loyalty, and for many it would not be easy to walk away from such money. So has it not suddenly become [u]much more difficult to expect true independence and a real debate[/u] where serious questions or objections are raised???

My recent comments about the refereeing at EURO 2010 suggested that one of the problems this time involved a distinct lack of a ‘common line’ among the referee couples, something that both the coaches and the referee supervisor clearly see as an important issue. Of course, the coaches in a sense always have a similar issue, when they want to ensure that all the players on their team are synchronized regarding the tactics to be used, both generally and in specific game situations. After all, players are likely to have a mind of their own…

So it may have some relevance to examine the experience with achieving a ‘common line’ also in a totally different field. People who know me well are aware that I am not just a ‘handball fanatic’. I have many other interests, and perhaps the main one involves classical music and opera; no, do not worry, not as performer, just as an enthusiastic listener. Therefore, it seemed like a very nice opportunity when some time ago I was able to have a chat with a well-known symphony conductor. He wants to be ‘anonymous,’ but I can reveal that he is from a handball country and he is sports-minded. Thus he was able to appreciate the significance of my questions, when I asked him about ensuring a ‘common line’ from the members of an orchestra that he is conducting.

As he noted, a ‘common line’ for an orchestra obviously does not just mean following the same music sheet but, in particular, it means following the conductor’s intentions and interpretations. And the [u]whole[/u] group has to ‘buy in’, has to be on board with the agreed approach. He wanted to mention five points, three of which are relevant to the preparations or rehearsals prior to a concert (or a game). One applies during the concert/game, and the last one is more related to the feed-back afterwards. I hope you will agree that, not surprisingly, they are very much the same kind of points that a coach or a referee supervisor need to keep in mind; nothing revolutionary, nothing that they may not know already, but still interesting.

The first point is to show that the conductor clearly knows what he/she wants to achieve. One must be prepared to listen and to accept ideas, but one cannot get respect without coming well-prepared and being able to demonstrate one’s knowledge. Being overly democratic and too ready to make compromises or to let the team decide does not work, if you want to emphasize a ‘common line’. The same goes for a group of referees.

Second, it is critical to focus on the big picture first. It is tempting to get caught up in detail after detail, but the approach to those details will not be clear, until and unless the overall goal or tactic is clear. It is especially important to avoid getting into a lot of negative feedback and criticism on minor details during a rehearsal or practice. (A referee supervisor may need to explain how he/she wants the referees to lead a game, before one gets into explaining the specific mistakes that they need to avoid).

The third pre-event point is to remember that, even as you focus on a team approach and a ‘common line’, you still need to treat the orchestra/team members as individuals. Some are more comfortable with the notion that the leader knows best, and are not so willing or capable of articulating any views of their own. Others need to have more of a dialogue, both for the purpose of understanding the message and in order to accept it fully.

During the concert/game, you need to realize that most of the opportunity for serious teaching is already over. Going too far in trying to change course or to rectify problems can easily backfire and make things worse. Certain things can be, and need to be, dealt with as the event goes on, but especially negative feedback, including body language, can often be demoralizing or confusing. (I am not so sure that all coaches will agree on this).

After the game, a team coach or a referee supervisor normally has the opportunity to offer feedback. The conductor noted, with some envy, that for him this tends to be the case only when he is conducting ‘his own’ orchestra, where he is based and where he has more ongoing and managerial responsibilities. When he is a ‘guest conductor’, there often is not an opportunity, except if one tries to do it in a rushed way directly after the event. But he warned against this; he had found that such immediate feedback, at a moment when the adrenaline is still there and when the orchestra members have not yet had time to do their own evaluation, is likely to be wasted. They are not receptive and are not likely to be able to make much use of the feedback.

I will not go back and comment (more than I did above) on how I think that each of these five points apply to a handball coach and to a referee supervisor; I will leave that to each of you, on the basis of your own experience, if you find it useful. Indeed, you may even disagree with some point. Personally, I do find it relevant and useful, and of course I can primarily comment on it from the perspective of a referee supervisor. I think there are some good analogies or comparisons, and I do believe it offers some helpful reminders. As Mozart used to say, “we are all in the same boat.”