In an article some time ago, https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.908 I described the IHF’s Global Referee Training Program (GRTP) as a success story, but I also emphasized that the ‘hard work needs to continue’. The Program will have its purpose and its initial success undermined, if the former participants do not get the follow-up that most of them clearly need. I noted that the IHF ‘must shift gear and focus more on continued nurturing’.

In this regard it must be kept in mind that many of the GRTP ‘graduates’ come from countries where they cannot count on strong support in the form of technical experts and financial resources. And the match experience will also come extremely slowly and randomly, unless the referees are European and can benefit from the intensive competition program of the EHF. Clearly it is not enough that these referee couples get an IHF event with good supervision and refresher training with one or two years’ interval. It is the continued nurturing that is crucial for referees who are still young and at a critical stage in their career: will they ‘take off’ and become elite level referees, or will they stagnate and find their GRTP training mostly wasted?

If one looks at the issue from a European perspective it is easy to say: ‘we, the IHF, have helped identify these young talents, and we have given them a jump start with intensive education and testing within the GRTP; now it must be up to the national and continental federations to handle the follow-up.’ But this is not realistic in most cases. Apart from the lack of technical experts and other resources, there is also the crucial aspect of a lack of suitable match training on a regular basis. It is not good enough to say: ‘sorry, we cannot change the realities in the continent; the countries in the continent must try to help each other on a bilateral basis etc.’ What must be kept in mind is that, while the initial training of referees within the GRTP obviously is beneficial for individual countries and continents, [u]the main beneficiary is the IHF itself![/u] It is the IHF who needs to bring these referees gradually up to the elite level, so that the IHF can meet [u]its responsibility[/u] of providing adequate refereeing in the senior World Championships.

Clearly, this is not a task that can be handled by a small group of volunteers, such as the IHF Rules & Refereeing Commission. They have the technical expertise, but there are too few of them for the many tasks they need to manage. Every year they have to focus on a number of Youth/Junior Championships and continental events. But they do have additional technical experts who could be utilized on a more continuous basis. So the manpower is not the main obstacle. It depends more on a determination to invest enough in the nurturing phase for the IHF referees, by ensuring that the overall manpower can be assigned to follow the referees more frequently and individually, especially in connection with matches. It also means that the manpower must be spread out, so that there are resources available to set up training camps and test events. And there must be strong, competent resources available from the IHF Office. But mostly it is a matter of budgeting and giving it sufficient priority and prominence.

If, as suggested in some of my recent articles, there is a feeling that the refereeing job at the elite level has become so demanding that one must begin to consider using [u]more than 2[/u] referees in a match, or to use new or expanded methods under the 2-referee system, then it would seem obvious that first of all we need to make sure that the existing IHF referees are more closely and thoroughly supported in their climbing towards the top. If a football referee from Uzbekistan could become the big surprise at the recent World Championship, then this is not explained just by extraordinary personal talent; it is also a testimony to the huge efforts undertaken by FIFA in making such referees ready for the very top. IHF must do the same!

A few days ago, I took our THN readers on an excursion into a possible future, with a THREE-referee system for the elite level in handball. https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.1092 The premise was that, at the top level, the speed and dynamics of today’s game offers insurmountable challenges for also the best trained referees. There is simply too much to try to observe and react to in today’s elite handball. So, after 40 years of using the 2-referee system, should we not at least consider the possibility of adding a third referee just at this level, and therefore start examining and experimenting with this approach? There has not been much time for feedback on my thoughts yet, but the feedback I have received has been predominantly positive. Handball people agree with the issue, and many feel that at least an unbiased and unprejudiced examination would be appropriate.

But in my article I also promised this ‘Part 2’ which you have now started reading. Here the focus is more on what things we might do to [u]improve the situation under our current 2-referee system[/u]. Of course, we have been continuously trying for many years to assist the referees with training, guidance and new methods. But undoubtedly more could be done. The basic issue is that the referees need to see more of what happens in the game, with a focus on what is relevant and with greater accuracy. And then there is the correct understanding of what happens and the resulting correct or optimal decision-making.

Clearly more can be done to help ensure, even on a mandatory basis in the case of the elite level, that the top referees spend more time with teams during practices to understand better the modern tactics, techniques and methods. An improved ‘[u]understanding of the game[/u]’ obviously contributes to a more correct anticipation of what happens on the court and enables the referees to improve their positioning. But the game understanding also helps the referees properly focus on the relevant aspect of a situation and to interpret better what they physically see but may not otherwise understand correctly. (I will here just mention fitness as another key component in positioning.)

In part 1 I mentioned briefly the recent rejuvenation of the referee corps at the elite level. In part this has been necessary to replace ‘early retirees’, but there has also been a conscious effort to rejuvenate, in line with the increasing focus on fitness, speed and agility. However, there is a downside to this: experience is not exactly irrelevant, let alone a handicap, in the efforts of a referee to handle the job in an optimal way. It is not enough to anticipate and to physically see accurately. In the many complex situations on a handball court, it is also important to know and detect the most relevant cues in what you see. This largely is helped by [u]experience[/u], by having seen the same type of situation ‘a thousand times before’. The same goes for the ability to interpret the cues and translate them into good decision-making. So it becomes critical to help the talented young referees to get the maximum out of their more limited experience, through professional feedback and evaluations, supported by video from their own games and more generally.

There are also scientific methods that help referees (just like the athletes) to improve their [u]visual attention[/u], to reduce their ‘cognitive anxiety’ (e.g., the pressures of the situation), and to upgrade their ability to ‘read complex patterns of moving objects’, i.e., players and balls. For me the comparison with an icehockey goalie is a good one. He might have a more dangerous job, but he really has be razor sharp in focusing on the relevant aspects of a fast-moving and stressful scenery in front of him. And training is available for such functions.

Moving on to other aspects of technology: I have commented in the past on the great advantages that have already been gained from the usage of [u]wireless communications [/u]between the two referees and a supervisor at courtside. https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.801 The referees are getting increasingly used to this new method and use it more and more intensively. It adds an extra pair of eyes in the sense that one of the referees can help his colleague focus on the right aspect of what is happening at a particular moment, and it is also facilitates a timely exchange of information about important trends in the game. But in that latter sense, an extra pair of eyes is also available if the observations of a really [u]competent supervisor[/u] are used more fully. IHF has initially been very cautious, limiting the interventions to a very specific number of serious issues that fit the supervisor’s traditional role. But this needs to be expanded, assuming it is ensured that the person ‘in the loop’ is indeed a refereeing expert, who should then be able to alert the referees in a much broader set of circumstances with observations and advice.

I have written entire articles https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?item.977 about the prospects of using [u]video review [/u]in certain specified situations in games where adequate equipment and staffing is available, i.e., specifically at the very top level. In such situations, however, the capacity does not have to be used entirely in a ‘defensive’ sense, meaning to sort out a problem after the fact. With a video monitor available to the supervisor in the kind of circumstances described in the previous paragraph, the role of the supervisor and the usage of the wireless communications could also be enhanced. With this I mean that it would help the referee supervisor provide more accurate feedback and advice.

Finally, while there has been a particular focus on providing up-to-date guidance regarding running paths and moving patterns (largely thanks to the efforts of my IHF successor Manfred Prause), especially as it relates to counterattacks and other turnovers, there has not been the same strong focus on positioning under the current ‘diagonal’ approach in the 2-referee system. Yes, the emphasis has been on admonishing the goal referee to focus more exclusively on the action at the 6-meter line, something which by default tends to increase the burden for the court referee. But less has been done to help this court referee, and it seems this should be given more attention. In my personal opinion, one thought would be to suggest [u]more flexibility in positioning[/u], picking up on the main advantage of the ‘side referee’ position under a hypothetical 3-referee system by having the court referee swing over to the side line position with some regularity. But additional ideas would surely come up in a brainstorming.

And my whole purpose of today’s comments and ‘Part 1’ a few days ago, is really to [u]encourage brainstorming and to push for an examination of new approaches[/u], both under the 2-referee system and under a possible 3-referee system. We must guard against the old attitude that ‘everything is already perfect!’

When one is an IHF insider, particularly in an exposed position such as that of the Referee Chief, one has to be careful about commenting openly and spontaneously about new issues and ideas; they can easily be misunderstood as formal proposals that are about to be introduced, or at least as ideas that have been carefully thought out and tested. So in my capacity of a former IHF insider but now just a web writer, I can be more carefree and bring up topics just for the purpose of provoking reactions and discussion. My provocation today involves the question if there is now a need for additional eyes, as far as the refereeing of games at the absolute top level are concerned.

In part 2, a week from now, I will comment on aspects such as more intensive utilization of the communications system recently introduced for the referees and the supervisor in events at the top level of handball. I will then also touch on the utilization of video cameras and replays in games at those levels where this might be feasible. Positioning will be another consideration. And I will also discuss ways of taking education and training a bit further in the efforts of helping the referees to see and understand what is happening on the court, involving areas such as anticipation, concentration, attention and decision-making. But today I want to concentrate on the question as to whether it would make sense to consider [u]introducing a third referee in games at the highest levels[/u]!

It is almost exactly 40 years since the 2-referee system was officially introduced in handball. (Of course, I am fully aware that in many parts and levels of the overall handball world it remains necessary to use only one referee in a game, simply due to the shortage of qualified referees). During these 40 years, the game has developed tremendously, especially at the elite level. IHF and continental/federations have made major efforts to help the referees through refined instructions regarding work distribution, positioning and running paths. There has been a lot of emphasis on ‘understanding the game’, as a requirement for better anticipation and positioning. Conditioning and agility have been emphasized, partly in combination with a rejuvenation of the referee corps at the international level.

But the basics of the 2-referee system, in terms of the ‘diagonal’ approach and the work distribution have remained unchanged during the entire 40-year period. Is it not reasonable to think that the time has come, at least to [u]examine[/u] whether the existing system is optimally used and even whether it has reached its limits; in other words whether there is scope for adding a third referee at the [u]elite[/u] level?! In the next few paragraphs I am [u]not pushing[/u] for such a change. I will merely try to bring out some of the aspects that would need to be considered in detail. But in doing so, I am naturally hoping that somebody will find the time and the energy to examine these issues in practice!

Clearly one should not consider adding a third referee without analyzing thoroughly the purpose and the role. As I see it, it should add a position, ‘side referee’, that allows someone to observe the action between attackers and defenders in the critical area, between the 6-meter and the 9-meter lines, from another (often better) angle, standing at the side-line. It should also provide relief for the ‘goal referee’ and the ‘court referee’ so that they could focus more on actions away from the ball, which in the case of the goal referee means a more constant focus at the 6-meter line without any conflicting priorities. The court referee should be able to stand further back from the players with a chance to get a broader overview, not necessarily following the ball movements so much, in a position that would also help at quick turnovers.

The main concern if adding a third referee is that there would now be one more person feeling compelled to ‘justify his/her existence’. In other words, one would have to guard against too much overlapping in the responsibilities, especially between court referee and side referee, with a risk for unnecessary or premature interventions. Teamwork and trust would become critical, and ‘preemptive’ communication (through microphone/headsets), like “I have it”, would minimize the risk that a referee feels that it is necessary to step in for a colleague who in fact has decided [u]not[/u] to whistle. There would also have to be a basic guideline that the court referee mainly takes situations outside the 9-meter line and/or near his side-line, while the side referee is the main person for situations between 9 and 6 meters and/or near his side-line.

Obviously, what I have just outlined is only one possible model for using three referees, and experimenting and comparisons might lead to new ideas. There would be a number of specific details to work out under such a system. For instance, would the three referees move up and down the court during long periods without changing their relative positions? This would mean that the ‘side referee’ would be in that role at both ends. (Instead of the current diagonal, it seems clear that the goal referee and the court referee would be near the same side-line). Would it under this system make sense to keep the side referee at one and the same side line all the time, or should one shift the whole ‘triangle’? And another detail, how would one best handle the 7-meter executions? But these are details in the overall scheme…

What I would sincerely hope is that unavoidable transitional problems, like under any type of change, would not discourage people from at least considering the whole idea. Of course such a new system would require adjustments and adaption, but this is what we handled well when the 2-referee system was introduced. Also, during any experimentation, it would be important not be too quick in jumping to conclusions in one direction or the other. Different variations should be tried and one should have a lot of time for feedback from the participating referees. And the testing would have to be done under realistic conditions and in events with elite teams, because this is the only relevant level.

In recent years, the IHF has embraced the notion that the rules and referee development must go hand in hand with the developments in the game itself. Therefore I am optimistic that there will be an interest in looking further into the potential advantages of having a third referee at the elite level.

As many of our readers know, Greenland, the land of Inuits, is a place with a [u]fanatic interest in handball[/u]. In fact, measured per capita, there is no other nation with more handball players. Greenland has been a Danish territory since 1721, but more recently with a ‘home rule’ provision. Last year, Greenland obtained ‘self rule’ status, following a referendum, a vital step towards formal independence. In sports, Greenland does not have an Olympic Committee, but eight major sports are coordinated by a national sports federation. Handball is indeed a vital activity for the youth in Greenland.

Greenland is a full member of the IHF since 1998 and has participated in numerous World Championships in different categories. In fact, Greenland took part in the Women’s Junior World Championship in Korea last month. The allocation of Greenland to the Panamerican continent has at times been controversial, both on grounds of principle and for the practical reason that it creates a continent with huge distances for travel. But in reality, the only ones who have been forced to cope with such travel are the Greenland teams themselves, frequently traveling to South America, as no Panamerican events have been allocated for hosting by Greenland.

One other concern that has been heard from various Panamerican sources over the years is: ‘how can we know that we are really playing against a true Greenland team, as it is normal for the players to travel under Danish passports’. In the end, I think the other countries have been convinced by what I know to be an absolute reality: the pride of the people in Greenland in their athletes and teams who represent them abroad would never permit a situation where a non-native would be allowed on a team.

While the Inuits of Greenland thus have had their special status and issues in their international sports participation, there is another group that is facing similar but even more awkward problems. Many here in the U.S. are familiar with the sport of lacrosse, although not everyone knows a lot about its origins. Just like I was relatively unaware until recently, I think there would also be a widespread lack of awareness that lacrosse exists in some many countries around the world. The Federation of International Lacrosse (FIL) has about 25 ‘full members’, 15 ‘associate members’ and 35 ‘emerging nations’.

BUT the biggest secret, at least to me, was that the Haudenosaunee nation (six Iroquois Indian tribes) is a full member of the FIL!!! If you are intrigued and want to learn some further details about this nation, then I suggest that you ‘google’ and check out some web sites, but suffice it to say here that these North American Indians are the ones who [u]invented lacrosse[/u] in its original form. (It was described in 1636 by a French missionary as the ‘Jeu de la Crosse’). Even more astonishingly, they are highly competitive internationally today. For instance, the Iroquois men are ranked [u]fourth[/u] in the world, behind Canada, USA and Australia, but ahead of England!

The crux, however, is their long-standing and proud independence. The Haudenosaunee nation has treaties with the U.S. that go back two centuries, and they have been traveling around the world on their own passports for over 30 years, for instance participating in previous lacrosse world championships. Suddenly this year, just before the start of the Men’s World Championship in England, the U.S. government announced that these passports would no longer be valid. (Security concerns involving the old-fashioned, partly hand-written passports appeared to be the reason). This decision was totally traumatic for the Iroquois, not just because of the planned travel but for much more fundamental reasons related to history and culture. In the end, the U.S. State Department backed down, but unfortunately the U.K. government did not, so the team had to stay home.

To complete the circle back to [u]handball[/u], it should be noted that American Indians participated for two years in the mid-1990s with their own a team at the U.S. nationals in handball. It was an all-star team, put together after nationwide try-outs, that participated with some modest success on the men’s side. (A women’s team had also been put together but was not seen to be competitive enough.) The whole endeavor was made possible through the support of the Native American Sports Council (NASC).

My understanding is that their interest in handball remains. Both the NASC and many tribal leaders recognize the potential value of sports, also at the competitive level, as a way of providing inspiration and an outlet for young Native Americans. Many of them are growing up under miserable social and economic conditions, and they are facing a difficult situation with huge unemployment and limited prospects. My contacts with a former national team player (at the Olympic level) and referee, Dan Foster, who is back at his family’s Sioux reservation (Rosebud in southernmost South Dakota), suggest that a resurgence might be viable with some support from USA Handball.