Your independent news and commentary outlet for the Olympic sport of Team Handball
Surprising Brazil wins their Group; Up next defending champion, Norway in the Quarterfinals
Women’s Group play has just concluded and the Men have just one more round of games. NBC Commentator and 1996 Olympian Dawn Allinger Lewis discusses the upcoming women’s quarterfinals and the men’s results so far. Podcast length is 15 minutes.
Targeted recruiting for national teams or grass roots development? Or Both? And why is it so hard?
In Part 1, I provided some top level analysis as to why our current national teams didn’t qualify for the London Olympics. This analysis simply looked at our current team and compared that team to former U.S. Olympic teams and our current Pan American competition. That analysis highlighted that our current teams are lacking in the following areas: 1) Raw athletic talent, 2) Conditioning, 3) Individual technique/skills, 4) Team cohesion/experience, 5) Coaching strategy/preparation. In this second part I start to look at the underlying reasons for failure.
The Underlying Reasons: A complicated web they weave.
I’ve been asked a number of times over the years, just why the U.S. isn’t any good in Team Handball. I usually reply with “How much time do you have and where should I start?” As I started to map out the reasons on paper in a systematic way it became even more clear to me just how complicated it is as all of the reasons are interlocking in multiple ways so there is no clear root cause to failure. In short, there is no straight line cause and effect like the old “For want of a nail” proverb by which if we just solve this one thing we’ll become a great handball nation. Perhaps, some reasons like the lack of funding or lack of marketing exposure come close, but there is no “silver bullet” guaranteed to solve all the problems.
So, with that little diatribe in mind I would like to highlight 4 major underlying reasons worth further discussion. Those 4 reasons are:
1) A lack of good handball athletes
2) A lack of marketing/awareness
3) A lack of funding
4) Ineffective leadership/management
Underlying Reason #1: A lack of good handball athletes
Perhaps the most obvious shortcoming to the U.S. National teams relates to a distinct lack of athlete with both the raw talent and technical skills to compete at higher levels. There are two basic solutions or paths to address this problem:
1) Targeted Recruitment: You can recruit some good raw athletic talent and have a dedicated and intensive training program to build up their technical skills
2) Grass Roots: You can develop broad based grass roots programs to increase the number of players in this country and out of those greater numbers some good athletes with strong technical skills will emerge.
Over the years the U.S. has tried both approaches to varying degrees of success. In a series of articles I wrote 3 years ago, “A Framework for Creating USA National Team Success” Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, I provided an in depth review of some of the problems with each strategy and proposed a hybrid model for implementation. Here is a somewhat shortened version of that analysis.
Targeted Recruitment: The obvious solution?
With the Olympics going on various media observers have been watching the Handball matches and have been zeroing in on the Target Recruitment strategy. All we need is NBA D-League players or mediocre NCAA talent from the Big Sky conference and train them up a little. Even USA Team Handball is in the act taking the more modest approach of 1 (all we need is just 1) athlete from each NCAA conference.
It’s easy to see why so many people immediately come up with this strategy as one only has to watch the teams currently playing in London and assess that there are indeed thousands, if not tens of thousands of athletes in the U.S. with the raw athletic talent necessary to compete. But, it’s just not that simple as there are a number of further underlying reasons:
1) Recruitment of the great raw talent athlete is only feasible when those athletes run out of other options: Many observers fully realize this and that is why the more credible back of the napkin analysis focuses on athletes that aren’t going to make the big time. Problem is you need to convince those athletes that they aren’t going to be the next D-Leaguer that isn’t going to make the NBA.
2) More athletes have more “other” options: Not too many years ago the options for former NCAA athletes were pretty limited making an Olympic handball career an interesting possibility. This is not as true anymore, particularly for basketball athletes who have a lot more options in Europe. This article highlights how things have change over the years.
3) Older players are more likely to have “life issues” emerge: Most great raw talent athletes at least having the option of playing their chosen sport in college. This means the youngest athletes will be in 22-23 age range. Certainly from a physicality standpoint this age is not a tremendous problem, but with each passing year athletes will inevitably have “life issues” play a greater and greater role in their overall psyche. The possibility of marriage, needing to start a career or just waking up some morning and deciding that this training isn’t any fun anymore will come into play.
4) The Olympic carrot is less of a tangible reward: In the past a USA Team Handball recruiter could confidently wave the Olympic carrot in front of a would be player. Certainly at the 84 and 96 Olympics there was automatic qualification. The competition in the Pan American region, however, is now much stiffer and some athletes will be less enticed when they realize that participating in the Olympics is far from a guarantee.
5) Lack of funding: And right now the USA Federation has nowhere near the funding necessary to establish a credible training program for these would be recruits. The programs in the 80s and 90s provided room and board, overseas travel opportunities and a small stipend. With the other reasons outlined above even that model might not be sufficient enough to recruit the players needed.
Grass Roots: Too hard and it takes too long?
While it’s not the solution du jour, Grass Roots strategies have garnered more weight at other times. All we have to do is copy what soccer has done (or lacrosse, or rugby, or ultimate Frisbee) and then the sport will be popular in this country. It’s not so simple and in this post I explained why.
Perhaps the biggest proponents to this strategy are the many expats who remember how they learned the sport at younger ages in their home country. If we could do it in Elbonia then we can do it in the USA. Grass Roots takes time, but it’s clearly the way to go if we want to have sustained success. If you have thousands and thousands playing the sport, you will have great players that bubble up to the top and they will be doing so at age 18, not age 25. But it’s not easy to develop these broad based programs. Here are some of the reasons why.
1) Starting up a team sport from scratch isn’t easy: Team Handball is a team game and you need a lot of players in order to have a good training environment. We can probably quibble about just exactly how many are needed, but at least 10 is probably a good number. Then, of course, you have to add the challenge of convincing people who’ve never played a sport before to suddenly decide to devote time and money to it. The internet and Olympic telecast make such recruiting easier, but as anybody who’s ever started a club knows this is painstaking, unglamorous work.
2) Gym space is needed: Finding a gym to play in can be a challenge as many in the U.S. were built for smaller basketball courts. And then all those basketball leagues have to be contended with. The cost of gym rental can be a crippling blow to new clubs which lack the numbers to share the costs.
3) The tyranny of distance: The U.S. is a big country. Even if a good club program is started in one particular city, that club often has to travel considerable distance to play another club. This means that for real grass roots efforts to succeed that one club in a city often isn’t enough. This is why to a certain extent that there is a little bit more concentration and development on the East Coast where the population has a bit more density.
4) The dominance of basketball: Team Handball is its own game and has similarities with a number of sports. Still, it should be obvious that there is a great deal of similarity between the two games. Not every good basketball player could be a good team handball player (and vice-versa), but there is a massive number of players that could choose either. Basketball was invented in the U.S. and it’s our national indoor sport. That’s not going to ever change and those would be athletes at younger ages are almost always going to select hoops over handball.
5) The physicality of team handball: Team Handball can be a rough sport to play and it’s probably better suited for athletes in their teens. Accordingly, it’s at a handicap compared to other sports like soccer where there is less injury, or at least the perception of less injury.
6) The pressure to succeed now: It’s a given that Grass Roots programs will not lead to immediate success. In fact, you could argue that it will take at least 10 years to see any success translated to our national teams. Meanwhile the USOC, a primary funding source for USA Team Handball, requests a yearly High Performance Plan which is supposed to outline how Team USA is going to win medals when the reality is that even qualifying at this point would be a tremendous success. This pressure has always existed, so it’s not surprising that funding choices have often been made towards supporting National Teams rather than Grass Roots efforts. And then when those National Teams have only moderate success (if even that) the Grass Roots proponents out in the sticks have complained, if only you had given me the resources I need, I would have developed several athletes that could make your national teams.
7) Lack of funding: But, again the reality is that even if USA Team Handball zeroed out all funding for USA National Teams there still wouldn’t be enough seed money to support Grass Roots programs on the scale that is necessary. Sure, it could be argued that these programs should be self-sufficient, but with the challenges outlined above assistance is needed to better enable success.
The Answer?
When you start to add up the underlying reasons it becomes fairly clear that both strategies have a lot of hurdles standing in the way of success. As I noted in my framework series there are elements of both models that have merits, so that’s why I think some sort of a hybrid approach stand the best chance of success. And I say best chance, because there are some other underlying reasons that would have to be resolved before any plan to field better teams has a good chance at success. Those other areas include a lack of funding, a lack of exposure/marketing, and yes, a history of ineffective leadership/managemen. In Part 3, I first address the historical lack of funding.
the British are beginning to catch on
In one women’s group, it may seem we have a top trio, who have beaten each other and will end up in the sequence Russia, Croatia and Brazil, if they can win their final group games. But the key match-up here is Russia-Montenegro, where a win for Montenegro would suddenly send the Russians to fourth place, while Brazil would win the group. Even if this were not to happen, it seems one must regard Brazil’s performance as particularly positive after their disappointment in the World Championship half a year ago. And there was clearly special excitement in the game where Croatia managed to beat Russia. It should also be noted that Angola and Great Britain are already out of the running.
In the other group, the tougher one, France has seemed to be the more solid team, also in a physical sense. Some may have been surprised by the Korean, but then they forget that it is Korea’s traditional specialty to come with a cohesive team precisely to the Olympic Games. By contrast, Sweden has been the real disappointment; four straight losses so far, but above all some really uninspired performances. Today’s final game was Denmark’s ‘battle for survival’ against rivals Norway. The game was dramatic, shifting between a narrow lead for Norway and a tied game. Norway scored the winning goal in the final seconds, and this means that Denmark will now join Sweden on the sidelines when we get to the quarter-finals. Frankly, this really fits the Danish performance both earlier in week and in recent time. They are not at their usual level.
The men’s ‘group of death’ has Croatia and Denmark at the top with three straight wins. Tomorrow’s game between the two is likely to determine the group winner. Denmark has not tended to make it easy for themselves, but towards the end of each game they have come through. Spain and Hungary have showed good form but without consistency. The disappointment so far is Serbia; they have looked very solid in a couple of games, but then suddenly they lost their strength and composure. Finally, Korea’s men follow the pattern of being less competitive then their women counterparts.
The other men’s group has come out as expected so far. The key game for advancement to the quarterfinal will be Argentina vs. Tunisia on the final day. Great Britain will try to ‘complicate’ things by getting a point or two against Tunisia tomorrow. Among the three traditional powers, Sweden has been the weaker partner so far. Like the women, they have not shown much fighting spirit. So it will be up to France and Iceland to settle the top two positions tomorrow.
It has really been impressive to see how the British spectators have taken to handball, showing up in large numbers and with great enthusiasm, despite the lack of success for their teams. And then, of course, each one of the other teams has had their contingent of boisterous supporters. So the atmosphere in the Copperbox Arena has really been great!
it was nice as long as it lasted...
And this week, with the handball world’s attention being on the Olympic tournament in London, it was made clear that AGK has declared bankruptcy. The club is now reverting to its old form of Albertslund-Glostrup in the Danish 3rd division and the players are considered unemployed. They are entitled to unemployment compensation under Danish law, but many of them will quickly reach the limit for such payments, considering the size of their contracts. Skive who were relegated at the end of the 2011-12 season are now pondering an offer to remain in the top division.
While the players are not likely to have been totally unsuspecting about the end being near, for several of them who are right now focused on Olympic handball it must be an unwelcome distraction. Some of them would normally be eagerly sought after by other top clubs, while others might suddenly consider early retirement. The problem is the timing. At this point in the year, most clubs have their rosters and their budgets firmly set for the 2012-13 season and there are very few who would have the resources to absorb AGK players.
The Swedish trio, Kim Andersson, Ekberg (who is currently performing well in London) and Petersen, may be sure to get offers ‘from across the bridge’ in Sweden, although it is also suggested that Kiel is interested in Ekberg. Boldsen might retire, but he is also speculating about joining a club in Qatar. Having not played in the EURO 2012, he would in fact be eligible for the Qatar national team when they host the World Championship in 2015. Olafur Stefansson might also consider retirement.
The main speculation tends to involved ‘World player of the year’ Mikkel Hansen, but he is not the only one whose name is being linked to a European top club. But only a very limited group of teams would seem to be in the running, e.g., Kiel, Flensburg, Barcelona, Kielce and Veszprem. It will be interesting to see how this sudden ‘market’ will play itself out after the Olympics.
Obviously there are also implications for the EHF Champions League. After their third-place in the past season, AGK was the obvious top seed in one of the main round groups for the coming season. The EHF took a few days to consider this unprecedented situation, and today came out with an announcement. Perhaps some other top teams had hoped for an improved ranking through some kind of ‘chain reaction’, but the EHF went for the simplest solution. The slot of AGK will be taken over by Bjerringbro-Silkeborg (BSF). And the place of BSF in the Champions League ‘wild card qualifying’ was given to Cimos Koper (Slovenia) who had been next in line for such an opportunity. Everything else remains unchanged.
One hopes that some lessons will be learned from the AGK saga. While AGK had successes and was a positive factor as long as it lasted, they now leave a gap in Danish handball and in the Copenhagen region. Particularly at a time of financial difficulties essentially in most of Europe, it seems important that sports clubs at the elite level have a very solid foundation. Relying on the money and efforts by an individual owner or key sponsor is likely to constitute a gamble. The endeavor may be well-intended, but it may easily turn out to be a ‘house of cards’!
if only the gamblers would stick to roulette, cards etc...
However, the real risks in terms of match fixing and a serious impact on our sport come through illegal gambling. Many of you have undoubtedly heard stories about numerous conspiracies that have been uncovered, for instance in the world of soccer, both at the elite level and at very modest levels. Even so, many fans of handball may remain rather ignorant or naïve regarding the possible impact also in our sport.
So I want to share with you that about two weeks ago I was contacted by someone whose name seemed a bit ‘muddled’ and whose firm did not sound like one of the established ones. He claimed to have been directed to me by someone unnamed in international handball who knows me. This may or may not be true. But the purpose was to get my help in coming up with ideas for interesting aspects of a handball game that could serve as a basis for betting.
I was obviously not about to enter into such a collaboration, but I was curious about the whole thing; therefore I pretended not to understand and asked for some explanations of what was meant. So, before I politely indicated that I was not interested, I was then given some examples of what ideas the person already had. I will share these examples below and also include some similar ones that I have come up with myself.
Established betting firms typically accept bets primarily on the final results of a specific game or, in the case of the Olympics, the final winners on the men’s and women’s side. To add some more variations, they may add betting on the goal difference in the final result, the half-time result, which team will first reach 5 or 10 goals, the best individual goal scorers etc. Manipulation of some of these aspects would clearly involve manipulation of the final result of a game or an event.
But what I found was that, beyond what had ever occurred to me, there would be many aspects of a game which would be quite harmless as regards the result of the game, and therefore also would lend themselves much more easily to manipulation that would never be suspected or detected, simply because the impact would not matter very much. So this might seem more innocent in a way, but as long as there are people who are interested in betting money on some of these strange things, then clearly the opportunities and the risks for manipulation by players, officials and referees will increase.
For instance, what would you think about betting on which TEAM will be the first one to request a team time-out, will get the first throw-in, will make the first faulty substitution, will be the first one called for entering the goal area of the opponents, or will be the first one to be shown the forewarning signal for passive play? And would you be prepared to bet on which individual PLAYER will be the first one to get a yellow card, the first one to be called for too many steps, the first one to miss (or save) a 7-meter throw etc. Or would you prefer to speculate about the exact time for the first or last goal of the game, or perhaps the total number of 7-meters awarded or the number of offensive fouls called??
Some of these ideas seem quite mind-boggling; who would take a pleasure in risking some money on that? And could there really be so much money involved that this would be lucrative business for an illegal betting firm or make them prepared to take the risk of ‘convincing’ participants to become involved in manipulation? It may seem difficult to believe, but when there is easy money to be made by unscrupulous people, then everything is possible. And again, the experience from other sports really does make me think that perhaps it is not so farfetched after all.
In my recent interview with the new EHF President, he felt reasonably confident that their protective measures are adequate. And I also hope that we can trust our elite players and referees to have integrity and not be prepared to put their careers at stake. But in several other sports they have said the same thing and have still been proven wrong. So let us be aware and be vigilant!
Brazil scoring one of their 50 goals in their 50-10 victory over the USA last year at the PANAM Games. The USA will need to get a lot better if it wants to qualify for the Olympics.
I’m in the process of updating the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page and as this is easily the question of the moment, I thought it worthwhile to answer it. In this first part, I simply review the qualification competition and analyze why the U.S. came up short.
Why aren’t the USA men’s and women’s national teams at the 2012 Olympics?
The simple answer: They didn’t qualify (and they didn’t even come close). There are two paths to qualification for the USA; either via the World Championships or the PANAM Games. It’s a somewhat complicated process and the details are at these links (Men’s 2012 Qualification, Women’s 2012 Qualification). By far, the simplest and easiest way for the USA to have qualified would have been to win the Handball Tournament at the PANAM Games.
At the 2011 PANAM Games the women finished 8th out of 8 teams, failing to win a single match. In pool play they lost to the eventual winner and Olympic qualifier, Brazil by a score of 50-10. There’s no way to sugar coat such a loss as it means that Brazil basically scored at will. In their other 4 games the women were more competitive, but still lost by an average of 7 goals. (Details on PANAM Games Women’s Tournament)
The men fared slightly better and finished 7th out of 8 teams. In pool play they lost 36-19 to the eventual winner and Olympic qualifier, Argentina. Their other pool play and placement matches were relatively close. They lost by 5 goals to eventual 4th place finisher, the Dominican Republic and lost by 1 goal to both Mexico and Canada. In the 7th place game they managed to beat winless Venezuela by 4. These margins of defeat make it abundantly clear that there was no realistic scenario by which either the men or women could have qualified for London. (Details on PANAM Games Men’s Tournament)
Why weren’t the U.S. teams more competitive? The U.S. has never been a world power, but in the 80s and 90s, the U.S. fielded competitive sides that were able to earn qualification to the Olympics. What happened? Why the lopsided scores? As this is just the first of two parts, I’ll first give the direct causes of failure. In thinking about how to best capture this I came up with 5 key areas that factor into how good a team is. These 5 key factors are:
1) Raw athletic talent
2) Conditioning
3) Individual technique/skills
4) Team cohesion/experience
5) Coaching strategy/preparation
So here’s my assessment of our current national teams and where they stand, both in comparison to their current competition and USA teams of the 80s and 90s. (Side Note: If this assessment comes across as a cranky old timer who thinks former USA teams walked on water, let me be clear on a couple of things. I, personally was a border line national team player on a team that only was able to eke out a win and a draw in my 12 International Game; And those were against Canada. Translation: I am a has been, that never was. Going further, no USA team has ever been good enough to beat the top teams of Europe in World Championship or Olympic competition.
1) Raw athletic talent. If you can jump higher, throw harder and move quicker than your opponent you will have a distinct advantage. For many years, U.S. teams compensated for their lack of technical skill with superior athletic talent drawn from our sizable population
USA Women: With the Women’s team, I would assess that only one player (Jennifer Fithian) to have the type of raw talent that would compare with our former Olympic teams. Karoline Borg comes close and would “have a chance” to make the roster, but mostly based on her strong technical skill. Against current PATHF competition they are totally outgunned by Brazil. The gap with the rest of PATHF, however, isn’t as bad, but they still are at a disadvantage.
USA Men: The men’s team is a bit stronger in this department. Clearly backcourts Gary Hines and Adam El Zogby have the raw talent. (Although, Hines would have to play wing instead of back.) From what I’ve seen Jordan Fithian may have the raw talent, but it’s not as clear cut. The rest of the roster is filled with some decent talent, but in a competitive environment for roster slots comparable to the 80s and 90s most would come up short. Against their current competition in PATHF, however, they only have a slight handicap against Argentina/Brazil and have better raw talent than the other also-rans.
2) Conditioning. Team Handball is a physically demanding game and if athletes are out of shape it can make a big difference. Former USA Olympic team might have come up short technically, but rarely were they out hustled.
USA Women: The U.S. Women’s team was clearly lacking in this area and this certainly played a role in the final score line of their matches.
USA Men: The USA Men seemed to be OK in this department. Although, perhaps a little better conditioning could have helped the team to overcome some rough patches in close matches.
3) Individual technique/skills: While Team Handball is a relatively easy game to learn, it can be a challenging game to master. Despite extensive full time training (often for several years) former USA Olympic teams were always outmatched in this area by European teams. In the 80s and 90s it was a rare occurrence for a USA team to be technically outmatched by their PATHF competition, but several PATHF nations have since made significant gains in training and development.
USA Women: On the women’s side, arguably only one player, leading scorer and Swedish-American, Karoline Borg, has fully mastered the finer points of the game. Several other players have made significant progress, but still have a ways to go in this department. The current USA team is technically weaker than our former Olympic teams, but this is due to substantially fewer training opportunities. And slippage against PATHF competition is also attributable to improved training in development in those nations.
USA Men: Several players, primarily dual citizen athletes, are pretty sound technically. Gary Hines is arguably the most technically developed American player that didn’t also have the benefit of training as part of a fully established USA residence program. The American born players aren’t as strong technically for the same reasons mentioned in the women’s section.
4) Team cohesion/experience. Team Handball, as the name indicates, is a “team” game. How the different individual players combine their talents to form a cohesive team can make all the difference. Additionally, teams that have played together for years have a distinct advantage in that the players are familiar with each other’s moves, strengths and weaknesses. Former USA Olympic teams were very cohesive in that they trained and, in many instances, lived together for several years. USA teams in the past also had the advantage of periodic overseas trips for competition.
USA Women: The core of the USA Women’s team is a pretty cohesive unit having trained together at Cortland University from 2004-2007. Since 2007, however, there have only been a few training camps prior to competition for World Championship or Olympic qualification. There is no comparison to the advantages that former USA teams had in this area. Additionally, several PATHF programs now have regular training and overseas trips for competition.
USA Men: The Men’s team is even more handicapped in this department as players often met each other for the first time at the short training camps prior to competition. The team has done as good as job as can be expected in this department, but they are clearly lacking opportunities to play together as a team. This has put them at a distinct disadvantage against several PATHF foes where those teams have played dozens of games together.
5) Coaching Strategy/Preparation. A good coach can make any team a little bit better with good X’s and O’s strategy during the match and by preparing his team with a good scouting report on the opposition. USA Olympic teams in the past had full time coaches and in most instances they were experienced European coaches with good track records.
USA Women/USA Men: Both the current men’s and women’s teams do not have permanent head coaches. Instead coaches have been hired prior to competition. It’s difficult to assess the performance of these coaches without being more closely involved in the program. Additionally, as part time coaches with inadequate resources it’s difficult to find great fault with their efforts. In terms of the PATHF programs, Brazil has had full time European coaches in recent years and I suspect that Argentina and Chile’s coaches also receive more consistent support from their federations.
Summary
It’s possible that a team can compensate for a weakness in any of these areas. I’ve seen superior raw athletic talent trump weak technical skills and I’ve also seen the reverse happen. I’ve seen inexperienced teams do well with a good coach, and again I’ve seen the reverse as well. But, if you are at a disadvantage in all 5 areas (Women) and 4 out of 5 (Men) there’s simply no way you can expect anything but poor results.
Of course, there are a number of obvious steps that could be taken to improve in all of these areas. If you need better raw talent, then do a better job of recruiting. If your players are technically weak, well then train them to be better, etc., etc., All of this, however, is easier said than done. In part 2, I’ll tackle the underlying reasons as to why the USA has struggled to field better teams and qualify for the Olympics.
No major surprises in the early going
John did not seem so optimistic about our PanAmerican representative on the women’s side, viz. Brazil. But they cannot be so bad when they defeat Croatia despite seemingly trying every method to ‘give the game away’. — Russia almost seemed to have the same mindset, but they were able to hold off Angola even though the game was tied 10 minutes before the end. Should we believe that the Angolans are better than expected and could cause trouble for, say, Croatia or Montenegro? — It is unlikely that many of the British spectators understood how surprisingly respectable the British team effort was in the 19-31 loss against Montenegro. At times they looked quite good, but in many situations their relative lack of experience did them in. Lost balls, crazy shots and other mistakes were costly. But they are clearly not going to be an embarrassment.
In the other group, the revelation was that the Koreans seem to follow their tradition of always coming extremely well prepared and focused on the Olympic Games. They had no problems in taking charge of the game against Spain. — Denmark and Sweden played a rather mediocre game, where Sweden squandered a three-goal half-time lead through an absolutely miserable second half. It is difficult to see any of these two teams as a medal candidate, especially after having watched the final game of the day. — Here Norway and France, all in all, played a game at a higher level, with a fast pace and strong individual performances. The final result, 24-23 to France, does not really explain what happened. Norway gave away the game in the early going by falling behind 1-6. This was too big a handicap. At one stage in the second half, however, the Norwegians seemed to explode into an incredible comeback. But all they managed to do was to get the goal difference more respectable. Who knows, perhaps these two teams will meet again sometime next week.
In Men’s group A, the ‘easy’ one, Iceland and Argentina had the morning game, which evolved into a ‘run and gun’ battle. The goalkeepers had a tough task, but a key performance was provided by Icelandic back-up Gudmundsson. Olafur Stefansson was perfect from the 7-meter line. In the end, their greater accuracy and experience allowed Iceland to pull away, to the delight of their fans which included the country’s President. — Tunisia showed some glimpses and cannot be taken lightly, but it is clear that Tej, Hmam and Meganneh are getting on in age. The new revelation was tall, 21-year old Jallouz, an ‘Abalo type’. In the end, Sweden’s very diversified offense was enough, especially combined with a strong effort from Mattias Andersson in goal and an alert Doder. — The British team could have had a gentler draw; France as opponents in the opening game must feel a bit overwhelming. But the Brits kept it to 5-8 during the first 15 minutes, before the French team, without playing their best line-up, turned up the pace and got 21-7 at half-time. The second half continued much in the same way and led to a final result of 44-15.
The Koreans did not have the stature or strength to match up well against the forceful Croatians. It is probably premature to judge after just this game, but one wonders if perhaps this is the moment of a Croatian comeback, where the younger generation teams up successfully with Balic/Vori/Lackovic. — Spain-Serbia turned out to be as thrilling as one had expected, at least for about 55 minutes. After Hombrados unexpectedly had had to enter to replace an injured Sterbik, the Serbs had pulled away to a four-goal half-time lead. But then it was back and forth between a tied game and a narrow lead for Serbia in the second half, until two alert interceptions and fast-break goals seemed to demoralize the Serbs. From 18-20 it went to 24-20 in favor of Spain in six minutes. The game was not exactly elegant; instead it was characterized by wrestling, clumsy offensive fouls and technical mistakes. — In the third match in the ‘group of death’ we had Denmark against Hungary. This also tends to highlight a duel between Mikkel Hansen and Laszlo Nagy, but that duel today became anticlimactic. Hansen was overshadowed by several teammates, especially Mogensen and Eggert. Nagy was mostly noticed for being benched after two 2-minute suspensions, and then at the very end two costly turnovers. After 15-20 minutes the Danish ‘machine’ had gotten warmed up and a deficit was turned into a half-time lead 13-10. But in the second half the Hungarians soon caught up. The result was 25-25 shortly before the end, but then the Danes scored the final two goals of the game.
5 Time Olympian and Player-Coach Kyung-Shin Yoon leads the South Korean delegation into Olympic Stadium
Here’s some quick analysis and a few notes of the upcoming Olympic Tournament
Olympic Tournament Format Basics: The Olympic Tournament consists of two phases. The first phase, group play, has the nations divided up into 2 groups of 6 nations. Over 10 days the teams will play a round robin with the women and men alternating playing days. At the end of the first phase, the top 4 teams from each group will advance to the second phase. The second phase is a straight knock out competition with quarterfinals, semifinals and finals
Group Play is somewhat academic: The nature of this format makes group play somewhat academic since it’s very unlikely that the favored teams won’t finish in the top 4 and advance to the quarterfinals. So, a team can slip up in group play; heck even lose 3 times and still advance. Sure the nations would prefer a higher seed and avoid a tougher opponent in the quarterfinals, but that’s only a slight advantage. In 2004, France went 5-0 in group play then got unceremoniously bounced out by Russia in the quarterfinals. So, look at group play as extended warm-up for the top teams.
Favorites (Women): Here are the odds for the Women’s teams to win the gold medal. I’ve kept the teams in their respective groups so you can get a relative sense of each team’s projected finish.
Group A
Russia (3.5 to 1)
Montenegro (7.5 to 1)
Brazil (50 to 1)
Croatia (75 to 1)
Angola (500 to 1)
Great Britain (10,000 to 1)
Group B
Norway (1.75 to 1)
France (6.5 to 1)
Denmark (33 to 1)
Spain (34 to 1)
Sweden (33 to 1)
South Korea (50 to 1)
So, the oddsmakers have assessed that in Group A, Russia and Montenegro are near locks for a 1st or 2nd place finish. Brazil and Croatia are also expected to advance, while Angola and Great Britain are significant longshots. In Group B, Norway and France are expected to advance, but it should be a big fight between the remaining sides for spots 3 and 4. The big question mark is South Korea. South Korea didn’t perform particularly well at the World Championships in December, but they’ve been known in the past to regroup pretty quickly. Their fast style of play also has been known to give the Europeans fits.
Favorites (Men): Here are the odds for the men:
Group A
France (2 to 1)
Iceland (19 to 1)
Sweden (40 to 1)
Argentina (550 to 1)
Tunisia (550 to 1)
Great Britain (10,000 to 1)
Group B
Denmark (3.5 to 1)
Spain (5 to 1)
Croatia (5.5 to 1)
Serbia (30 to 1)
Hungary (40 to 1)
South Korea (150 to 1)
In Group A, France, Iceland and Sweden are pretty much guaranteed to advance. Argentina and Tunisia are expected to battle for 4th place. In Group B the teams are more closely bunched. Denmark, Spain and Croatia are the favorites while Serbia and Hungary are expected to battle for 4th. The difference between all 5 of those teams is not nearly as great, though compared to Group A. South Korea is expected to be an outsider, but then in Beijing they surprised everyone by winning their Group.
Great Expectations for Great Britain? My assessment is that the host nation is not like to win a match in this tournament. The scorelines for the past year suggest that the Women have made significant progress and there’s a good chance that they will keep the final scores respectable. Their best chance for victory is against Angola, who they actually beat in a friendly earlier this year. The Men will likely struggle against their competition and the best they can hope for is to be competitive against France, Iceland and Sweden (Keep the margin under 20). Against Tunisia and Argentina if they can keep the final margin under 10 they will be doing well. The real goal for Great Britain is not so much the outcome in London, but to leave a legacy that will enable them to continue the sport’s growth in their country. Other minor handball nations (USA and Australia) were able to get a marginal bounce from hosting the Olympics. Maybe the Brits can show the way.
Wither Karabatic? Since 2002, I’ve followed the career of Nikola Karabatic fairly closely. I’ll never forget seeing him play on TV for Montpellier, asking myself, “Who’s that guy? He’s pretty good” and being stunned to find out he was only 18 years old. I’ll go on the record as stating he’s the best all around player, I’ve ever seen, period. I’ve never seen a handball player do such a good job at making the players around him better. No more so was that evident then at the 2011 WC, where he shepherded a weak backcourt (Sorry, French youngsters, Accambray and Barrachet) to a gold medal. But, then at the 2012 Euros with Narcisse back in action, Karabatic instead of his usual masterful self was uncharacteristically pedestrian. Teams lose at teams, but France’s 11th place finish was largely due to his uncharacteristically pedestrian performance. More than his share of turnovers and some downright bad shots on goal. Even in the matches this past year in the Champions League he hasn’t seem to be his usual stuff. So the big question in my mind is whether the guy who’s the best I’ve ever seen can shake it off or will I need to re-evaluate the current pecking order of greatness. At 28, Karabatic should be at the peak of his powers, so I’m guessing we will see a return to earlier form.
Flag Bearers: Three handball athletes were honored with the opportunity to carry their nation’s flag in the opening ceremonies: Croatia’s Venio Losert, Tunisia’s Heykel Megannem and South Korea’s Kyung Shin Yoon. At 39, Yoon is playing in his 5th Olympics, this time as a player coach. Yoon also is notable for having the record as the all time goal scorer for the German Bundesliga.
Predictions
Women:
Gold: Norway
Silver: Russia
Bronze: Montenegro
Men:
Gold: France
Silver: Denmark
Bronze: Spain
OK. None of these are very bold, but it’s what I think will happen. I will, however, go out on a limb with this prediction: The French Men will shake off the doldrums from the Euros and have an undefeated run to the title. And, further they will comfortably win every match. My rationale is that the Euros have taught them what happens when they let the competition stick around and they will assert their superior talent early and often. We shall see, however, we shall see.
this could really make the Winter Games more exciting
So now it clearly occurs to me what an imbalance we have between the Summer Games and the Winter Games. Of course, it is a matter of personal taste, but in the Winter Games there are not so many sports that catch my attention. Of course, if you are a fan of ‘movement’ on snow and ice you will disagree, but the variety just is not there. I enjoy the icehockey, especially as these days all the best players tend to be there. But being a spectator of, for instance, curling, ski-jumping and cross-country skiing almost puts me to sleep. Some of the other sports have their exciting moments and performers. By contrast, now that the TV/internet coverage is so good, in the Summer Games I have a hard time figuring out my choices, even with the help of taping set up on two TV sets. My handball watching will have to suffer….
So how about the idea of trying to ‘even out’ the size of the two games and the assortment of sports. If you think of it, very few of the sports in the Summer Games really have to take place in the summer; in fact, most of them are sports that normally have their season in fall/winter/spring. This of course tends to apply to the indoor sports, not just handball/basketball/volleyball, but also for instance, badminton, fencing, wrestling, boxing, and swimming. On the other side, one would have to agree that track & field, sailing/rowing/canoeing, cycling and equestrian work better in the absence of snow and ice. But, mischievously, would it not be exciting to imagine, for instance, triathlon in the winter.
More seriously, it would seem feasible to switch at least half a dozen sports, like the team sports handball, basketball and volleyball, together with some individual ‘power sports’, such as boxing, wrestling and judo!? Apart from the viewpoint of TV/internet audiences worldwide, it would also seem to provide better balance in terms of the work of organizers and media, and the convenience for spectators. It seems that the problems that come with having 11.000 athletes at one huge event (compared with about one fourth of this number in the winter) are really a bit much. And very few countries and cities can realistically handle something of this magnitude.
Also, the current size of the Summer Games creates almost a ‘zero-sum’ situation regarding the desire of including new sports, adding events to existing sports or adding the number of athletes per event. This can only be done through the elimination or reduction of some sports. And handball is suffering the consequences. In the typical discriminatory fashion, not so long ago we had to accept a limit of 8 women’s teams compared with 12 men’s teams. Now we have grown gradually to 12+12, but the price has partly been that we must accept that only 14 players are allowed per squad. This is of course a handicap when teams are used to 16 players in a World Championship. So most teams had difficult choices to make and now some of them additionally have a dilemma due to injuries and illness, because they have no margins.
Of course, as the IHF President has been heard suggesting, for handball there might be a further incentive for moving our (indoor) handball to the Winter Games. We see with some envy that volleyball has two variations in the Summer Games, both the traditional indoor format and the beach volleyball. As beach handball is growing in popularity, it might soon be realistic to think of it as an Olympic sport. But in the current circumstances, with the ‘zero-sum’ situation I mentioned for the Summer Games, it seems rather impossible to imagine that beach handball would get the opportunity, as a second variation of an existing sport, ahead of the many new sports that are pushing hard to be considered. But if the pressure was relieved by switching sports, including indoor handball, to the Winter Games, then the odds might become more favorable.
In the past, the idea of expanding the winter games to include sports requiring large indoor arenas would have been rather unrealistic. In the days when St. Moritz, Cortina, Lake Placid, and Albertville were the typical kind of host cities, it would have been impossible to allow for many more athletes and the construction of major arenas. But this is no longer an issue, because recent organizers have included Vancouver and Turin, and Munich was a strong candidate for 2018. So it should always be possible to find organizers that have both the facilities required for the traditional (outdoor) winter events and the resources and infrastructure to handle some indoor sports in addition.
It would be interesting to get your reactions!
Note: The key words are "Schedule Subject to Change"
American residents can now see what their TV viewing options are for Team Handball as NBC has posted their tentative TV schedule. You can find the schedule by clicking here: http://www.nbcolympics.com/tv-listings/index.html# And then clicking “TV Schedule by Sport” and selecting “Handball.” (Also, depending on whether you’ve accessed the site before, you may need to answer a few questions to sign in. The good thing is that they will adjust the schedule to your local time.)
According to the posted schedule, there will be at least part of 1 handball match shown every day and the matches will be broadcast on either MSNBC or the NBC Sports Network (formerly known as Versus). You may want to check your current programming packing with your cable of satellite TV provider to see if you have those channels. MSNBC is available with most lower tier packages, but you may have to upgrade to get the NBC Sports Network (I did with Dish Network).
Of course, NBC will also be live streaming every single match, but you’ll need to sign up and verify that you have cable or a satellite TV package. The link to the live streaming schedule is here: http://www.nbcolympics.com/online-listings/sport=handball/index.html In terms of “On Demand” viewing (i.e., replays after the live showing) it remains to be seen as to what is provided and how soon after the match it will be available for viewing. In 2008, NBC provided options for delayed viewing, but you had to be careful if you wanted to watch it without first finding out the score.
Also, don’t be surprised if there are some changes to the schedule in terms of what’s shown on TV. It’s best that you check the online listings every day or so to see if there are any changes.
This is where most of the action is...
The IHF Referee Commission always takes great care in connection with the Olympic Games to provide the referees with all the necessary instructions regarding important rules issues and interpretations. But it should be noted that the focus is on reminding the referees about points of particular importance and on giving feedback about the aspects which have led to less satisfaction in recent World and Continental Championships. What must not happen is that the referees are given ‘new’ instructions or any advice that would suggest major changes in interpretations or procedures. On the contrary, the teams must be able to trust that they are not encountering any surprises when the event starts.
Even beyond that, the real objective should be to get all the referee couples on the same wavelength, so that there are no differences in interpretations and styles between couples or from one game to another. We do not want ‘robots’ out there, and their personalities are not supposed to be ‘erased’, but consistency is the key word.
Consistency also means applying the rules in the same way from the first moment of a game to the last. For many years now, it has been emphasized that serious fouls early in the game must be identified and handled firmly. If a foul deserves a direct 2-minute penalty or even a disqualification, then it is not an excuse that it is (‘too’) early in the game and that all the yellow cards have not been ‘used up’. Similarly, the rules do not change in the final, critical moments of a game. The referees must show courage and avoid the temptation of becoming ‘diplomatic’ in those situations, meaning that they overlook infractions or penalize too softly. We do not want to see that the team which is more cynical or ruthless than their opponents gets an advantage.
In some recent events, including EURO 2012, there was a general sense that the handling of offensive fouls had been a week point. The most common problem was that such fouls were ‘invented’, meaning that offensive fouls were called even if the confronting defender was moving, or if there was a sufficient path between two defenders. But the opposite mistake also happened: clear offensive fouls were not detected, especially away from the ball. More generally, action away from the ball requires strong attention. Players are very ‘smart’ in realizing when they can more easily get away with something without being caught. Especially the struggle between attacker and defender on the 6-meter line is critical. It is necessary to take action to put a stop to the ‘wrestling’ and to detect who was the instigator.
There is always an inclination to give too many hints, so that the overall message becomes diluted. Therefore I will not comment on other aspects of a technical nature. But I really do want to finish by emphasizing the role of our referees in maintaining a positive atmosphere and creating a good image for our sport. This involves maintaining sufficient discipline, with a clear line (for both coaches and players) between spontaneous reactions and systematic protesting and provocations. Similarly, the faking of injuries and the general attempts to mislead the referees (and provoke the opponents) by falling or screaming in a dramatic way must be brought under control.
I emphasized in my earlier article that we need referees who have the physical capacity to match the speed and the physicality of the game. But I also noted that, ideally, this should be combined with experience. And while experience can be important for the ability to judge body contact etc., it is perhaps even more important in the context of handling the relations with the players and coaches and even for the self-control of the referees. Yes, we want quick reactions and good instincts, but we also need the ability to stay cool and to avoid impulsive actions and decisions. Let us hope it works out!
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 38:31 — 8.8MB)
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS
Uber Fan Stefan Fatisis (#17) acquired this Team Handball jersey from Club VfB Fallersleben last year while visiting Germany
Stefan Fatsis is without a doubt the biggest mainstream sports reporter/proponent of Team Handball in the United States. A regular guest on National Public Radio’s All Things Considered, if there’s a possibility to work in a tidbit of news about the sport Stefan finds a way.
With the Olympics coming up Stefan was curious as to the state of the sport in the USA and what do expect in terms of the upcoming Olympic competition. Our conversation covers these topics and more and lasts about 38 minutes.
Stefan Fatsis Website: http://www.stefanfatsis.com/
Hang Up and Listen Podcast: http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/hang_up_and_listen.html (Stefan is one of the hosts on this weekly sports podcast)
Wall St Journal (25 Aug 2004): A Game We Ought to Play: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB109338095139999984.html
New York Times (9 May 2009): Team Handball Has It All, Except an American Interest: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/10/sports/othersports/10cheer.html
THN (26 Dec 2011) Analysis of the Hang Up And Listen crossover athlete Team Handball All Star Teams: https://teamhandballnews.com/2011/12/tim-tebow-future-american-team-handball-star/
(Includes link to the podcast that discusses the teams)
Krstic/Ljubic - the only referees in London with previous Olympic experience
Olesen/Pedersen (Denmark) and Lazaar/Reveret (France) handled the medal games already in the 2009 Men’s World Championship, so they are no newcomers. The Spanish couple Raluy/Sabroso handled the men’s final in 2011, and the Norwegians Abrahamsen/Kristiansen handled the final in EURO 2012, apart from having been at the top level for quite some time. Geipel/Helbig from Germany have three World Championships under their belt, and they are remarkably the only German handball presence on the court in London, as the German teams did not qualify.
The ‘Balkan’ referees, apart from Kristic/Ljubic, tend to be among the younger members: Gubica/Milosevic (CRO), Nachevski /Nikolov (MKD), and Nikolic/Stojkovic (SRB). The same goes for the Czechs Horacek/Novotny. But all these couples have been in men’s and/or women’s World Championships at least once. France is the only nation with a second couple, as the Bonaventura sisters are one of the two women referee couples. The other one is Florescu/Duta from Romania. It may seem as if two women’s couples is not a lot, but it is in fact an important milestone on the way towards, one hopes, a more balanced composition at the top.
As always at the Olympic Games, the host country is entitled to have both teams and referees participating. This is not the first time that the Olympics have been held in a country with modest handball standards, and it requires a careful balancing act to fit these rather inexperienced referees, Bartlett/Stokes, into the match schedule. From Panamerica, the nominees are Marina/Minore (ARG) and from Africa Coulibaly/Diabate (CIV). The Asian continent sends two couples: Al-Suwaidi /Bamatraf (QAT) and Al-Marzouci/Al-Nuaimi (UAE). These non-European couples have the disadvantage of not being able to gain the same match experience as the European, but they are the best ones in their respective continents at this point. And all of them have handled one or two World Championships.
So what are then the explanations for the major rejuvenation of this top group? It is really a combination of two factors: first, the demands on the top referees are in several respects so great, that they can no longer combine this hobby (which is essentially what it is) with career and family responsibilities for very long. In the past, the typical career for an IHF top couple may have lasted for about 15 years, from around age 35-37 up to the age limit of 50. But that duration does not tend to be realistic any longer, especially in Europe, where the combined demands at the national level and from the many EHF games are considerable. So it was not surprising that more than half of the European referees who were in Beijing in 2008 retired soon afterwards, well before the age of 50.
But the need for rejuvenation had been anticipated by the IHF, and a pipeline in the form of the Global Referee Training Program had been created. In other words, the IHF actively seeks out young talents and puts them through systematic training, testing and observation. This makes it realistic to bring individual couples faster and earlier to the top level. And this combines nicely with the reality that nowadays the physical and mental demands of the game at the elite level necessitate having referees who are in top shape and can handle the speed and physicality without fatigue and loss of concentration. However, as I said at the outset, experience is also a key component for successful refereeing, so it will be interesting to see how the group in London will collectively withstand the pressures and handle its importing task. We wish them success!