Recently, I stumbled on to this website: http://www.hand-ball.org/en/

This site has a lot of good material on it. Particularly noteworthy is the extensive compilation of videos (both online and CDs- for purchase) of complete Handball matches. Additionally, it has a handy compilation of handball related software that is available from several different sites. The site is based in Spain, so some pages are only available in Spanish.

The FIBA World Basketball Championships are coming up later this month. The game is similar to the US version, but one difference is the court length.

FIBA: 28 Meters or 91 Feet, 10.36 Inches
US: 28.65 Meters or 94 Feet

Did you ever wonder why? Through some logical deduction, I’ve concluded that the answer is a combination of the metric system and Team Handball. This became apparent to me from Handball matches I’ve seen on TV and from the many courts around Paris that I’ve played on for basketball matches. At all of these gyms, the baseline for the basketball court fits exactly on the 6 Meter Handball line on both sides the gym. I thought to myself, “Gee, how come that never worked out for me the many times that I made lines for a Handball court.”

Well the answer, of course, is that the dimensions for US basketball courts are different from International Rules Basketball courts.
And if you do the math: 6 meters + 28 Meters + 6 Meters = 40 Meters (the official Handball length court) you get that perfect match with the Handball 6 Meter Lines and the FIBA Basketball baselines.

I don’t think that this happened purely by chance. According to Wikipedia, International Handball matches were first played in 1925 and Basketball followed up in 1932, so Handball probably set it’s court length first. When FIBA codified the dimensions of the basketball court, they copied a lot of the American lengths despite their less than ideal Metric equivalent. For the length of the court, however, somebody probably figured out that if they cut out .65M they would not only have a nice round number of 28M they would also have a symmetrical, less line-cluttered floor for gyms that are used for both handball and basketball. Just a theory, but unless someone has a better one, I’m sticking to it.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2006-08-02-landis-lawyer_x.htm

Howard Jacobs, the lawyer hired by cyclist Floyd Landis to address his positive doping tests at the Tour de France, was also the principal attorney hired by the USOC during the USA Team Handball decertification process http://www.usoc.org/43922.htm . I’ll go out on limb here, but my guess is that this case will be a little more challenging for Mr. Jacobs.

This past Saturday the draw for the Champions League took place. The EHF Champions League website has the full details and some reactions from the teams http://championsleague.eurohandball.com/new.asp?page=20071071X,1217 Beyond the typical standard lines from the team officials, here’s my analysis of the draw.

General comments:

The Objective: For each group the top 2 teams will advance out of the Group Phase and into a “Sweet 16” home and away aggregate knock out competition. Advancing out of the Group Phase is, of course, the first goal. The second goal is to finish first in your group, and thus avoid the other group winners in the round of 16.

The Top and Bottom Halves- Two Distinct Tiers: Last year the top two performance rows for the Champions League went a perfect 16 for 16 to advance out of the Group Phase. While this hasn’t always there is a definite trend established. Additionally, no team from Germany or Spain has ever failed to advance.

The Impact of German and Spanish Dominance:

The top row of teams does not represent the best 8 teams. As the German and Spanish leagues are the best leagues in the world, their 2nd and 3rd place teams are often better than the Champion from France, Denmark, Hungary, Slovenia, and Croatia. This isn’t always true (Montpellier and Celje have won titles), but it is usually true. As a result of this inequity, some groups have a top half which is significantly better than some of the other groups. Both of the strong teams, of course, will advance, but the 2nd place team will be a tough round of 16 match up for a first place group finisher. Conversely, it’s also possible that 2 of the weaker teams can end up meeting each other.

The Impact of Player Transfers: Originally, I took a look at the groups and assessed them based on last year’s results. However, when I compare my original assessment with the odds at Centrebet.com some of the teams that played decently last year in Group play are given virtually no chance of advancing. It’s pretty tough to follow all the club teams in the myriad national leagues, but the logical explanation is that these teams that did well last year have lost some key players to richer clubs.

Odds in parentheses are to win the Champions League as of 31 July 2006 (courtesy of Centrebet.com www.centrebet.com)

Group A:
HUN MKB Veszprém KC (20-1)
ESP Portland San Antonio (11-1)
SVK MSK Povazska Bystrica (1000-1)
BIH RK "Bosna" Sarajevo (1000-1)

As luck would have it, the draw produced a rematch of one of last year’s semifinals. Portland San Antonio and Veszprem will battle it out for first and the Slovakian and Bosnia clubs have little chance of beating either of these two teams

Group B
ESP BM Ciudad Real (2-1)
HUN SC Pick Szeged (100-1)
SUI Kadetten Schaffhausen (1000-1)
NED HV KRAS/Volendam or BLR Brest HC Meshkov

Look for the defending champion to go undefeated in Group play and for Pick to take second place. Kadetten Shaffhausen will put up a good fight on it’s home floor, but is still a long shot to advance.

Group C
DEN KIF Kolding Elite A/S (150-1)
FRA Chambery Savoie HB (33-1)
POL Wisla Plock S.A. (1000-1)
TUR Milli Piyango SK or SRB Crvena Zvezda Beograd (150-1)

Easily the weakest of the 8 groups and according to the odds makers the most evenly matched. Chambery is favored, but I saw them play several times last year and they are not a dominating team only sneaking into the #2 French spot on the last weekend of the year. Jackson Richardson is a legend, but is clearly in the twilight of his career. Kolding, the Danish Champ is shown little respect by the oddsmakers. Perhaps, they were hit hard in the offseason by transfers. Wisla Plock beat Kiel last year, so they should feel confident that they can win their matches at home against Kolding and Chambery. The odds makers give Belgrade the most respect of any 4th tier team. They are likely a young squad full of players looking for a better contract next year. Bottom Line: This Group is wide open.

Group D
CRO RK Zagreb (17-1)
GER Flensburg-Handewitt (8-1)
RUS Chehovskie Medvedi (66-1)
MKD RK Metalurg Skopje or POR ABC de Braga-Andebol SAD (1000-1)

Flensburg and Zagreb should advance, but the Russian squad, which won the lower level Cupwinners Cup last year has a decent shot at placing 2nd.

Group E
GER THW Kiel (5-1)
DEN Svendborg TGI Gudme (150-1)
CZE HC Banik OKD Karvina (150-1)
ROU C.S. HCM Constanta (1000-1) or ITA Pallamano Conversano.IT

Kiel is clearly the big favorite here. With the recent addition of former Montpellier goalie Thierry Omeyer, they now have the 2 best French players on their squad. Will French youth start wearing Kiel jerseys like they wear Tony Parker San Antonio Spur jerseys– Not likely- but at 5-1, I think they are a good bet to win it all. According to the oddsmakers, Danish Svendborg and Czech Karvina will battle for 2nd in this group.

Group F
SLO Celje Pivovarna Lasko (20-1)
GER VfL Gummersbach (20-1)
ISL Fram Reykjavik(1000-1)
LUX H.C. Berchem or NOR Sandefjord TIF(500-1)

Gummersbach and Celje are the clear favorites here. Reykjavik and Sandefjord will battle for 3rd.

Group G
ESP FC Barcelona-Cifec (4-1)
SLO RK Gold Club Kozina (1000-1)
SWE Hammarby IF HB (500-1)
GRE Panellinios AC Athens or CYP SPE Strovolos Nicosia

Barcelona should waltz through this group. The oddsmakers show absolutely no respect to the #2 Slovenian team Kozina. They will battle Swedish champ Hammarby for 2nd place.

Group H
FRA Montpellier HB (17-1)
ESP CBM Valladolid (17-1)
UKR Portovik Yuzhny (1000-1)
AUS A1 Bregenz HB (1000-1) or EST "Viking Malt" Panevezys

Montpellier and Valladolid will battle it out for the top seed. The Ukranian and Austrian Champs will battle it out for 3rd. Last year Bregenz showed they could play spoiler, though, knocking Madgeburg out of first place with a victory on the last weekend.

As reported previously, https://teamhandballnews.com/news.php?extend.77 USA Rugby was undergoing some serious upheaval similar to USA Team Handball debacle. USA Rugby, however, has apparently looked over the abyss and decided to step back away from it. Indeed their old Board of Directors, recently agreed to vote themselves out of a job and seat a new, slimmed down Board of Directors primarily consisting of “Independent Candidates.” http://www.usarugby.org/cgi-bin/02/press/displayFullAnnouncement.pl?announcementId=394 Where have I heard of that before?

And this new Board has apparently been met with approval by the skeptical rank and file according to blog and forum commentary. http://www.gainline.us/gainline/2006/07/roberts_wacker_.html Not too surprising, if you look at the new director credentials, which include some pretty strong marketing and advertising expertise. They won’t necessarily solve all of USA Rugby’s budgetary and sponsorship problems overnight, but you’d like to think that if anyone can steer Rugby in the US to the next level, this Board can. Who knows, maybe 3 years from now some of these Board members, flush with all their success in turning USA Rugby around, will be looking for a new challenge in another developing sport.

A side note to all this is the International Rugby Board’s (IRB) active engagement with USA Rugby. The IRB is the Rugby equivalent to the IHF, and they have invested significant funding to develop Rugby in Canada and the USA. (Were not talking a few hundred balls here, we’re talking millions of dollars.) In fact, because of their significant investment the IRB has essentially taken over day to day management of USA Rugby on an interim basis, including the appointment of an interim coach. This in some ways parallel’s the USOC’s current oversight of Handball. While I would like to see the IHF engaged with American Handball development in a similar fashion, I’m guessing that the IHF’s funding profile is nowhere near the IRB’s. As the IRB World Cup is the 3rd most watched and attended world sporting competition (after the Soccer World Cup and the Olympics) they likely have a lot more money to throw around. But, you can be sure they are not throwing that money around idly. They obviously see the huge potential of the USA market and are hopeful that they can entice some portion of it to become rugby fans.