A red card with a major impact in Man U – Real M

Whether one believes that the referee decision was justified or too harsh, there is in my mind another aspect that matters more and brings up an interesting comparison with handball. For many decades, in handball we had a punishment in the rule book, exclusion, which rarely was used because it was felt that its consequences were too harsh. It was generally agreed that leaving a team with one player less for the entire duration of the games was bound to affect the spectacle in a very negative game, leaving the shorthanded team without much hope. The situation is not quite the same in football, where a team can survive for an extended period in this way, but it normally has a major impact, not just for the teams but also for the spectators and a worldwide TV audience. This is of course especially the case, if the send-off happens very early in the game.

In handball, we decided not so long ago to remove this drastic punishment. Instead we have ‘red card with report’ and ‘red card without report’, depending on the severity of the infringement. But in both cases the team is back to full strength after two minutes. On some occasions, I had the opportunity to discuss with FIFA and UEFA officials about the feasibility of introducing a similar principle in football, i.e., that one could allow a red-carded player to be replaced after X minutes. But the unwillingness to see the merits of such an idea was always astonishingly strong, even if the football officials agreed that such an approach could make the decision to show a red card much less dramatic and controversial.
So, it seems that on this point we have a clear advantage in handball, but the issue is still not free from problems.

Instead we have had some improper unwillingness in some places to accept the global principles contained in the IHF playing rules. Under those rules, the referees (and nobody else) make a final decision whether the infringement that leads to a red card is severe enough to warrant a report to authorities. The purpose of the report is to enable the responsible federation to take a decision about further punishment, such as a suspension from X games. The rules make it clear that such added punishment is not to be considered in those cases where the referees have decided that the violation belonged in the category that did NOT warrant a report.

Nevertheless, some national federations have incorrectly taken upon themselves to set aside this basic principle in the rules, by pronouncing added punishment also in cases which the referees found to be less severe. I was happy to read this week that perhaps the most prominent one of these federations, namely the Danish one, has now decided to abandon its flawed practices and follow the IHF rules and principles. So all that we are now waiting for is for the European Handball Federation (EHF) to come to the realization that they should follow the same course and give up a self-proclaimed prerogative which they do not really have!

I think I have made it clear on several occasions, that I generally find the EHF to be a competent and well-managed organization, but that their handling or rules issues, protests, and disciplinary matters leaves a lot to be desired. Perhaps it is the size of the EHF operations and the broad scope of their competitions that cause difficulties, as they require a large bureaucracy with a formidable set of rules and regulations, sometimes seemingly a bit removed from the practical reality on the handball court. Perhaps it also reflects a disconnect between handball experts and legal/administrative functionaries.

In any event, the recent handling of the protest from Croatia Zagreb regarding their crucial Champions League game against Minsk puts the reputation of the EHF in a poor light. The protest essentially involved the inability of the match delegate to detect that a player serving a 2-minute suspension entered the court and contributed to the scoring of the goal late in a game with a very close final result in favor of Minsk. The initial response to the protest was correct, in the sense that the denial of the protest was based on the principle that a protest against ‘an observation of facts’ is not valid.

But when Croatia appealed the initial verdict, the statement of denial at the second level in the process was horrifying. Because it stated that the EHF hypothetically could go against the basic principle, but only if the error in an observation had ‘an essential and crucial influence on the final result’. In other words, the EHF entity admitted that the EHF is willing to go against basic principles, but at the same time they showed a terrible judgment in claiming that the effect on the final result was not obvious. So it is easy to understand why Zagreb was not willing to accept the denial of their protest with this kind of reasoning, and they have now taken the matter to EHF Court of Arbitration. As I see it, it would really be an injustice if the protest were to be denied again at this final level, given the terrible arguments that have been used. And, if the final verdict were to go in the favor of Zagreb, there should be a replay and also a possible impact on which team should play in the upcoming Round of 16.

When there is a ball involved, the wrestling certainly becomes much more interesting!

The situation is that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) needed to cut down its number of ‘core sports’ in the summer program to 25, and the recommendation from the IOC Executive Board is now that wrestling is the sport to be dropped. The sport that had seemed more vulnerable was Modern Pentathlon, notwithstanding its name one of the really old and traditional sports just like wrestling.

It is interesting to observe the arguments from the wrestling community, from the sports that narrowly escaped and also from the ones who are now, together with wrestling, left to compete for the chance to be an ‘additional’ sport in 2020. Some seem to think that a sport should be protected precisely because it has long traditions. Others emphasize instead that the ‘old’ sports need to renew themselves in order to remain relevant and interesting. This may in fact be what rescued modern pentathlon, which has gone from a five-day event to an intensive competition where even two of the components (running and shooting have been combined).

I would personally support the argument that all sports need to think about changing in ways that make them more appealing to new generations. Increasingly, there is a strong interest in sports that are dynamic or even adventurous. Speed and continuous action are key factors, something that we have seen in handball, where we have also tried to support this trend through appropriate rules changes. Similarly, the IOC has begun to use the Youth Olympic Games as a place to experiment and make room for new, modern sports that attract young participants and a young audience. I think this is a healthy trend, and I feel there should be an increased willingness to let new sports be added on a temporary basis and evaluated against some of the stagnating traditional events.

The reaction to the proposed exclusion of wrestling has also followed ‘geopolitical’ lines. In one way I think this makes sense. A sport that has a strong following on a truly global basis would seem to have more merit than one that continues to be limited primarily to one continent or to a small group of countries. These arguments were heard when baseball and softball lost their status, and people now seem to argue against table tennis, because nobody from outside a small number of East Asian countries seems to have a chance to compete at the very top level. And somehow it seems that every time that a sport which is popular in the United States comes under scrutiny, it is taken as a deliberate insult.

I would be inclined to argue that a bad record regarding doping, match fixing, corruption and bad governance should be factors of considerable relevance in determining whether a sport really deserves to be in the Olympics. Perhaps that approach would be of some help for those who try to fight for their respective sports to clean up their act, whether from the inside or the outside. On that score, some might argue that also handball would have its problems, but one might hope that this is a temporary situation. On other accounts, it does not seem that handball is in any serious danger of being a candidate for elimination. Some hope has instead been attached to the idea that beach handball might become recognized as an Olympic sport, along the lines of beach volleyball, but that may be a rather remote possibility.

it is too tough to do it alone; the top non-European teams need help from the IHF

Considering that in most years Europe only has 10-12 really strong teams, there should be room for a few non-Europeans to make their mark. It is not good enough to be about equal with teams such as Montenegro, Belarus or Macedonia. Another observation is that there are no new teams from outside Europe who seem ready to get to the very top. Korea are not as solid on the men’s side as they have been among the women, and Argentina were unable to follow up on their surprising performance two years ago. Even the IHF President publicly expressed his disappointment specifically with Argentina.

Of course, someone might suggest that, as long as we have a sufficient number of good teams to make the quarter-finals exciting and of high caliber, it should not really matter where these teams come from. But this would be a flawed reasoning in the case of a World Championship. One important point is that we also have European Championships every two years, currently with 16 teams, and the impression is that these are events that are more homogenous in quality, leading to suggestions that they are a stronger event than the World Championship. Particularly at a time when there are loud voices to the effect that the competition calendar must be reduced, it is not a good sign if the World Championship can be seen as a secondary event.

But this is not even the main point, as I see it. We all want handball to be a truly global sport and one of the most important and popular Olympic sports. But this is not an image that is easy to maintain in the absence of really strong participants from several continents. What would a football World Championship be in the absence of the perennial contenders from Argentina and Brazil and the other South Americans? And here we have gradually found competitive teams from Africa, Asia, and even North/Central America. The situation in basketball is not very different. Even icehockey thrives on account of the transatlantic rivalries.

Unlike the IHF President, I do not want to be too harsh in a case such as Argentina, even if I have some understanding for his reaction. I know how difficult it is to create the necessary foundation to bring a national team to the very top level, not because the nation is located outside Europe but because there is no tradition or culture for our sport. It is meaningless to discuss why football has managed to become truly global; we have to deal with the realities we have. I have seen it first-hand after moving from Sweden to USA almost 40 years ago. Instead we need to look ahead, and focus on the scope for changes that would be both quick and solid.

Considering how difficult a task this is, also for countries with sports traditions and some government support, it is not realistic to say that the responsibility should rest exclusively with the individual federations. It also has to be a responsibility for the IHF because, as noted above, it certainly is in the interest of the IHF. But one needs to recognize that ‘politically’ this is a sensitive issue. A lot of countries in each non-European continent need help at the grassroots level to get handball established. This is an obvious and non-controversial role for the IHF, and the only concern is that more resources should overall be spent on this. But it is a different matter if one suggests that the IHF also needs to help in a tangible and forceful way in the case of those nations who are already among the best in their continent and manage to qualify for most World Championships.

It would seem that such countries have shown that they are somewhat capable of helping themselves and should not be priority recipients of support from the IHF, when there are so many other needs. However, I would still argue that, at any given point in time, it is critical to give further support to precisely those nations who have already shown that they have the talent and the determination to get to the top. Everyone would benefit from a policy and project under which they got that final push that gets them to the very top and keeps them there.

We are talking about countries and federations who have already made a major effort and sacrifice to get where they are; they are not ‘free-loaders’ and they deserve support. Neither the Europeans, who see them as potential rivals, nor the lower-ranking non-Europeans, should be envious and consider such an approach to be unfair. The assistance should only be provided for a certain period of time, and it should not be provided in the form of a blank check. Much of the help could be in the form of providing these national teams with the opportunities for frequent high-level competition that would make them more experienced and stable. So I am urging the IHF, with the collaboration of the continental federations, to consider this new approach to get our World Championships and our sport to be truly global at the elite level!

Collina and Webb, the best known examples in soccer; how would it work in handball?

Traditionally, men have tended to see hair loss and baldness as a matter of concern and embarrassment. Lots of money has been spent on combating and concealing baldness, often with poor results. The younger the person is, the more of an issue the baldness has tended to be, if baldness is (mis)taken as an indication of aging and reduced strength and fitness. So at the same time as we are increasingly emphasizing youth, fitness and strong personality for our elite level referees, it is then a bit amusing to see the trend that baldness is used as a method or signal for conveying strength and authority.

This has become amazingly common in international football, and it seems for instance that a disproportionate number of the referees in the UEFA Champions League are sporting that bald look. Of course, when it started that way, with PierLuigi Collina, one of the very best referees in recent decades, who undoubtedly would have been an excellent referee also with a full head of hair, it was because of a medical reason and not on a voluntary or intentional basis.

But among the many followers, it is interesting to note that perhaps the favorite method is for those who still have quite a bit of hair growth, often in the male pattern where the top/middle is empty, to remove what remains to get the complete bald, razed look. Perhaps it looks younger, stronger that way? It would be interesting to get opinions from referee, players, fans about this question. Does it really work: does it give the referee a more appropriate look for his task, does it command more respect, does it avoid a sense of aging?

In just a week from now, the handball men’s World Championship is getting underway. Perhaps this would be a good opportunity to test the hypothesis that the bald look is an improvement and has advantages in term of match control and respect. Would these referees, who are already well-known and generally respected, be able to gain a further edge by changing their look? It seems that it would be worth trying! And it would seem to make it easier to do it as a group, rather than having one individual referee or couple trying it on their own. It would not be so awkward if all of them had the same look.

Moreover, I remember having used all kinds of gimmicks as IHF Referee Chief to emphasize the notion that the 16 referee couples in a World Championship must see themselves and act like a TEAM. Of course, there is only one couple on the court in each game, but it is important that they all follow the same approach, do their job with strong consistency and also support each other as a team, even if in a way they are also competing with each other for the top assignments. So just perhaps, the real way to create that team spirit would be for all of the referees to shave their heads!? Surely that would give the clear signal that they want to appear as a team! Naturally, it would require that also the members of the Referee Commission follow this example. And I am sure that Manfred, Ramon and the others would be prepared to do so!

And on a more serious note, it would also be a gesture of loyalty and support for one of the referee colleagues who is sadly missing in Spain, namely Mads Hansen. In a recent article, I wrote about Mads and his valiant struggle to recover from lymphoma. One of the effects of chemotherapy is hair loss, and Mads decided to shave his head rather than seeing his hair falling out randomly. So a show of support for Mads would be yet another reason for that bald look when the World Championship starts.