Team Handball is a very minor sport in the US and many other countries. This low profile can be expressed in several ways to include:
– Limited athlete participation
– Little or no fan attendance
– No significant amateur leagues
– No professional leagues
– Very weak National Teams
– Almost no TV coverage (2004 Olympics was the most significant coverage ever on U.S. TV)
– Almost zero name recognition (people don’t even know the sport exists)

Well meaning observers of Team Handball, often upon seeing the sport for the first time, are perplexed. They think, “What a great sport! Why haven’t I heard about this sport before? Why is the US so uncompetitive against the top teams? You know, if Team Handball simply copied what was done for <insert sport here>, then Team Handball in the US would also be popular and competitive.”

These well meaning analogies however are often plagued with problems. So herewith is my analysis of “What’s wrong with your analogy.”

Soccer

This is probably the most commonly cited analogy and there are many commonalities between the state of US Soccer many years ago and the current state of US Team Handball. The progress US Soccer has made in the past 20 years is simply dramatic. One has only to look at the number of youth leagues in the US, the attendance at the World Cups in the US, the development of MLS into a fairly stable Professional League, the performance of the US National Teams, and the availability of TV broadcasts. By emphasizing youth leagues the US has not only been able to develop some quality players for the National Teams they have also created a greater appreciation of the sport and enough of a fan base in the US to support a Professional league and TV Broadcasts.

What’s wrong with this analogy?
1) What’s often overlooked with this analogy is the “why” behind the development of so many youth leagues. This didn’t happen by chance and was driven by a number of factors, with the biggest one being how dirt cheap it is to field a soccer team. Balls, goals, and an outdoor field is all you need. The fact that Team Handball is an INDOOR SPORT WHICH REQUIRES SIGNIFICANT COURT SPACE is a huge handicap. As anyone who has ever tried to start a Handball team knows the challenge of finding, and often paying to use, an indoor gym is a significant hurdle to overcome. And even if you find a gym, you will also be fortunate if you find one that can handle a 40m x 20m court.
2) Another factor that has to be considered is that soccer is relatively speaking a less physically and technically challenging sport than Team Handball. While Team Handball can and is played by young children in Europe, soccer is a better game due to less physical contact and the fact that even 5 year olds can kick a ball. And at any age the fact that Team Handball is a PHYSICAL SPORT immediately limits your pool of potential players.
3) While Soccer suffered from low participation the sport has always had significant name recognition and exposure in the United States. I grew up in rural Iowa in the 1970’s and 80’s, far away in both time and place from the soccer explosion in urban centers during the 1980’ and 90’s. Yet, I knew what soccer was and played the sport (albeit poorly and with little real understanding of the rules) in Physical Education classes. Contrast this to the virtual zero name recognition that Team Handball has in the US. Quite simply, it is extremely difficult to start from ZERO NAME RECOGNITION and have to actually explain the basic concept of a game to somebody who potentially might be interested in it.

What’s right with this analogy: While the 3 hurdles listed above are significant they can be overcome. It’s unrealistic, however, to think that the US can simply mimic soccer’s road to success. No one will argue, thought, that if some good youth leagues were established, even at a ridiculously small fraction (compared to soccer), US Team Handball would be in a much better state than it is today.

Lacrosse

This analogy’s faults are similar to soccer’s. Lacrosse isn’t nearly as popular as soccer, but it has seen some significant growth in the past 20 years, including the development of a professional league. However, tenet 1) the sport is played outdoors and tenet 3) it is fairly well known; still apply. In fact in some parts of the country (the Northeast), I’ve read that they have had to shut down little league baseball, because so many kids are playing Lacrosse. (It would be amazing if Handball ever did that to one of the major US sports)

What’s right with this analogy: The professional league, albeit not a huge one, could be a long term goal for US Handball. Additionally, focusing on one principal region of the country might be something for US Team Handball to consider.

Ultimate Frisbee

Same analogy faults as Soccer, and this sport is even cheaper.

What’s right with this analogy: The growth of this sport has been truly dynamic and fast despite at one time having near zero name recognition. Once again if Team Handball could only have a fraction of their participation and success it would truly be an improvement.

Volleyball

Volleyball has exploded from a principally California based sport to a nation-wide sport. This is particularly true in terms of the number of girls playing the sport today. Case in point, I’ll use my old high school in Iowa. Twenty years ago we played the sport (poorly) in PE class. Now my high school and virtually every high school in the state it is a varsity girl’s sport. How did this happen? Title IX played a primary role, but volleyball and its non physical contact nature is a natural for girls. This goes back to tenet 2) Handball is a physical sport and that can sometimes make it a tougher sell.

What’s right with this analogy: Title IX should be used to sell Team Handball as a woman’s sport. This is being done it just needs to be done more aggressively.

Rowing

Don’t ask me how this sport has increased in popularity. It’s more expensive than handball, requires having a lake or river nearby, and in my opinion, has got to be one of the most boring sports in the world to watch. Amazingly, because it is an NCCA sport and helps fulfil Title IX obligations, schools like Arizona State (In the middle of a desert!) have programs:

Arizona State Crew:  http://www.asu.edu/clubs/rowing/index_files/page0002.htm
I even read in Sports Illustrated that some schools have given scholarships to athletes with no experience in the sport.

What’s right with this analogy: My goodness, if you can get 50 people to join a club to row in the desert, you’d think you could get 20 to play handball. This proves anything is possible. Once again Title IX should be a key ally.

Rugby

There are several hundred rugby clubs in the United States playing at different levels including a National Super League. Rugby is also arguably the most popular club sport in American colleges. The US National Team has not come close to cracking the top tier of nations, but can field a respectable team and even has a few players playing professionally in Europe. But while USA Rugby, comparatively has been more successful then USA Team Handball, the sport still hasn’t been able to reach the next level in terms of popularity.

What’s right with this analogy: Well certainly Rugby in the US has proven that a sport can grow and become popular even if it is a very physical sport. It also has a pretty organized nation wide club system, both independent and collegiate. USA Team Handball should also try and follow Rugby’s path of getting more Americans to play for overseas clubs.

This can go on and on. The bottom line is that Team Handball can certainly learn and apply lessons from these other sports, but it will never be as simple as an exact copy of another successful development plan, principally because I know of know other sport that has had to overcome these three principal handicaps:

1) Team Handball is an indoor sport that requires significant court space
2) Team Handball is a physical sport and this limits the overall potential player pool
3) Team Handball suffers from near zero name recognition

Saturday’s, EHF Cup 2nd leg match between Goppingen and Creteil, ended in controversy during the waning seconds of the match. Creteil had won the first match in France by 4 goals 30-26. With 30 seconds remaining and trailing 23-19, Creteil needed to score one more goal to cut the lead to 3 and win by aggregate. (Note: Goppingen would advance on a 4 goal victory due to the away goals rule).

Creteil’s last offensive series was somewhat unorganized and Goppingen was able to disrupt it on 3 occasions with contact fouls. With 2 seconds remaining the last foul was called. Creteil player, Pierre-Yves Rigault, realizing that time was winding down quickly executed a direct 9 meter throw that surprised the goalie and hit the back of the net. One ref signaled a goal and Creteil started to celebrate. The other ref, however, said no and a 5-10 minute discussion which included table officials resulted in the goal not being allowed and Creteil being given 2 seconds back on the clock. With no element of surprise and a set defense in place the end result (no goal) was predictable.

Now, in defense of the officials, replays clearly showed that one Creteil player had not fully moved beyond the 9 meter line and several German players were clearly closer than 3 meters to the throw off. Still, as I think about it, it seems to me that these sorts of situations happen all too often and one simple rule changes could fix these end of match problems.

That rule change would be to simply adopt a basketball style stoppage of time for the last minute of every half. That would mean, if a whistle blows, the clock stops– immediately. The current system, by which officials decide to blow the whistle 3 times and stop the clock, is too wide open to interpretation. After a goal is made, the official has to make a decision as to whether the team is moving fast enough to half court to start play. After a foul, the official has to decide whether the offense is moving outside of the 9 meter line and the defense is moving 3 meters away from the ball fast enough. If we simply take this decision out of the hands of the ref, these controversial judgment calls won’t have to be made.

Not only would this eliminate these stall tactics, it would also eliminate the all too common ploy to simply foul the other team as the clock winds down, as the worst thing that can happen is a 2 minute penalty (assuming it’s not foolishly done in the act of shooting). The IHF now regards flagrant instances as “serious unsportsmanlike conducts,” but the remedy of not allowing a player to play in his next match is not very satisfying to the team that’s eliminated. (Nor is it working- every other EHF press release seems to be a disiplinary notice on this very subject.) And even if it’s not flagrant, do we really want to see a succession of 9 meter throw after 9 meter throw as the defense tries to run out the clock?

Will this change the game? Yes, the stoppage of the game clock will extend the last minute of a game slightly. I would estimate that it would add perhaps another minute in real time for close games. Teams also would no longer foul quite as much at the end of the game as the reward of taking another 5-10 seconds off the game clock would be gone. There still will be fouls, of course, but the defense’s only reward would be the opportunity to set back up on defense. And this reward will be offset by the offense getting an opportunity to run a set 9 meter play.

While, I suppose it could be argued that the current rules are fine the way they are. I just don’t see what’s so exciting and compelling about waiting to see if the ref thinks one team’s stalling has gone too far and deserves a stoppage of the clock. If this simple rule for clock stoppage was added, the ending seconds of a game would hinge more on the skill of the players, and less on the judgment of the referee.

The back and forth arguments regarding seeding for the SETHC playoffs resulted in the unfortunate dismissal of the ATH from the SETHC. The questions regarding seeding were raised by ATH Coach, Chris “Cap” Cappelmann and centered around Benedict College receiving the number one seed despite having won fewer games in the conference. For those unfamiliar with traditional Handball (or Euro format) standings, the ranking of teams is done strictly by the points awarded for wins and ties. Winning percentage is not used, so by Cap’s logic (and traditional Handball circles), ATH with an 8-2 record should have received the #1 seed over Benedict’s 7-1 record.

For whatever reason, however, the SETHC and its commissioner, Andrew Washington chose to use the winning percentage method and awarded Benedict the top seed. This decision and example scenarios concerning seeding was then sent out via email in January to the SETHC. The time for complaining (justified complaining, in my opinion) would have been shortly after that email and prior to the matches played in February. Waiting until after those matches and shortly before the play-offs is simply the wrong time to make your case.

The resulting email dialogue which grew increasingly personal led to the commissioner’s decision to remove ATH from the league. Cap, in my opinion, had a valid point, but made the point at the wrong time and in frustration, also crossed the line in his dialogue with Andrew. And regardless of how much you feel your team has been wronged, it’s important to keep perspective on just how important that seeding was in relation to the opportunity to have competition.

Andrew, in my opinion, could have been a little bit less dismissive in responding to some of the email traffic. I also think that if the earlier email containing the scenarios was resent that might have resolved the issue earlier. And finally, perhaps the punishment should have been simply on the coach, instead of the entire team. (e.g. suspension for the first day of the tournament)

But enough! I think everyone should move on from this and learn from it. Having two good teams in the same town is quite a luxury to have. I’m sure clubs like Utah, Cleveland and other locales are scratching their heads. Some of the commentary I’ve seen also suggests that ATH and Atlanta Metro need to better share the workload logistics for making a league work. That sounds like a good plan. Let’s also hope that next season the league adopts 100% clear parameters at the start of the season and that these rivalries are settled on the court, instead of the court of public opinion. But maybe this will be settled on the court sooner than that. Hmmm, I wonder who’s setting the brackets for the USOC Championship next month.