Your guess is as good as mine…

And I really do believe that my heading is justified. While I think this is going to be an event where most of the traditional contenders will do well, many of them are in some kind of transition, with the loss of key players or the arrival of a new coach. So I think there could be as many as ten teams having a good chance for a medal, and that you could not really talk about a surprise if any of those ten teams go to the final. But at the same time, I will be a coward and predict that Norway and France will qualify from one half of the draw, while Hungary and Romania are my best bets from the other side.

You have heard me argue that I do not really like the tournament format with four groups of four, where only one team in each group misses out on the main round. Many times this makes for a rather boring first stage in some groups, and it even leaves some room for tactics and manipulations in the third round of the groups, when some teams can afford to speculate about what result suits them best.

But at least I see some intriguing match-ups in each of the groups. While I see Norway as the favorite in group A, I wonder if the home court/crowd advantage can help Serbia overachieve, just like they did on the men’s side. It would also be nice to see if the Czech team could get to the main round, after so many years of weak showings. In group B, I see Denmark-Sweden on the first day as the key game, with a probably edge for the young Danish team. And the loser of this game may find it tough to keep FYRO Macedonia behind them. While I have already said that I see France going through to the final four, mostly on account of their physical style, I do not think they are unbeatable.

Germany’s return to the top level is causing speculation in a positive direction, while I see some experts predicting a decline for Spain this time. I think this leaves some room for an experienced Hungarian team to get off to a good start. Iceland will find it tough to win a game in group D. We have here, like several times in recent years, a Russia-Montenegro encounter; moreover with a new coach for Russia and an interesting psychological situation for Montenegro. Will the Olympic silver now lead to a letdown or will it stimulate them to a further surprise? But I think the time is now right for Romania.

Finally, the EHF has nominated six women’s couples among the twelve referee pairs. There are also six rather experienced men’s couples. In the Olympic Games we often had the sense that several of the men’s couples had major difficulties in finding the right approach to the women’s games. Let us see now if the women’s couples, despite their generally more limited experience, are better at finding the right touch for this women’s event. Good luck to all of them! Our top women’s teams deserve first-class support from the referees.

Old habits and attitudes need to change — also in the IHF !

The EHF, just like FIFA and UEFA in football, allows not just discussions but actual negotiations on these issues with the other stakeholders. By contrast, the IHF has consistently dictated the conditions for player release, compensation and insurance on a ‘take it or leave it’ basis in relation to IHF events such as World Championships. Increasingly, this authoritarian approach has led to great dissatisfaction among the representatives of leagues, clubs and players. It is not seen as an acceptable recognition of the fundamental asset that players and clubs constitute in the world of handball.

Moreover, it fits in with an attitude demonstrated by the IHF in recent attempts to revise the IHF By-Laws, which reflect the apparent desire by the IHF President to impose duties and obligations but deny rights and privileges on the part of the stakeholders in handball. The pivotal role in dealing with this problem is played by the national federations in Europe. Of course, to some extent the federations might be seen as competition for influence with the leagues and clubs, and they may therefore fail to question the obsolete IHF practices. But one would really like to believe that the national federations which, in aggregate, are the ones, who have the formal political influence on the IHF regime, should better understand that the IHF’s position is really untenable.

As an example of the absurd length to which the IHF is prepared to go in order to maintain unilateral control, it should be noted that not just does the IHF refuse to recognize and have a dialog with the FCH; in a clear attempt to ‘divide and conquer’, the IHF has announced to clubs that they must deal with the IHF on an individual basis, because otherwise they cannot even count on the compensation that the IHF arrogantly determines without any form of negotiation. In other words, clubs who would want to stick together and be represented by the FCH in any such meetings will automatically lose the right to compensation. Instead, they would have to tolerate that the IHF hand-picks a small number of national federations and clubs as participants in the meetings where the IHF decisions are conveyed.

Frankly, it is embarrassing to see such methods continue to exist in our sport and, again, it is equally disturbing to see that the national federations do not force the IHF to change its approach.

Side by side, for now, but perhaps one day the star gets moved!?

However, one should keep in mind that this referendum does not in any way guarantee that statehood is just around the corner. Many Puerto Ricans would see statehood as something that would help the local economy, as it would undoubtedly make them ‘takers’, to use the terminology that came up in the recent U.S. election, meaning that they could expect economic benefits that would exceed their aggregate federal tax burden. But this may be precisely what would make the members of the U.S. Congress hesitate about voting with the two-thirds majority in favor, in this precarious moment for the U.S economy. The initiative would have to come from President Obama, who has generally spoken favorably about statehood, but also for him would it be a big step to take up this initiative right now.

So it may be a bit premature to discuss statehood despite the results of the Puerto Rican referendum. But it may still be fun and thought-provoking what it could mean in an admittedly peripheral area, namely the impact on the state of handball if Puerto Rico were to become fully integrated with the rest of the U.S.! Puerto Rico has participated independently in handball as in all other sports with national teams, and they have their own sports structure and Olympic Committee. In some sports the Puerto Ricans would be ‘dwarfed’ in the case of an integration, but that would not be the case in handball.

While traditionally U.S.A. had the upper hand, this is typically not the case today. Despite its relatively much smaller population, but to some extent due to the advantages of its ‘compact and manageable’ size, Puerto Rican handball has been holding its own in comparison with U.S.A handball in PanAmerican competition. Their federation has been well-organized and has had substantial clout in their Olympic Committee. They have had good coaches (sometimes with Cuban support) and astute administrators. They have good, dedicated handball facilities, and their youth program has been impressive in relation to its size. And they have an IHF referee couple, which is more than USA handball can boast with at this point in time. So quite conceivably, the Puerto Rican handball could become ‘the tail wagging the dog’ as the expression goes.

In other words, it could become a rather interesting debate about how integration would influence the development of handball over the short term and for the longer term! Clearly, there would be a sudden influx of good quality players, although the integration would not necessarily be an easy one. This could lead to a sudden boost in the context of the competitiveness of the national teams at different levels. But what would it mean for the longer term? Would it serve to encourage the growth of handball in the other 50 states or would it perhaps in some way cause handball to become even more of a ‘niche’ sport? And what about development in Puerto Rico when moving from being a country with a proud national team of its own to being a component of USA handball and its national teams? Is it conceivable that some of the excitement around handball in Puerto Rico could diminish rather than being enhanced? (This is of course a broader question that would affect all types of sports).

In the U.S., we have often debated whether it would be more realistic to ‘jump start’ handball development by concentrating mostly on a few geographic areas rather than focusing on nationwide growth all at once. With the addition of a 51st state, it seems that this issue would be given a sudden, practical test. It would also be interesting to see what the reactions would be among our Caribbean and Central American neighbors. They would obviously have reason to speculate about the impact of joint U.S./Puerto Rican resources on the opportunity to be successful in advancing from the region in qualifying events for PanAmerican Championships and beyond.

Given that the statehood question is not likely to have an imminent resolution, I will put on the brakes on my speculation at this point. The scenario may never come about, or it may be something for a distant future when the circumstances may have changed substantially. But apart from intriguing speculation, it just might suggest to us that it would be prudent to do some modest amount of preparatory thinking about the implications, just in case…. And it is also interesting to see that, at this very moment, there is some excitement about the notion of the possible independence of Catalonia from Spain, precisely as it pertains to sports, given the dominant role of FC Barcelona in football, handball and other sports and the large number of individual star athletes from the region!

Michael V. Knudsen of Flensburg and Denmark; who or what prevents him from playing in the World Championship?

But now we have had a sudden signal that clubs and players may become fed up with the status quo and the lack of serious action on the part of those who have the main role in determining the calendar and thus the workload. With two different versions being presented, it became clear that Michael Knudsen from Flensburg and Denmark had been ruled out from participation in the World Championship next January. It had nothing to do with injuries. Rather, it was suggested (supposedly according to statements from Knudsen) that Flensburg had forced him to accept such a clause as a condition for having his contract extended. By contrast, Flensburg insisted that the decision was really initiated by the wishes of the player himself.

The news caused an outrage in Denmark, because Knudsen is a key player. It was also noted, on the one hand, that such a contract clause is not permitted under IHF regulations and, on the other hand, Knudsen was criticized for showing up at a Danish training camp if he was not going to be a team member in January. It would not be the first time that a player had been formally prevented from his/her club to participate in a World Championship. But it could really trigger a major debate about who has the prerogatives, the club or the national federation. It should be recognized that the players are really caught in between. They do not want to be forced to abandon their national team, if they do not have their own reasons for staying out. But, of course, they do not want to spoil the relations with their employer, the club, so it would always be possible to come up with a plausible explanation that nobody could formally criticize.

Essentially the issue is linked to two basic conflicts: first, it has been argued for a long time that it is just too much to have more than one major international championship per year. So in a sense it is the participation of handball in the Olympic Games that becomes the trigger. But as nobody suggests that this should be changed, then it is the pattern of having either a World Championship or a European Championship every year that is the crux. Compromises have been sought but with no result so far. The EHF does not really want to budge, and the IHF must protect the interests of all the other continents. The second issue is that, added together, games in the national leagues, the EHF Champions League and for the national teams simply add up to being a bit too much. (When one talks about the national team, this includes not just the Championships but the qualifying events leading up to them).

Martin Heuberger, the men’s national team coach in Germany, suggested recently that it would be fair and necessary to ‘shave off’ some portion of each of the three workloads. Of course, one could suggest that the top nations could have their burden reduced by entering at a later stage in the qualifying events, as compared with the model that is being played precisely this weekend. And, as I have done before, one could argue that the current Champions League model causes too many ‘unnecessary’ games for the participants. Or one could suggest, as Heuberger did, that the number of teams in the German Bundesliga should be reduced. Every year, essentially the same teams gain the top positions and then also play in the Champions League or the EHF Cup, while several other teams are clearly at a lower level. But Heuberger got the reaction from his own Federation that “it would really be difficult to deprive some teams of the chance to play in Bundesliga, and even the top teams want the extra income from a couple of additional home games”. Clearly, one could argue ‘forever’ how the reduction should best be achieved.

But the reality that most people overlook, when they propose one solution or the other as ‘the obvious one’, is that the situation is far from similar in all the top handball countries in Europe. The one thing that most of them have in common is that they attach a lot of importance to their national team, but even that may vary from country to country. In some countries there is relatively more interest in the EHF Champions League, and handball fans rally around the team that represents their country. But so far, it is much more common that the fans really care about their own club and everything else becomes secondary. However, that is very much related to the third dimension: many countries have a national league that, year after year, creates a strong interest on account of many evenly matched teams. But other countries, even some of the very best, have only one or possibly two dominating teams, so the league becomes unimportant. And then we have the unique case of Germany, who ‘has it all’. The Bundesliga has strong traditions, also among the smaller clubs, the national team is a matter of real pride, and they have at least six-seven teams in the EHF competitions.

So one of the reasons for reluctance in other countries to change things is that they primarily see the problem as one that is caused by the German situation. This has been quite clear from media comments and views expressed by fans. They are upset if a German club ‘interferes’ with the participation of a player on the national team in country X. And they do not have much sympathy for the ‘dilemma of the German clubs’. On the contrary, it reminds them that Bundesliga dilutes the quality of the leagues in many other countries. Perhaps the most interesting and astute comment I saw in recent time was along the following lines: ‘the problem is caused by Germany, where they have teams and players for an absolute elite league but still insist on adding many comparatively mediocre clubs that really belong in a lower league’. I can appreciate these arguments; and at least the strong divergence of views within Europe (and even more if one adds the top other countries in other continents) will make it really tough for the IHF and the EHF to achieve serious change.

desperately trying to find something uplifting…

First just a small update on Karabatic and Montpellier: while the team is doing rather poorly without their currently ineligible players, Karabatic has just been out on a ‘crying tour’ in the media, swearing to his innocence and complaining that he is prevented from doing his job of playing handball. In the meantime, the authorities have suddenly realized that, just as I mentioned earlier, it is awfully difficult to prove that a team lost on purpose; and now they have also discovered that the wording of the regulations in the French federation and league is such that it (stupidly) only refers to on-line betting and not to placing money with a bookmaker! But French sports fans have also expressed their views. In a recent survey, almost 50% indicated that the players should be banned for life(!) if they were to be found guilty. Last time I used the image above my article to show the Karabatic brothers in their uniforms with ‘brother’ on the chest. The latest is now that the ‘brother’ company has announced that they no longer wish to have their ‘brother’ printers and sewing machines associated with a team and a pair of brothers who may not be so good for their image. So the sponsoring has been cancelled!

Turning to the financial worries in Spanish handball, there are almost daily reports about how fragile the situation is for the clubs in the top league. Some of the clubs that were given a chance to step in for others who had been forced out are participating on a ‘semi-amateur’ basis, and almost all the other clubs (except Barcelona and Atletico Madrid) are in a tough situation. Players are concerned about their situation and look for opportunities elsewhere, and there are frequent complaints from the fans that the quality of the league has dropped off substantially. What a moment to be gearing up to be the host of the men’s World Championship in just a few months!

Germany is supposedly the stronghold both for handball and in terms of the overall financial situation. But below the surface there are issues. Anecdotes from the grassroots level, confirmed by academic studies, suggest that handball is finding it increasingly difficult to recruit children into our sport, as the tradition for handball is no longer as strong as it used to be, in part due to influence of immigration. Just like in the USA, immigrants do not typically bring a handball background, and they do not find it normal to look for activities through clubs. At the federation level, an important study is underway regarding the need for changes in structure, strategies and management. And in the meantime, the national team coach, Martin Heuberger is heard pleading for an easing of the burden on the top players. He talks about reducing the teams in the Bundesliga, fewer German teams in the EHF Champions league, and fewer games for the national team. But more games and more participation is what yields income, so what gives? Moreover, for the EURO 2014, the EHF is using a qualifying system that seems very appropriate in terms of ensuring fairness, but this also means more games for the top teams…

Apropos the Champions League, many of the expected top teams are struggling with the consequences of key injuries, one critical aspect in the debate about the intensity of the competition schedule. And there have been comments, in line with those I presented a year ago, that the format of the group play is not really ideal. Last year it became too predictable and boring, essentially with the excitement limited to the fight for fourth place in each group, while the top teams had to play a lot of mostly meaningless games. Perhaps there is a bit more turbulence this year, with some surprising results. Savehof’s win against Madrid yesterday was one example. And some teams have had the luck of benefitting from the absence of AG Copenhagen and the miseries of Montpellier. For instance, please do not try to tell me that the group topped by Kielce and Metallurg is really competitive. I have seen enough on-line broadcasts to know better. The consolation is that there are several individual games that are exciting to watch even if the final result is not so critical. But I agree with those who argue that a format with four groups of six teams does not make much sense (except for the ‘political’ reason of permitting 24 participants). But a long, long group play followed by a sudden knock-out stage does not seem logical…

Am I my brother’s keeper? Nikola and Luka together on the court, and in court!

Of course, the handball season has not come to a standstill for Montpellier (or for Paris-St.G who now has two of Montpellier’s players from last year). Montpellier played a league game in Toulouse yesterday and lost. They had to do that without the five players (the Karabatic brothers, Gajic, Prost and Tej) who had been released from police custody but were still being interviewed, and moreover had been prohibited from having contact with their teammates. Montpellier lost 29-34, drawing on a mixture of experienced players (Accambray, Mamelund, Hmam and Metlicic) together with a group of young talents. Manager Canayer commented after the game that it was remarkable to see that the crowds now applauded the depleted team, rather than treating them as the invincible villains. On Sunday, Montpellier has a home game in the EHF Champions League against Ademar Leon.

I should again emphasize something that does not seem to be clear in the many media reports around Europe: we are dealing with two really separate actions, the betting on their own game, which goes against the regulations of the French league, the French federation (and, for that matter, their counterparts in most other established handball countries), and the accusation that they lost the game intentionally. The betting is exclusively a matter for the handball/sports authorities, as this goes against their ethics codes and regulations, and it has nothing to do with French law which treats all citizens the same way. By contrast, I do not know of any federation that has a regulation explicitly dealing with the notion of losing intentionally; there may be some more vague expectation that a team should ‘always do its best’. And of course, losing a game, even if it is done intentionally, would not be a crime under French law, if it was not for the link to gambling. Because then you commit fraud against other bettors. The police is attempting to confirm the betting, as it provides evidence for the intention to lose the game, and then remains the more difficult issue of proving that the loss actually was intentional.

So the only excuse for the federation and the league, in their preference to wait quietly for the police to conclude their investigation, is that they prefer to have the police establish the evidence for the prohibited betting. Karabatic first had his lawyer admit to his own betting, then he used his facebook page to deny it, but now that denial has been removed. It seems the defense will be focused on what I noted a few days ago: the loss was plausible because of the many injured players, the betting was done by the family and friends who inevitably knew about the injuries and the fact that Montpellier had already secured the league title, and the notion that players who did not actually play in the game of Cresson somehow, by definition, could not be accused of manipulation. But the legal authorities are smarter than that. They understand that key players such as the Karabatic brothers could easily influence their teammates about how the game should proceed, even if those who played had not been involved in the betting. And now it may be getting worse, because media have just released the idea of suspicions regarding another game that Montpellier lost late last situation, against local rivals Nimes.

Going back to the responsibility of clubs, leagues and federations, it was interesting to see that the National Association of the French sports gambling syndicates issued a scathing accusation. They noted that, when sports gambling became legal in France, they had urged the federations and the clubs to collaborate with them in a special effort to educate and warn the athletes about the potential risks and consequences. However, the statement suggested that there had been no interest in collaboration on the part of federations and clubs. So it is really a considerable hypocrisy, when the federations now express great surprise and the clubs complain about the hardships caused by the loss of access to their expensive key players. I have suggested that the FCH, the umbrella organization for the top European handball clubs, could use its neutral but prestigious position to urge clubs across Europe to open their eyes to the dangers and to help coordinate an educational effort.

Finally, an interesting twist: after I wrote my initial article, it has become clear that most of the betting was in fact in the half-time result, not the final result. This is a concept known as ‘spot betting’, meaning that it involves some detail within the game rather than the final outcome. I wrote about this a few months ago, and I underscored the dangers of such betting. Because it may involve some aspect that has no real connection to the final result (such as who got the first yellow card, or who scored on the first 7-meter throw), it is more obscure and less likely to draw attention. It may even seem more harmless, because it has nothing to do with losing intentionally, but it could still involve big money and clear manipulation. And I noted that there is more scope for this in handball, compared with for instance football. Intentionally being behind by one goal at half-time in handball involves no real risk for a superior team, but the same thing in football is considerably more dangerous.

Not surrounded by his usual admirers: Nikola Karabatic detained by police after his most recent match

Now we have evidence about one aspect (forbidden betting), and the suspicions about the other part (losing intentionally) are being investigated by the police. And it does not involve some low-level match in some obscure corner of the handball world! It turns out to involve one of the most famous players in the world, Nikola Karabatic, and his teammates in Montpellier, a perennial top club in France and in European competition. Karabatic, several of his current and former teammates and a number of their family members, were detained by police directly at the end of their French league match against Paris, their new big rival, last Sunday. Montpellier was crushed in that match, 24-38, but that is now a side story and perhaps they knew what was coming…

At issue is a match late last season. Montpellier had secured the league title the previous week and now was facing an away game against lowly Cesson-Rennes who needed to win to be sure of avoiding relegation. Perhaps it was all along a match that would be risky for someone interested in betting. Montpellier could be expected to play without motivation. And on the evening of the match it became clear that six of their better players, including Karabatic, were injured. It is not clear if this fact was generally known, or if it was known only to the team. This is relevant, because such information, which is useful to bettors, is not allowed to be revealed by team members. But this is probably a minor issue by comparison.

What was not minor in terms of sports ethics and regulations in French handball was that Karabatic and several other players, through friends and family, decided to bet large amounts (although smartly in small installments) on both a half-time lead and a victory in the match for their opponents. What seems so absurd is that the amounts, which came during a small window of time and from just a few locations, were large enough to set off alarms in the monitoring system (and therefore close down the betting and alert the police) but that the potential gains were still rather modest for persons as wealthy as Karabatic and his colleagues. They certainly did not desperately need to take such enormous risks to win those amounts. But the fact that they were betting on their team to lose has been confirmed, so that is not in dispute.

However, that is a matter for French sports authorities and for the relations between Montpellier and the players. The club is now finding its strong image badly tarnished. And this is not because the club is being accused of anything. Indeed, not even the opponents who badly needed to win are suspected of having done anything improper to influence the result. But what remains as the issue that the French legal authorities are now pursuing, is the question as to whether the Montpellier players lost the match intentionally!? This amounts to corruption and could in principle result in prison terms if anyone is found guilty, as this would mean that a fraud was committed against those who innocently were betting in favor of Montpellier. They have the right to expect fair play and ‘may the best team win’.

But, as always will be the case in a situation like this one: how can you ever prove, in a legal sense, that a team is losing intentionally?? The result was 28-31 (12-15) and it was not exactly an absurd situation where Montpellier players started scoring against their own goalkeeper… They were the team without motivation, and they played without six important players! So the result is not really implausible and perhaps Cesson was ‘the best team’ that day.

But can one argue that the accused players really were able to play for 60 minutes without thinking about the money they would win if they lost the game? And did they really bet against their own team just to have some extra money as consolation if they lost the game? Yes, you and I can have our opinions, but how can you find legally binding evidence? There have been reports about phone-tapping and hidden cameras, but even if it seems stupid that the players took such risks, would they then in addition be so stupid that they spread around remarks about losing intentionally? It will be interesting to see the eventual outcome, but I would not advise a betting person to put any money on a guilty verdict…

I actually say that with a sense of regret. Not because I personally have any reason to see the players found guilty. Rather, I am concerned that the ability to lose a game intentionally in such a way that there is no legal evidence, is one of the inherent weaknesses in sports. Experienced players and, yes, experienced referees, can easily find ways of affecting the outcome of a game in such a subtle way that it does not leave strong suspicions, let alone formal evidence. As I see it, this means that we need to be much more alert and suspicious than we normally tend to be. We may never see ‘evidence’, but over time we should be able to recognize a pattern, and we should be able to find indications that may not hold up in a court of law but that would be enough under rules and regulations of sports to weed out the athletes, officials and teams who threaten to ruin our sports.

As the legendary French coach Daniel Costantini said yesterday: one must condemn players who are so stupid that they are ready to risk a world-class career for modest gains. They are no role models who deserve our respect. But what Costantini added is also astute and correct: all of us in the world of handball contribute to this situation by building up young, talented but often immature athletes into idols who feel that they are above it all, that they can do nothing wrong. Federations, clubs, fans, media can, and should, play a positive role in ensuring that it does not go that far. And part of that role is also to make sure that we are not so naïve about the risks and the problems that do exist!

British referees Battlett and Stokes had a game during the Olympic tournament

Although I watched, through high-quality TV broadcasts or live streaming, 49 complete games and 15 at least half games (making me miss only 12 games of 76), which provides me with a very solid basis, it is of course conceivable that the official IHF evaluation will differ somewhat from my own informal effort. But I am reassured to know that the IHF Referee Commission, strongly supported by the Coaching and Methods Commission, has collected a wealth of information to be able to come up with a solid analysis in due course.

I noted in my article about the nominated group of referees that this is group that I have reason to trust as a serious and honest team, who will do their utmost to handle the games with integrity and to protect their own reputation as unbiased officials. Nothing that I saw from London makes me modify that evaluation in the slightest. To the extent that, in some games, the refereeing may have given the impression of being a bit lop-sided, it was more a result of an inability to recognize, in that particular game, that one of the two teams was much more cynical than the other, in terms of acting outside the rules. And if they did not get caught, some unfairness may have been created.

From a technical standpoint, it was clear that the areas of emphasis, which the referees heard about from the IHF before the start of the event, and which were basically also the ones that I commented on a month ago, were indeed the ones creating the main challenges during the Olympics. This is obviously not because the referees ‘refused to listen’; it simply confirms that there are some specific aspects of the game that always tend to be the more difficult ones and that, despite the reminder and the support from the IHF, these will still be the ones that cause problems and lead to criticism.

It may be frustrating to point it out, but the key issue was most likely the frequently shifting line in individual punishments. There were tendencies to differences between referee couples, but also for the same couple from one game to the next. Even more awkwardly, there was a general trend towards more leniency as we moved toward the later stages of the event and, similarly, the referees sometimes became too soft and ‘diplomatic’ during the critical final stage of a game. Also, direct 2-minute suspensions and direct ‘red cards’ were used too sparingly.

In many games it seemed that the players on the offense could do nothing wrong, as almost all the decisions went against the defenders. And unfortunately, this did not quite match the reality, so it led instead to an escalation of the methods by the desperate defenders. But in individual games, it was suddenly turned around so that all the attention seemed to be on infringements by the attackers. Of course, this tended to cause confusion.

As so often in the past, many of the problem situations occurred around the 6-meter line. Often this was in the sense that a ‘wrestling’ or ‘shoving’ match was taking place, without any action from the referees. And another issue involved the well-known trend of ‘detecting’ defenders inside the goal-area and awarding a 7-meter-throw, even when this was not really the situation. It would be a major break-through if, one day, one could get a consistently more accurate observation by the referees about this.

And the final realization was that too many of our top referees are not used to, and comfortable with, refereeing women’s matches. So precisely in the Olympic Games, which is the only time when we have simultaneous men’s and women’s competition, it was noticeable that the judgment of body contact in the women’s games often was flawed or at least inconsistent.

This year’s Olympic handball tournaments may not have been of the absolute top level that one might have hoped. But the speed, dynamics and physicality were nevertheless sufficient to make observers begin to wonder if we have reached the stage where it is beyond the capacity of TWO pairs of eyes to register everything that is happening on the court. Or alternatively, what are the scientific methods that have not yet been tried, in the area of helping the referees to maintain the concentration, focus, recognition and interpretation that is needed?

More generally, most of the referees in London will also by appearing in the Men’s World Championship in just five months time. On the basis of the observations now made, will the IHF, in collaboration with the continental federations, be able to apply the resources needed to follow these referees in the meantime, offering feedback, mentoring and practical advice? As I have commented, these referees are not ‘beginners’, but they also are not ‘ready’ in the sense that can be left to their own devices. They constitute a key resource for our elite handball, who need and deserve constant support and nurturing!