The German Handball Federation (DHB) wants to give the appearance of being offended and mistreated, through the EHF verdict against the referees Lemme/Ullrich. In recent time, there have been several statements from DHB to the effect that “German handball is clean” and “the Bundesliga is clean”. Therefore, it is of course ‘highly inconvenient’ when a punishment against their ‘poster boys’, Lemme/Ullrich, is now pronounced. This is the only explanation I can find, when usually sensible DHB officials now get so upset.

Because I sincerely hope that it is not a general attitude they demonstrate, when their focus is on the assertion that the punishment is too harsh and should be appealed. For federations who supposedly want to participate in a serious way in the fight against corruption, it is clearly the wrong instinct to put their energy into defending anyone who has been found guilty of some kind of wrongdoing.

As handball is years behind in taking action, the situation is now that the EHF is trying to establish, for the first time, some kind of standard in determining punishments in relation to the different types of wrongdoing. Clearly it will take some time to establish a ‘catalog’ of punishments with very specific guidelines for each type of action. Indeed, for obvious reasons, one hopes that such a ‘catalog’ will never become very complete or comprehensive. Therefore, it is just not realistic and appropriate to get into arguing that is ‘unfair’ that someone gets the punishment of X+1 for infringement A, when someone else got ‘only’ X for infringement B.

As you may recall, I was disappointed that the first round of EHF verdicts seemed clearly too lenient, so I am more worried about a trend in that dangerous direction!

Of course, it is awkward that the first punishment against a referee couple involves precisely Lemme/Ullrich. And as I can personally verify, they have for many years been one of the most solid couples in the world. They fully deserved the top nominations they received from the IHF, including an Olympic final. Perhaps one could note that in this year’s World Championship in Croatia, they were no longer as strong as before, showing problems in resisting the pressures of the home team and the home crowd.

Regrettably, there is this tendency that referees do not always go out ‘on top’. Perhaps they stay on after some of the motivation is gone. Lemme/Ullrich had already notified the IHF that this would be their last IHF event, and it seems that EHF had been told the same thing regarding the Euro Championship next January. So one could note that the protest against a 5-year suspension must be more about image and prestige, because the international career of Lemme/Ullrich was about to come to an end anyway. Moreover, they would reach the mandatory age limit 3 years from now.

So back to the heading: I am prepared to believe that what really upset the EHF was the decision of Lemme/Ullrich [b]not[/b] to reveal the specific name(s) involved in the affair in Russia. This leaves the EHF with the more anticlimactic action of punishing the club for ‘not preventing’ the action of certain individuals. But perhaps, if the name(s) were to be revealed, it might turn out to be more than the EHF has bargained for…

If you have watched top-level football matches, FIFA or UEFA events and the top leagues of Europe, you have become used to seeing the referees and their assistants communicating via wireless equipment.

This type of equipment was demonstrated to the IHF Referee Commission not so long ago, and I am happy that I had the opportunity to push for it to become introduced also in handball. There was initially some skepticism: “Do we really need such a method for just 2 persons and on such a small court? Surely they can continue to handle it with sign language and by getting close to each other occasionally?!”

But it was tested, both at elite events and for training purposes in courses for IHF referee candidates, and it really became clear very quickly that here we had a new important resource for the referees. So approval was obtained to acquire enough equipment to use the system during the men’s World Championship in Croatia earlier this year. And again it was a great success, even though there had been some worries about the fact that the idea was completely new to most of the referees. They were really enthusiastic!

Every method that can be used to improve the teamwork between the referees is obviously positive. For the most part, each individual decision is of course taken by ONE referee, the one who has the main responsibility for a situation on the court. But there are still many reasons to collaborate and communicate. Generally speaking it is a psychological advantage to know that it is possible to communicate instantly and in an ‘invisible’ way whenever it seems helpful. And it strengthens the sense of teamwork, something that can be positive in situations where it is important to remain strong and resist the pressure from teams and spectators.

But there are also many specific situations where it is good to be able to compare impressions and to warn or support each other: observations of struggles between players on the 6-meter line can often benefit from two different perspectives; quick agreement on what happened first – offensive foul or defense in the goal area – is another situation; comparing the impression that a defense may have escalated the methods too far and deserves a punishment is yet another situation, and a clear agreement prior to a drastic decision such as a ‘red card’ is also advisable. The examples are numerous!

[b]So, all in all, there are many good reasons why the wireless communication should really penetrate the top levels of handball very quickly.[/b] It should be standard in all IHF and EHF events, and most top leagues would benefit from it. Indeed, it is not going to be so effective if the IHF and EHF referees use it only in their international games and then go back to old-fashioned methods at home. The IHF and EHF need to resort to some form of cost-sharing to make this work, as the IHF referees would mostly use the method outside IHF events, such as in the Champions League. And the IHF would need to ensure that non-European IHF referees get to use it in their respective home continents. Then the national leagues will need to follow. I believe France has already started.
But there are two sides to the feasibility of a speedy introduction of this system: it does not just depend on the willingness of the IHF to spend considerably more money and its continental and national federations to follow the example! It is also a question of reasonable pricing. I do not have inside information about the margins the main producer, ADEUNIS, is operating under. But it is clear that prices that present no problems to FIFA, UEFA, and top football leagues, may well be quite unrealistic if one wants rapid penetration in handball. Increased volume should in itself make it possible to keep prices down, but a strategic and PR-related decision may also be needed to achieve a reasonable level. Nevertheless, the first thing is that the eyes of the decision-makers in the IHF, EHF, other continental and national federations must be opened to the great advantages of using this new technology.

Finally, a parenthesis apropos some comments that were heard in connection with the World Championship in Croatia: while a supervisor on the side-line may be connected with the referees, it must be remembered that the handball rules do NOT allow the intervention of a ‘super referee’ from the outside, regarding the [u]observation[/u] of facts. Only the referees can decide if ‘the foot was on the line’, ‘who touched the ball last’ etc. And this is something that one definitely would not want to change, as it would easily lead to chaos. The role of the supervisor is limited to ensuring that the referees do not inadvertently commit any [u]rules[/u] mistake of the nature that it could lead to a formal protest.

It was good news for the sport of Handball that it has been determined that the refereeing in two matches under investigation was unbiased and correct, despite the attempts to influence. Additionally, I was pleased to see that the referees did their duty and reported the improper actions that they had been subjected to.

But as I pointed out in my earlier commentary, “What results do you want?” https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.794, when clear evidence has been found of wrongdoing, the responsible federation MUST use this opportunity to set a very clear example, in the hope that this will serve as a deterrent. As such, it is my firm personal opinion that EHF failed to set the right example in the verdicts that have been announced. A financial punishment for HC Metalurg is not enough. There should also be a punishment in the form of disqualification from all EHF competition for a substantial period. (At least one year and probably more)
In the case of Mr. Vakula, his actions were so serious, considering his position as an EHF referee, that his disqualification needs to be permanent. I will also note that he and his partner were among the referees eliminated by the IHF not so long ago, as it was determined that they could no longer be trusted for IHF events.

(Editor’s note: The EFH official statement is somewhat vague as far as the incidents involved. According to my understanding (limited by google translation of Handball-World articles), Vakula reportedly called and texted the officials of the match in question. Additionally, it’s worth mentioning that his wife also played for the Russian club in question. For the Metalurg incident apparently the refs were offered a trip to the WC in Macedonia should a favorable account in the match was achieved. A win for Metalurg would have sent the club into the main round of the Champions League)

EHF Official Statement (22 July 2009) Arbitration Tribunal decisions:
http://www.eurohandball.com/article/12467
Handball-World (German): Referee affair: Vakula suspended for four years: http://www.handball-world.com/o.red.c/news.php?auswahl=21296&GID=1
Handball-World (German) Lack of protection of the referee: Metalurg Skopje must pay a fine of 4000 euros: http://www.handball-world.com/o.red.c/news.php?auswahl=21301

[i]Manipulation of games – what is the problem and what needs to be done?[/i]

Of course, it is not very good for the image of any sport to be talking loudly about manipulation of game results, attempts to bribe referees and other forms of corruption involving the games. Moreover, bribery and similar actions are serious and delicate legal issues, which should not be discussed lightly in the absence of evidence. And the nature of these actions obviously tends to make it almost impossible to come up with clear evidence, so if the absence of evidence leads to silence, then silence is what we will have.

But in my opinion, [b]silence is not the best tactic[/b]. The problems with manipulations of games are so serious for the reputation of a sport, that it is not healthy and realistic to ‘bury one’s heads in the sand’ and pretend that the problems do not really exist. On the contrary, [b]it is extremely important to create awareness [/b]that handball, like many other sports is [b]facing major risks[/b], that we are [b]vulnerable to attacks[/b], and that it is vital to try to [b]take preventive action![/b]

Frankly, it is not really credible, when people in important positions react with great surprise, when suddenly possible problems are revealed regarding 6-8 matches, as has happened within EHF competition. People with deep knowledge of our sport are more surprised that there have not been [b]many more [/b]matches identified over the years. And it is definitely not a good thing if it becomes known that some of the matches now discussed were brought up years ago [b]without[/b] any follow-up, or that it [b]now[/b] becomes necessary to search urgently for solid procedures to handle such matters. But better late than never!

[u]Why corruption occurs[/u]

Most of us realize that in politics and business there is a lot of corruption in different forms. But not all of us seem willing to accept that, whether we like it or not, sports at the higher level is to a large extent politics and business. So why should we assume that sports in general, and our dear handball, is somehow immune to corruption??

Federation and club officials see it as a matter of [b]enormous prestige [/b]that their team does well, qualifying for World Championships, Olympic Games or major continental events such as the Champions League. [b]And a lot of money is at stake[/b]. Staying eligible for government support or Olympic Committee financing tends to depend on results, and the same goes for the ability to hold on to generous sponsors. So, of course it is [b]tempting to go beyond what is ethical or legal to improve the chances of good results![/b] For that matter, it is not farfetched that a sponsor may want to do something ‘extra’ to help improve the ‘return on their investment’ in the form of better results and better PR.

Those who are vulnerable in all this are primarily the referees. (Of course, we also know of teams paying each other for some ‘collaboration’, when one team desperately needs the points and the other one does not). The referees are generally not the instigators, as they do not run around looking for opportunities, so we must be very [b]careful to avoid seeing the referees as the main culprits.[/b] I am not saying that there is an excuse if someone is falling for a temptation, but personal problems, poor living standard and other factors do make people vulnerable. We are all human beings…

To make things worse, while handball is not yet affected in the same way as some other major sports, [b]gambling is adding a very nasty dimension [/b]to the whole issue of manipulation of results or ‘match fixing’. Legal gambling can be bad enough, but as has been experienced especially in football, [b]the inroads of illegal gambling [/b]mafias, typically based in Asia, have become a serious problem. It is not just that they skillfully find ways of manipulating results. They also make sure that people with gambling addictions get into bigger and bigger problems, so that they (perhaps players, team managers, referees) are de facto forced to play along in illegal operations. It is not clear to me that we in handball are fully prepared to deal with this kind of threat.

[u]Necessary action[/u]

Of course, the idea that any sport would be [b]capable of simply preventing problems is far too naïve[/b]. And creating awareness goes only some distance in dealing with the issue. The EHF has recently announced measures such as the introduction of a Code of Conduct, a multi-faceted Integrity Program and a specific ‘hot line’ so that it is clear where any attempts at bribery and other wrongdoing shall be reported. This seems a good beginning of efforts to make the referees more supported, with less of a feeling that they are all alone out there.

But the best prevention may involve showing the world that there is a readiness to take strong action when weaknesses have been discovered. I am not just talking about legal measures against proven bribery. Some referees have also shown through their actions and performances that they are not up to the task of handling the big matches. This includes situations where the referees becomes totally overwhelmed by the spectator pressure, where they completely lose their courage to take the necessary tough decisions late in the game, or where they constantly look for ‘easy solutions’ in the form of quick whistles, compromise decisions, compensation etc.

Again, these referees should not be accused of corruption, but if this is the best they can do, then they do not belong in the top matches. And while it has happened quietly, perhaps too quietly, the IHF has in recent years [b]weeded out [/b]a number of such couples, because the risk is too great that one incident will be followed by more. Moreover, such refereeing shows a [b]lack of strong personality[/b], and from there the step to being vulnerable to illegal pressures may not be very long. So setting examples and showing ‘zero tolerance’ for biased or incorrect refereeing is very important for everyone’s sake.
It follows that the recruiting of new young top referees must have the same emphasis!

But it would be totally wrong to focus exclusively on this kind of action. It is extremely important to have a practical support structure in place (beyond the formalities announced by the EHF). Especially [b]during events[/b], such as World Championships and continental championships, [b]the resources for supporting the referees need to be strengthened considerably.[/b] This is a ‘personnel management’ function that has traditionally been totally underestimated and understaffed. Referee Commission members work around the clock but still do not always have time of offer all the personal attention.

The referees need to have a [b]professional environment [/b]that enables them to prepare and recover fully, to get feedback and encouragement, and to get physiological and psychological support. Moreover, they must be totally isolated from teams, media and fans, and they also need to [b]be isolated from political pressures[/b]. This means that everything related to nominations and evaluations must be handled exclusively by the [b]technical[/b] staff. A good example for this whole set of issues is set by FIFA and UEFA.

So I am urging the IHF and its continental federations to deal with this extremely important set of issues [b]immediately, forcefully and openly[/b]. Awareness is the first step, but preparation and preventive measures are also required, as is the readiness to take the [b]strongest action [/b]whenever needed. This obviously includes [b]harsh punishments[/b] against clubs/federations and referees in those cases where bribery really has been [b]proven[/b]. And, as discussed, it includes the strict and continuous separation of other referees who do not measure up. [b]Wishful thinking is not going to be enough![/b]

From a USA vantage point, it may be easy to be affected by the traditions of the concepts of NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB etc., but it may not be so easy to understand all the considerations involved in figuring out how European club handball should best be organized to accommodate its many constituents!

First one needs to appreciate the rich traditions involved in the European ‘pyramid’ structure within [u]each[/u] country with a proud National league at the top. The system is also based on annual promotions and relegations throughout the pyramid, totally unlike the ‘closed’ approach in professional sports in the USA. There is the same strong support from the fans and the communities for the individual teams in each country as there is for each team in a USA Pro league.

But there is also a strong tradition for European Championships and Cups for both national teams and club teams in handball, just as in other sports such as football. It is the evolution of the formats of the club team competitions that is interesting, as the migration of the best players to a select group of teams in a very few countries creates a major ‘imbalance’ on both the men’s and the women’s side. This affects the TV and marketing situation, it affects the financial situation of the clubs (both the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’), and it affects spectator interest.

The fans and clubs in the individual countries still see it as major matter of prestige to have [u]their[/u] team compete for the chance to play the other league champions, or for the opportunity to participate in of the other European cups. At the same time, the owners and fans of the top European clubs (from a very limited number of countries) see it as a vital business interest to have as much competition as possible against each other. Many Handball fans are torn, because while they want to support their local club they also have a great interest in seeing the big clubs playing each other, live or at least on TV.

So where do you strike the balance, and who has the right to decide? It has been taken for the granted that the EHF, as the ‘umbrella organization’ for all the national federations and their leagues should have this task. The top clubs beg to differ, talking about an illegal monopoly situation and point to European Union legislation. And EU does indeed take an interest in such matters, as has already been evident in the context of football regarding different proposals that FIFA or UEFA felt free to introduce.

Of course, one extreme is to say that all national champions must be allowed to play in the ‘Champions League’ and not just in some ‘pre-pre-qualifying’ event with a slim chance to get in. The other extreme is to say that the best 16 or 24 clubs in Europe (although with questions about how this is fairly determined) should be allowed to play in the highest competition, without regard for the resulting nationality distribution.

On the men’s side, the EHF has this year come up with a compromise, at a moment when the total number of teams in the Champions League is reduced to 24, which further complicates the issue. There are now 3 teams each from Germany and Spain, and 2 teams each from Denmark, France and Hungary taking up half of places. Then there are 7 additional national champions, with 4 slots set aside for winners of qualifying groups plus this year’s new feature: 1 slot for the winner of a ‘wild card’ group with the next teams in line from 4 top countries. Needless to say, a compromise never really satisfies everyone!

But then there is also the totally different idea, primarily pushed by the Group Club Handball (GCH), http://www.groupclubhandball.com/ an association of a large number of the perennial top teams. Why should there be an EHF formula for selecting the lucky teams; why should not the ‘perennials’ instead be able to ‘break away’ and create a league outside the EHF, with independence financially and in other ways!? This happened already a long time ago in basketball and has been discussed in football.

And of course yet other ideas: why base such a concept on the existing group of perennials, many of which are located in small towns? Would it not make sense to allow some financially strong and otherwise attractive cities of Europe to have a team (‘franchise’) But what would it mean for the fans and the traditions, based on which the sport has thrived?

Of course, all the different approaches also have an impact on the survival of the national leagues. What would ASOBAL in Spain be without 4-5 of its top clubs? How long would the fans and media in country X put up with a ‘national’ championship when it is known to everyone that the 2-3 best teams are perennially missing, playing instead in a continental league? Or would these traditions soon be forgotten, as long as there is an opportunity to see the best players confront each other in exciting matches every week?

Because one thing is clear, it is not possible to have it ‘both ways’. Today’s situation is not really tenable. The EHF tries every which way to satisfy both the top clubs and the top federations, with a fair participation, while at the same time actually reducing the number of games in which the ‘overburdened’ top clubs and top players have to appear. Quite ironic! This is not said to dismiss the notion of ‘overburdened’. But what creates the excess: the matches on the national team, the Champions league, or perhaps (which nobody ever seems to argue) the excessive number of useless matches in the national league? I do not mean to offend the likes of Torrevieja, Balingen, Alcobendas or Wetzlar, but the only excuse for 18 teams in Bundesliga or 16 teams in ASOBAL is to earn the extra money through some meaningless additional home games!

In other countries it may be different. In Sweden, for instance, one reason for pushing strongly for a firm place in the Champions League was the concern about setting aside 10 potential match dates in the season calendar, just on the chance that [u]one[/u] club might qualify for the Champions League through the qualification process. The gaps would be wasted if the team did not qualify, so why not instead play 10 extra income-bringing rounds of league games for the benefit of [u]all[/u] the teams in a league that has a much more modest financial situation. Especially as the other EHF cups are simply money-losers.

* * *
Despite the many seemingly conflicting arguments, the answer is at least clear to me: a drastic change is needed, as the ‘compromise solutions’ we have had until now do not make much sense. For me this means that a European League, playing throughout the whole season with 16-24 teams needs to be tried. EHF, the key national federations and the top clubs need to get together and work out the structure, the financial aspects and the administrative responsibilities. Yes, as noted above, this will have a major impact for those leagues providing several of the teams, and there will be an impact also in other countries, but there are so many benefits of this approach that it must be tried.

I know you will say that it is easy for me to argue for such change, as the personal impact for me is mostly limited to the issue of access to top games on international TV or web broadcasts, so I want to give you a chance to react, if you are immersed in the both national and continental competition in Europe: what do YOU think?

Does the approach I propose make sense? If so, do you have any views on how it should be arranged?
Or do you prefer the hybrid solution we have today or some other variation on it?
Or what about the idea that the European League should include the 16-24 best [b]national teams[/b], not the club teams, and how could that then be financed and arranged?
Or do you feel that the focus should really be on the individual [b]national[/b] leagues, with a much reduced continental competition?

Continue the discussion in the forum: https://teamhandballnews.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1281.last