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.

The arena in Sevilla, where the Danish fans will show their usual enthusiasm

In our recent podcast, John Ryan and I spent a few minutes on the upcoming World Championship, getting underway on January 11 in Spain. We had a few suggestions about possible success for Denmark and Poland, together with the notion that John is no longer as high on France as in the past. I also noted that several key injuries together with the some cases of post-Olympic retirement would undoubtedly have some impact.

But several friends, especially over in Europe, have used the New Year’s holiday to harass me about being a ‘coward’ by not offering some more specific suggestions for the outcome of the Championship. Yes, I know that some of you like to see my speculations, simply to be able to determine at the end that, yet again, my forecasts were a bit off the mark. So, I do not want to make you disappointed.

First, even more than in the past, I suspect that the preliminary groups will show a major contrast between some really solid teams and a whole bunch of teams that may be in the running for the ‘Round of 16’ but who really are not at the top level. So in each group it is mainly a matter of picking out the favorites and those who might be next in line.

In Group A, I think it is going to be almost impossible for France to fail to come out on top, and it is equally difficult to see the ‘new’ German team finish below second or third. I do not count on Argentina and Tunisia this time, so my only ‘dark horse’ here is Brazil. In Group B, Denmark seems to be the overwhelming favorite, whereas I do not expect great things from Iceland this time. So it should instead be interesting to see how a partly rebuilt Russian team will do. And let us see if Qatar, already looking ahead to hosting the next Championship in 2015, might be able to surprise FYRO Macedonia.

On the other half of the draw, I envisage a major fight for the first spot in Group C between Serbia and Poland. Some may think that Belarus and Slovenia will be in a battle for third place, but I could see the Koreans coming up with a surprise. Finally, in Group D, it can sometimes be a mixed blessing to be the home team, and perhaps Hungary could manage to win the group ahead of Spain. But I am also really curious about how the rejuvenated Croatian team, this time without Balic, will fare. Perhaps the Egyptians will turn out to be the best non-European team, but I do not have much of basis for that assertion.

So as you can see, I have been rather cautious, but I really do believe that it will in the end be a fight between ‘the usual suspects’. And perhaps I have been a bit less enthusiasm this time, as it will be the first time in 20 years that I am not involved, or at least present, for a men’s World Championship…

We wish Mads a full recovery and hope to see him soon on the court!

Last month, soon after Mads had lent his name to a campaign for cancer, ironically it was discovered that he had himself been hit by this illness, in the form of lymphoma. Courageously, Mads and his wife Marianne started dealing with this situation in an open way, using it to bring further attention to the need for public support for this often devastating illness. At first, the diagnosis gave reason for pessimism, but thankfully further examinations gradually turned this around, so that the prognosis is now considerably more optimistic. Mads has left the hospital and is undergoing chemotherapy.

Those who have followed Mads on the handball court, as I have had the opportunity to do, know that he has a great personality, always dealing with the players and coaches in a constructive manner, ready to handle hectic situations with a disarming smile. It is clear that he enjoys the task and that he is focused on supporting the teams on our sport in the process. It is fortunate that he has this attitude, because he will now need it to fight his illness in a positive spirit and with the same energy that he has always displayed in the handball matches. Being a cancer survivor myself, I know how much depends on contributing with everything that your own mental and physical capacity has to offer.

So when we are now finding ourselves in what for most of us is our main holiday season, normally in a happy mood together with family and a lot of expectations for the New Year that is awaiting us, I would ask you to join me in thinking about Mads and his family. If you know him, by all means contact him by mail or Facebook or whatever, as a way of showing him your support and wishing him a good recovery. And why not consider the idea of spending some money in the form of a contribution to the fight against this illness or for some other worthwhile cause; there is always someone or something that needs and deserves our support, when we are otherwise inclined just to think about ourselves.

Time to celebrate GOLD!

It must have been a nice situation for Montenegro to get their opportunity for revenge against Norway so soon after the Olympic final, which left some bad taste with controversy related to refereeing and bad luck. Today there was some of the same concern about tough decisions, but in the end it did not matter: Montenegro won the gold medals after a great surge at the very end!

The final started out just the way one ideally wants to see a final played: good technical quality with very few mistakes, a fast pace and good goalkeeping, accompanied with good refereeing, which all led to a game characterized by fair play and an absence of dirty methods. The Norwegians had some good periods, but Montenegro responded with determination and with nice attacking moves. The half-time result was 12-11 in favor or Montenegro.

In the second half, the trend continued where the successful early shooting by the Norwegians had become more hesitant, of course partly affected by the good form of Montenegrin goalie Barjaktarovic. But gradually, the Norwegians regained their composure, while at the same time the Montenegrins just perhaps were beginning to show tired legs and tired shooting arms, following the tough battle yesterday in the semifinal. Also, just as in the Olympic final, Norway escaped some of the 2-min penalties that Montenegro received, possibly because the methods of the Norwegians were a little less obvious. Understandably, coach Azdic was not too happy. And not surprisingly, the game was tied after 60 minutes, 24-24, following a Norwegian equalizer with just seconds to go.

The first overtime period was characterized by tentative shooting. However, mistakes by the Norwegians led to a 27-24 and 28-25 lead for Montenegro. But then came, to put it mildly, a disputed referee decision whereby Katarina Bulatovic was sent off for 2 minutes, accused of interfering with the throw-off after scoring a goal. This proved to be costly, and the Norwegians forced a second overtime by getting to 28-28. During that final overtime period, it seemed that the individual marking of Knezevic who had been the most successful shooter, and the sense that Bulatovic was a bit too tired, might decide the game in Norway’s favor. But in the end, it was the Norwegians who committed the costly mistakes and turnovers, so that in the last couple of minutes Montenegro could pull away and win by 34-31.

It should be added that Hungary won the bronze medal match after a considerable drama. At the end of the regular playing time, the game was tied at 33-33. Overtime periods tend to be tense and have relatively less goals scored. Here Serbia was ahead 37-36 at the half-way mark, but Hungary turned it around with some quick goals towards the end and managed to pull out a 41-38 win. So no medals for the home team, but their participation in the medal round contributed to a nice atmosphere with large crowds, after a disappointing spectator situation earlier in the competition.

Iranian women’s team, ‘brilliant’ against the real novices but too weak against other opponents.

With somewhat less media attention, Asia has carried out its women’s championship parallel to that of Europe. The event took place in Indonesia, and had a very large participation, including by some novice countries such as the home team and Kuwait. As expected, the top teams from East Asia dominated and obtained the three to places which qualify for the 2013 World Championships.

South Korea were impressive, beating China in the final with 40-22, after having beaten Kazakhstan by the score of 34-21 in the semifinal. Japan narrowly defeated Kazakhstan by 21-20 to capture the bronze and the remaining qualifying position, after having lost 25-28 to China in the semifinal. Kazakhstan had already lost earlier against Japan in the group play, just like China had lost against South Korea but with a much smaller margin. These four teams were totally dominant in group play, although the eventual 5th and 6th place teams, North Korea and Uzbekistan had shown a reasonable capacity.

Below those teams, Taipei and India had a ‘pivotal’ situation, being clobbered by the better teams but being able to take out their frustrations on the weaker teams at the bottom of the standings. Iran finished in 9th place, having lost four of their group games with the average score of 19-36. But their 53-4 win against Indonesia caused Iranian media to resort to euphoric statements about their team’s brilliant performance. Indeed, everything is relative! Kuwait, which of course has had a strong men’s team for many years, had their women’s team finish second from the bottom among the twelve teams. Their average result in group play was 4-62, so they obviously have a long way to go. So while it is nice to see a broadened participation, the enormous difference between top and bottom may be just a bit too much to be healthy and helpful.

Exhaustion, injuries and shortened careers are already major concerns; what should we now expect to happen!?

One proposal has been to reduce the ‘big events’ from five to four in each four-year cycle. We currently have World Championships every two years and European Championships every two years. But in addition, just like in 2012, we also have the Olympic Games. So one of the ideas has been to reduce the World and Continental Championships to three each in every eight-year period. Not much progress has been made, as both the IHF and especially the EHF have wanted to protect their respective big events.

But now we suddenly have a new situation that pulls us in the opposite direction. Africa, Asia and Pan-America have had continental ‘Games’ under the auspices of the Olympic movement for a very long time. For a lot of sports, these are really major events, and they also include handball. And now we have just had the announcement from the association for European Olympic Committees (EOC) that Europe wants to join all the other continents in organizing such continental Games. Just what handball did not need, it seems. If nothing else were to change, we would then move from five to six big events, rather than from five to four!

The first European Games will be held in June of 2015 in Azerbaijan, a country that has made noises in recent years about wanting to host the Olympic Games. One might think that this really would cause major concern among European clubs, federations and the EHF. But the reality is of course that once such an event comes into existence, it is almost unthinkable for a major sport to indicate that they do not want to take part. And for many sports, particularly most of the individual sports, the situation is very different from that of handball. Here the athletes are typically not under the pressure of overload, especially as the participants in individual sports are freer to dictate their own overall schedule.

So it is understandable that the official reaction from the EHF is cautiously positive. President Brihault has indicated that European handball and its various stakeholders support participation, and there are no specific comments about negative aspects. It seems that handball would prefer to take part from the outset and then perhaps evaluate both the benefits and status of this new event and the practical impact for handball and its top players. There has, however, been some speculation in the media that, perhaps, it would be better for handball to turn it into an ‘under-23’ or ‘under-21’ competition, although there must be doubts about the willingness on the part of the EOC to accept that approach.

The experience in the other continents does not provide much guidance. Here the existence of the continental Games every four years has rarely been an issue in terms of overload for handball players. The reality is that the proportion of players on the top national teams in those countries who also play for an elite club team, meaning in Europe, is much smaller, so there is not a serious conflict. Instead, because of the varying timing of the continental Games, the concern has more been one of securing the release for players on European club teams, when the continental Games come at a time that does not really fit with the European club calendar.

It will be interesting to see how the reactions might change as we get closer to June 2015. And there is also a suspicion that the new event might become an argument or create some leverage in the IHF vs. EHF debate about a possible cut-back of the existing big events. The IHF cannot very well complain about the emergence of such an event in the only continent where it has been missing, and it is not the EHF that has caused the situation to arise. But it might create a situation where a reduction becomes more inevitable than ever, and the IHF might argue that, after adding a European event, the obvious first thing that must happen is to remove another European event.

However, it might also create a certain appearance of symmetry, with one global and one European Olympic event, together with the two World and two European Championships. Perhaps this is what would make it look natural to cut one of each of these two types of events. Because at least personally, I have a hard time seeing that it is a tenable situation to have six such events in every four-year cycle.