USA Team Handball Announces New National Team Pool Criteria

Posted on February 25, 2011 by John Ryan

USA Team Handball recently posted updated National Team Pool Criteria for prospective National Team players. Some of the criteria appears to be simply a more structured rehash of criteria that has been previously used to assess and identify players. There are the usual battery of physical tests and handball skills identified, but there are also some new requirements that caught my eye.

For instance, some basic minimums were identified in terms of matches and practices each year. A relatively modest number of matches is required (15), but a fairly substantial number of practices are now required (48 court and 72 non court). This may seem rather simple to our European readers, but I suspect that there are very few club teams in the U.S. meeting the 48/year requirement.

More noteworthy, is a requirement for senior players to relocate to designated Regional or National Centers of Excellence by June 1, 2012(#5, page 13). Section 5 goes further to highlight that the process for selecting these locations is planned for the first half of 2011 and that preliminary plan is to re-establish a residency program (either walk-in or live-in). As far as I know, this is the first written indication that USA Team Handball was going to take this significant step. More details will hopefully be coming soon in regards to the specifics of such a program and how it will fit into the current practice of encouraging European Club participation.

Also added is a requirement off the court in terms of being an Ambassador for the sport with options to support development through recruiting, refereeing and fundraising. An appropriate requirement, in my opinion, for a sport that needs as many people promoting it as possible.

But what really caught my eye, were the closing comments in the “Athlete Development Pipeline Model” document:

Finally, as uncomfortable, inconvenient and uncanny it may feel, there is absolutely no science based nor practice based evidence of a “fast track” for high achievers to become masters in their fields. To the contrary, as Malcolm Gladwell in his bestseller “Outliers” put it (sic): “researchers and practitioners in variety of fields have settled on what they believe is the magic number of for true expertise: ten thousand hours.”

“The 10,000 – HOUR RULE” sends very clear and strong message to us all involved in handball. Handball must evolve into year around activity.

A table is then provided which tabulates what this mean in terms of 25 day month (assume you 4 or 5 days off) over a 12 year span (2.77 hours/day) or 16 year span (1.56 hours/day). I’ll have a follow on commentary about the 10,000 hour rule. But suffice it to say, this is a very telling stat that speaks volumes as to the historic lack of U.S. success and the challenge of developing handball experts who pick up the sport in their late teens.

USATH: Live the Olympic Dream: Tryout for Team Handball!: http://usateamhandball.org/news/2011/02/23/live-the-olympic-dream-tryout-for-team-handball/40313?ngb_id=42

USATH: National Team Pool Criteria: http://usateamhandball.org/national-teams/national-team-pool-criteria

USATH: USA Team Handball Athlete Development Pipeline Model: http://usateamhandball.org/assets/documents/attached_file/filename/38081/USATH_Athlete_Development_Pipeline_Model_Application_Guidelines.pdf

New rules for punishing players are good – but only if the referees use them

Posted on February 24, 2011 by Christer Ahl

I have earlier commented on the overall good performances of the World Championship referees. But I have also noted that there were concerns about inconsistencies from one game to another and from one referee couple to another. Separately I wrote about the beneficial and irreplaceable impact of experience and the reality that many of the elite referees today are relatively young and inexperienced.

The specific area where inconsistencies and inexperience could be observed was the way in which the referees utilized the recently modified (or clarified) rules for punishment of players in situations that go beyond the ‘routine’ fouls. I am talking about the new emphasis placed on having players sent off for 2 minutes without a prior warning (or before the team reaches the limit of three yellow cards). This was always possible, but the 2010 rules specify that this should be seen as a normal decision and not an extreme one. Moreover, very useful criteria are provided for fouls that should be seen as belonging in this category. The same thing applies for the serious fouls that should lead to an immediate disqualification.

This is a very welcome and necessary improvement in the rules, but it works only if the referees have the judgment and the courage to apply them correctly and consistently!! It seems that there are too many examples, both in World Championship, in the recently resumed EHF Champions League and in national leagues, where the referees are too timid or hesitant. Perhaps the traditional insistence on using the yellow cards systematically, three per team in the early part of the game, has become so ingrained that the referees use this old approach a bit like robots, without really considering whether a particular fouls deserves a more harsh action.

Alternatively, the referees in some situations may be too hesitant because they worry that they then set too high a level for the punishments early in the game, and that this will lead to an untenable situation as the game progresses. But what they should instead be thinking about is the preventive aspect. Most players are smart enough to make the same distinction as the rule book does; they will appreciate that a particular action simply went too far and warrants a more severe reaction. And if the players do not get this signal, chances are that the actions will escalate and the game will get out of hand.

Similarly, referees may hesitate to give a direct red card, especially early in the game. This may be even more likely if it involves a key player, and the referees start thinking about the impact for the team and perhaps the crowd reaction. But for many years now, we have had a definition of a disqualification that should make it much easier for the referees to apply the rules as intended. Some decades ago, we still had the same concept that makes a red card so drastic in football, i.e., that the team has to play short-handed for the rest of the game. But in handball we allow the player to be replaced on the court after two minutes, precisely because we want the disqualification to be a way of getting the cynical and dangerous players out of the game, without unduly punishing the team and distorting the entire game.

This means that, just like in the case of the direct 2 minutes, there must be no excuse for the referees when it comes to showing the red card in a situation where a player’s health is endangered and where a player simply has been too reckless. It should not be a question of courage, because it is not such a drastic punishment. I can have more understanding if it is a matter of a failing instinct, related to a lack of experience with games at a very difficult level. Here the responsibility must be shared between the young referees who aim to join the elite category and the supervisors/instructors who must use their position to help clarify the necessary instincts and actions.

I am glad to see now that EHF is strengthening its capacity for high-level education of referees through the use of new technology. They have started collaboration with FIBA Europe and are introducing a new super-efficient software that would greatly facilitate the feedback efforts for both the instructors and the referees through a web-based approach. (Apparently, it is also connected to a broader system for the game reports, statistics etc.). I hope, or assume, that the IHF will quickly follow this example!

Europe vs. the Rest of the World – How many teams in the World Championships?

Posted on February 22, 2011 by Christer Ahl

This is common topic for discussions before, during and after a Championship. Clearly, each continent wants to protect its rights and its participation. Of course, there are many different views about the underlying principles. Should we try to get as close as possible to having the 24 best teams in the world, or should we recognize that this is a World event where each continent must have a chance to take part and be seen? What is the right balance?

The debate tends to start when the qualification events are finished, also in other continents but especially in Europe. There are always some “traditional” powers that fall by the wayside, like Russia, Slovenia, or Switzerland in the case of 2011. How could it be that they are “left out” while some “clearly weaker” teams from other continents get to participate…? And then the discussions resume when the draw of the Championship groups become known: how could it be that this team from continent X is ranked so high and gets such a favorable draw, while that other team from continent Y gets such a difficult group because of its lower ranking etc.

Then the event starts and some seemingly unexpected results are noted. How could it be that Austria is showing such weak form in comparison to what they did in the 2010 EURO? And how come that both Egypt and Tunisia are so mediocre? And what happened to Slovakia after their seemingly promising start? Is it really possible that Asia does not have a better men’s team than Korea? And what happened to Romania’s expected return to the top? Of course, the Australians are fun to watch, but when will they ever win a game again?

I am sure that I will set myself up for screams of protest, but my focus is inevitably on the quality of the weaker European participants. The Europeans are so fond of noting that the European Championship with its 16 teams is tougher than a World Championship, “because there are no teams from the other continents!” But did Austria, Romania and Slovakia really did bring any qualities that we needed to see in a World Championship, so was there really any justification for their taking up spaces?

In my opinion, we need to make sure that at least the top 12 teams are all present and get a chance to compete for the top positions, but beyond that it is the really the non-European countries who are more in the need of being present. They do not have a strong equivalent of the European Championship and they need this one chance to compete in a top event. By contrast, Europe’s teams number 12-16 belongs in their continental top events, but that should really be enough for them.

Immediately the Europeans will ask: but which other teams deserve to replace the weaker Europeans? Well, the reality is that handball is perhaps currently where football was 20-30 years ago. At the most, the other continents in most years have about two teams each that are really (or reasonably) competitive. In football you can easily find four or five. So perhaps the real answer is that nobody else deserves those extra slots. Perhaps we moved to fast to 24 teams and perhaps 20 would be about right. Of course, the problem is that 20 does not allow for an attractive format. Realistically, 24 is here to stay for a while.

So please be patient, and in a couple of weeks I will come back with some ideas for a compromise solution regarding a new format and a new distribution of slots! But do not relax, Europeans, because you might not be happy, and do not relax Australian friends. (Perhaps I might join those who say that your only way of getting real respect is to make the same change as in football and join the Asian qualifications…).

Do we really need more speed in the game at the top level?

Posted on February 20, 2011 by Christer Ahl

There have been suggestions, including from the IHF President, that changes in rules and attitudes would be needed to speed up the game and to create more excitement. Apart from focusing on this aspect when I watched the games in Sweden, I took the opportunity to ask some players, coaches, journalists and TV producers.

I have rarely heard such unanimous opinions on any technical topic in handball. Many very surprised at the question. They felt the issue at this time is that the emphasis on pure speed and quick action may have gone too far. For instance, they noted that there are now many more fast counterattacks than just 10-20 years ago. And the rules changes that allow for a throw-off, after a goal, to be taken more quickly have really been effective. There is now a lot of pressure on the team that scored to get back on defense, and the mere “threat” of a rapid restart creates a bit of drama. Similarly, only in some tactical situations are there any delays caused by substitutions. Teams are now used to (and forced to) handling it very efficiently.

So from the standpoint of coaches and players, the main argument was instead that a further emphasis on speed would have a negative effect on ball handling and technical skills. It would simply be impossible for players to maintain the same control as they have now. And the view was that the game is nicer to play and to watch with this degree of control. There was also a sense that the fitness of the players is generally as strong as it can reasonably get. A further push for speed would cause a change in physical preparation and training methods that would be not just undesirable but in fact unrealistic. It was also noted that the risk for injuries will probably increase with higher speed and constant action. A loss of overview and body control would tend to cause more collisions with defenseless players.

I also chatted with some spectators. Here the response was often that “we watch handball precisely because it has so much speed and action”. Some compared with basketball which they found boring in this respect. “We also need time to digest and celebrate what we see”, was another reaction. The only negative remark involved excessive stoppages for real or “fake” injuries. It was felt that some teams use this kind of tactics to slow the game down against a superior opponent.

The journalists I canvassed had roughly the same opinions as the ordinary spectators. The separate category of TV commentators and producers had their own special concern. They liked the speed of the game with counterattacks and quick ball movement. But they felt that the restarts were often too immediate to allow them the necessary time for commentary or for slow motion repetitions. So they would not be in favor of having a quicker turn-around in the game. Instead, their focus tended to be at the overall concept of time-outs, but of course only at the top level where TV broadcasts are common.

EHF Game of the Week: Chekhovskie Medvedi at Aalborg (Live and with English Language Commentary)

Posted on February 19, 2011 by John Ryan

After a long layoff the Champions League is back with leg 8 of Group Play. The featured match this week with English Commentary has Danish side Aalborg hosting Russian side Chekhovskie. Chekhovskie is tied for first place in Group C with 11 points while Aalborg is in last place with 4 points. Aalborg still can qualify for fourth place in the Group, but with only 3 matches to play they will need to start winning. Chekhovskie is also highly motivated as they will want to move ahead of Spanish side Valladolid in their bid to win the coveted first seed heading into knockout play.

The match is at 4:50 PM (Central European Time), 10:50 AM (U.S. East Coast) on Sunday, 20 February. Chekhovskie is a 3.5 goal favorite

EHF Website interview with left wing Timur Dibirov: Hungry for European handball: http://www.eurohandball.com/article/013676/Dibirov%3a+%22Hungry+for+European+handball%22

Live Broadcast link: http://www.ehftv.com/ec/cl/men/2010-11/live/high/001431

On Demand broadcast at ehfTV: http://www.ehftv.com/ec/cl/men/2010-11/video/001431

There is also a tape delayed broadcast on the MHz Network in the U.S. at 4:00 PM (U.S. East Coast). For information on how you can watch MHZ see this: http://www.mhznetworks.org/mhzworldview/carriage/

Iceland – what happened to the fighting spirit??

Posted on February 18, 2011 by Christer Ahl

The results from the preliminary round in the World Championship suggested smooth sailing for the Icelandic Viking ship. They brought the maximum of four points to the Main Round and seemed to have had a relatively easy time in most of their five games. It clearly looked as if it would be realistic to gain two or four more points in the Main Round, which then would help secure a place in the semi-finals.

But this was not to be. Of course, if one looks at the final ranking, a sixth place and a spot in the Olympic qualifying do not seem so bad. And one should not expect that the results from the 2008 Olympics and the 2010 European Championship could be repeated every time. But the issue is HOW it all happened!

One might say afterwards that perhaps winning the preliminary group so easily created an illusion, because this group is likely to have been the weakest one, with Austria, Brazil and Hungary playing below normal standard. But when an Icelandic team needs to get two-four points out of three games, then they normally get it. Or at the very least, they fight to the last drop of sweat (or blood!) to try to do so.

There have been many instances of this famous fighting spirit in the past. Personally, having been present, I remember primarily the final preliminary round match against France in the 2007 World Championship. Iceland had “messed up” against Ukraine and now absolutely needed to win against France to be in the Main Round. This seemed too big an obstacle, but the Icelandic team came at it with an attitude that just helped demolish the baffled French opponents, 32-24.

The player who for many years personified this attitude was Sigfus Sigurdsson. Being somewhat of a giant, he is a really friendly person off the court, but on the court he was always a “tiger”, amounting to a real challenge for both the opponents and the referees. His methods may sometimes have been a bit “borderline”, but he sure knew how to fire up his teammates.

This year’s team really seemed to miss Sigfus. In the critical opening game in the Main Round against a desperate German team, it was the Germans who took charge by playing an enormously spirited game. And after Iceland seemingly unnecessarily lost this game, it seemed as if any remaining fighting spirit was completely gone, so both the remaining two games against Spain and France were lost, as was the fifth place game against Croatia.

And it is not as if Iceland is without stars and players with substantial top club experience. They had no less than nine players with more than 100 games for Iceland, most of them also playing for top clubs in Germany and elsewhere. And they had Olafur Stefansson, a world-class player for many years, and a team leader with tremendous personality. But perhaps Olafur is no longer able to “carry” a team in the same way he was, and he is not really a Sigfus character.

Whichever team an international handball fan is supporting, there would always be a special fondness for these remarkable Icelandic players, who have done such a fantastic job in drawing on their limited resources in terms of overall population. The handball fanaticism is enormous there, and no other country (except Greenland!) has more handball players per capita. But all of us really have come to expect not just strong results and great player; above all we have come to enjoy that special fighting spirit. Let us hope it returns soon!

The pressure on the players in a World Championship

Posted on February 15, 2011 by Christer Ahl

One of the proud statements from the IHF apropos this topic was that this time there had been an additional rest day inserted, in recognition of the concerns about fatigue and related issues. The twelve teams who played in the Main Round typically had to play eight games in twelve days. For the majority of them there was also travel on one of the rest days. This is obviously a somewhat more intensive schedule than during the normal club season, but it is indeed a slight improvement over schedules in the past.

So how could one then summarize the different aspects related to the participation in World Championship for elite players who are already expressing concerns about the impact of the overall competition schedule? Well, there are indeed several different aspects. One involves the different practices in different countries regarding an adequate break in the league schedule, not just to accommodate the World Championship as such, but also to ensure adequate preparation and recuperation time for the players on the national teams. Here it seems that most countries value the role of the national team enough to allow a rather generous gap in the league schedule. But the opposite was really true in the case of Germany, where one could even observe an accelerated schedule immediately prior to what must be seen as a rather minimal break.

Then there is the tension between clubs and national teams, with the players themselves caught in the middle, regarding the fitness of a rather substantial number of key players, whose readiness to participate in the World Championship was debated heatedly up to the last moment. Some clubs felt that there was undue pressure on players who were not really healthy, and some national teams clearly held the opposite view. And sure enough, some players who had been noted as being only marginally fit indeed suffered relapses or new problems through their participation in Sweden. In some cases it is suggested that players kept playing even when they perhaps should have been kept off the court. There are now accusations about carelessness and inadequate concern for the longer-term health of these players.

Other players, whose health was never an issue prior to the event, happened to suffer the kind of injuries in Sweden that inevitably will happen during a period of intensive and hard-fought competition. And of course it involved some players who are key figures on their club teams. It may be of some consolation that the IHF for the first time provided insurance to keep the clubs whole, in terms of salary payments for periods during which the players are now unavailable for club duty. But this is likely to be a limited consolation for teams who are now entering the critical stage of both the league season and continental competitions such as the final phases of Champions League etc.

Another new feature was the permission to allow each team to use all its 16 players in each game, instead of having to rely on 14. While this may have created some peace of mind for the coaches, who had maximum flexibility in using their troops in each game, it is not likely to have had much impact in terms of reducing playing time for the star players or reducing the likelihood that risks with semi-injured played were avoided. For the most part, four-five players were sitting on the bench rarely getting out of their warm-up clothes and setting a foot on the court. The team will simply rely on their key players. In fact, a couple of experienced coaches commented that the only benefit of the new regulation was really that it helped avoid the awkward decision of which two players would have to be placed as spectators in the stands.

But there is one aspect that seemed to be relevant. When many teams had players unavailable due to injuries during, or from before, the event, it seems clear that those with the “deepest” teams had an edge. They were able to integrate newer players who were able to play important roles throughout the Championship, and/or they could trust their marginal players so fully that they put them in for entire games or long portions without any risk. This meant that they were able to rest their stars in some games where the outcome or the goal difference was not so important. In this way, as the Championship came down to the final stages, there was a noticeable difference between teams that had constantly had to rely on five-six players and those who had been able to spread out the burden somewhat.

However, generally speaking, one cannot get around that the stars are the stars. These are players that both the national teams and the club teams must draw on. And these are the players whom the spectators and TV/web viewers love to watch. They are the ones whose skills help create the necessary excitement around our sport. One can come up with new regulations and fine-tuning in the schedule; but in the end we must realize that there is a limit to the intensity with which our biggest assets can be utilized.

Refereeing – nothing replaces experience

Posted on February 13, 2011 by Christer Ahl

Last week I wrote about the World Championship refereeing and characterized it as “fair and honest”. I also noted that, overall, the standard was good if one takes into account that many of the referee couples did not previously have much experience from this type of event. I have now received some feedback from acquaintances who were present in Sweden and felt that they I should have noted the inconsistency that was evident from couple to couple and also from match to match with the same couple.

I have to agree with these comments to some extent. This kind of inconsistency was noticeable, although, as I emphasized, the teams in a match were generally treated in a very even-handed way. To some extent, a lack of consistency (or a “clear line”) for instance in handling personal punishments can sometimes depend on a lack of clarity in the instructions received. But here I felt that most of the concerns were related to a shortage of Championship level experience on the part of several couples. When the pressure is on, then there is a risk that more spontaneity and reliance on sudden instincts will become apparent, as opposed to the ability to draw on years and years of experience with the same kind of situations in the same kind of atmosphere.

There is simply no easy substitute for experience. If a referee needs to analyze and think about every situation and decision, instead of just relating it to his/her vast “archives” of game situations, there will inevitably be deviations from a clear line and instead a sense of relative inconsistency. But this does NOT mean that the IHF policy for nominating referees is incorrect. As I noted in my previous article, there is not much choice, as the previous generation of top referees is for the most part no longer available. So it is a matter of making good judgments in selecting and supporting the best of a younger generation.

And it cannot be emphasized enough: it is not sufficient to make good selection decisions; these referees need a particularly strong education and nurturing to help make up for their lack of experience. Of course, they need to be supported in their respective continents through optimal assignments as a preparation between Championships, something which particularly outside Europe is easier said than done. But the IHF needs to see them as a group that constantly needs to be monitored and supported. In addition to those who were in Sweden, there may be up to ten more couples who could be seen as legitimate candidates for the next Men’s World Championship in 2013.

This combined group simply must get special attention, not just through sporadic moments of observation and feedback, but through a massive and systematic follow-up effort. While there are no shortcuts in making up for experience, this kind of close and personal monitoring will clearly contribute to increased stability and consistency. I know from my own experience that the IHF Referee Commission has only limited resources, especially in terms of manpower. But these resources can be supplemented, and especially used better through substantially increased financial resources.

Surely the IHF top management, including President Moustafa, will realize that the investment in the IHF Global Referee Training Program that has been so successful up to this point is just a start. Now the continuous development of this asset must follow, without any constraints in political and financial support. This is the only hope of having “the best of both worlds”: young and talented referees who are suited to the fast-paced game but also trained and competent well beyond their years of experience.

Tunisia and Egypt lethargic on the court – ‘distractions’ had an impact?

Posted on February 12, 2011 by Christer Ahl

When the group with the three most recent world champions (France, Germany and Spain) was referred to as the ‘group of death’, this was partly because it was furthermore believed that Tunisia and/or Egypt might be strong enough to surprise one of the three favorites. It turned out, however, that both of these North African teams played below their recent standard, something that may well have rescued the feeble German team from even greater embarrassment.

Perennially among the key players on the Tunisian team, Megannem was this time unable to impress, and Tej had become a heavy and immobile version of his past figure. The team played inconsistently and without real cohesiveness, despite drawing on many players with substantial club handball experience from abroad. Egypt seemed listless and without their typical fighting spirit. There were comments to the effect that the very late decision to bring back the German coach Lommel had led to confusion and divisiveness. I cannot remember having seen such an unimpressive Egyptian team for many, many years.

I happened to witness the game between these two teams. These rivalries are unpredictable: sometimes they offer very exciting spectacles but sometimes they are very disappointing. This time it was about as bad as it can get. The teams seemed to compete with each other not to win the game but to give it away. Tunisia seemed to have a solid lead, mostly because the Egyptians were so error-prone. But then suddenly Tunisia lost their thread completely, and within 12 minutes Egypt scored 9-0. After that, Tunisia more or less seemed to give up. And the usual tendency to cause a lot of stoppages by being down on the floor in exaggerated pain was worse than ever. At times it was really anti-handball.

I did not have many opportunities to talk with my old acquaintances on the two teams and delegations. And I did not want to get much involved with delicate matters. But ‘off the record’ I got unsolicited comments from Tunisians along the lines: “surely you appreciate that, while we try to concentrate, our thoughts are really elsewhere at this point in time”. And an Egyptian comment suggested that they had indeed had occasion to discuss a bit with their brethren, even though nothing overt had yet taken place in Egypt at that moment. One cannot escape the sense, however, that this group of Egyptians, like perhaps the broader population, was ‘seeing the writing on the wall’ and was beginning to worry about what might happen.

Let us hope that in future international events the two teams will come back to old form and with a new spirit of pride and determination. And more important than what might happen on the handball courts, let us be optimistic that the evolution will turn out to be what our many friends in these two proud countries are hoping for!

NBC to broadcast 5 hours of “7 on 7” Olympic Team Sport

Posted on February 11, 2011 by John Ryan

This weekend, one of the major USA TV Networks, NBC, will have an unprecedented 5 hours of live coverage of a 16 nation tournament for a relatively unknown Olympic team sport with 7 players to a side. The sport is fast paced, features crisp passing, physical contact and high scoring. Unfortunately, for us Handball fans, the 7 on 7 sport is Rugby 7s, not Team Handball.

My adopted home of Las Vegas will be hosting the 4^th leg of the Rugby World 7s tour. Rugby 7s is a modified version of Rugby that features fewer players per team (7 vs 15) and much shorter games. The Rugby World 7s tour plays in 8 cities world-wide and tournaments are played out in rapid fashion over two days in a festival style setting. Rugby successfully lobbied to get the 7 on 7 version of the game on the Olympic program and it will make its debut at the 2016 Olympics.

I’ll be attending the event and hopefully speaking with NBC and USA Rugby 7s executives and maybe see if we can convince them to do the same for Team Handball. If you have time check out the event on TV this weekend and let me know your ideas are concerning a similar event for our sport.

Hollywood Reporter: NBC, Universal Sports Bet on Rugby: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/live-feed/nbc-universal-sports-bet-rugby-98136

NBC Rugby 7s Page: http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/35910886/ns/sports-rugby_7s

Live TV Coverage is Saturday, February 12, 3:30 – 6:00PM ET and Sunday, February 13, 4:30 – 6:00 PM ET

Additional Internet coverage is also available at http://www.universalsports.com/

This time Argentina is the pride of PanAmerica

Posted on February 10, 2011 by Christer Ahl

Following Cuba’s short period of glory in the late 1990s, culminating with an 8^th place in 1999, PanAmerica’s representation has mainly been a matter of Argentina and Brazil. But Argentina never placed better than in the 15^th-18^th range, despite the sensational triumph in 2003 against Croatia who later went on to win the gold medals that year. And Brazil often got the upper hand in the PanAmerican finals against Argentina, but in the World Championships they had to be content with positions in the range 16^th-24^th.

So it was really a special moment, especially for Argentina but also for PanAmerican handball as a whole, when Argentina now managed to qualify for the main round in Sweden and then went on to finish 12^th. And to make it clear, it was not a fluke that gained this position; it could easily have ended even better! Already in the preliminary round, where Argentina shocked the handball world with a 5-goal win against hosts Sweden, they could have brought one or two more points with them to the main round. They lost 23-24 against Poland, in a game where only the lack of experience made them come out at the losing end. Similarly, both a one-goal loss against Serbia and an overtime defeat against Germany could easily have been turned into victories.

But the main thing is that Argentina really played a very attractive handball, with a sophisticated and quick-footed offense and a spirited and tenacious defense that frustrated most opponents. I heard spectators and TV commentators expressing amazement over the abilities of the young team from Argentina. And their relative youth and lack of international experience is what both make their success this time and their prospects for the future so remarkable. Their top scorer, Federico Fernandez is 21, and their great trio playing club handball for Torrevieja in Spain is also very young (Diego Simonet 21, Sebastian Simonet 24 and Federico Vieyra 22). Another outstanding contributor was the goalkeeper Matias Schulz who is 28. Perennial team captain Andres Kogovsek is the contrast at 35.

It is clear that the performance of Argentina was an eye-opener for many, and that it will help increase the respect for PanAmerican handball. Brazil was clearly not at their usual level this time. They were missing several key players, including their main star Bruno and their top goalkeeper. As a result, the Brazilians were somewhat resigned to a modest outcome and tried instead to integrate several younger players. One could even say that they used a World Championship as a preparation for the upcoming PanAmerican Games in October, where the continent’s one and only automatic slot for the 2012 Olympics is at stake. And the Brazilians know now that they must be at their absolute best to have a chance to knock off Argentina. That will be quite a duel in Guadalajara! But for the first time PanAmerica might have a serious chance of qualifying TWO men’s teams for the Olympics, by also making good use of the subsequent qualification tournament.

The third PanAmerican team participating in Sweden was Chile, much to the delight of the numerous Chilean immigrants in Sweden. Clearly they would have a long way to go to reach the level of Argentina and Brazil. But unlike some previous Championships where the performance of the No. 3 team was negative PR for the continent, this time the Chileans showed a bit more. They played in an optimistic style and showed a relatively more advanced type of handball, with at least 6-8 players showing good technical and tactical skills. Especially the Feuchtmann brothers took the opponents and the spectators by surprise. It seems that the Chileans might be able to establish themselves as medal favorites in upcoming men’s events in PanAmerica. Of course, there is some hope that the Cuban government one day will resume the support of their team and that the ‘North Americans’ will return to old levels, but the other contenders will probably find it difficult to remove the Chileans from the medal podium.

USA Team Handball’s Egypt Connection

Posted on February 9, 2011 by John Ryan

A strange twist of events resulted in USA Men’s National Team Captain, Mark Ortega, witnessing history in Egypt. Looking for a better training opportunity in preparation for the upcoming PANAM Games 2nd Chance tournament Mark moved to Egypt in January to train with fellow teammate Adam El Zogby’s club team, Al-Ahly, in Egypt. In two video reports, Mark chronicles Adam’s recovery from ACL surgery, life in Egypt and his search for a club to join. What starts as a handball travelogue seems starts to take a dramatic turn as protests in Egypt engulf the country. Video 2 ends with the protests starting and a discussion with a Cairo cab driver regarding their significance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY6Rcpx9Xto&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCcmSYU6GNs&feature=player_embeddedUSA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmpPpey64_k&feature=player_embedded

Team Handball’s weekly report on athletes playing overseas reports that Adam El Zogby is continuing his recovery and is safe and sound in his apartment situated a little over a mile from El Tahir Square.

USA Team Handball: Mark Ortega Profile.
USA Team Handball: Americans Abroad Report.

Oh la la — France loses to Qatar — perhaps just ‘comme il faut’

Posted on February 8, 2011 by Christer Ahl

Following the IHF Council meeting on January 27, there was a sense of ‘deja vu all over again’… Just a couple of months ago, Qatar surprised many, and angered some, by winning the rights to host the World Championship in football 2022. Now the IHF President was getting ready to reveal the name of the host for the 2015 World Championship. French representatives seemed tense but hopeful – surely it would be enough to rely on recent years of successes on the court and a reputation for being able to organize events!?

But, au contraire, out of the envelope came the dreaded 5-letter word: QATAR! A philosophical French representative was heard mumbling: c’est la vie… but the more typical representatives were instead commenting to the French media in terms of ‘deception immense!’ (Note: deception in French means disappointment) ‘How could this have happened’, they seemed to ask. ‘What did they do to avoid this defeat’, might have been a more relevant reflection.

Two other candidates never seemed to be in the running, namely Poland and Norway. The Norwegian bid was heard being described as lacking in conviction. And the Poles seemed to have done a great job of explaining in writing everything that might have been needed to answer serious questions. But had they done any ‘selling’? Yes, technically speaking, the only ones voting on the matter are those Council members who are not from one of the candidate countries. But in this day and age of constant bombardment of advertising through a multitude of media, is it not obvious that a serious contender needs to create a ‘hype’, an ambience of having the winning product?

So what did the French do, en route to the final decision-making in Malmoe. Well, they relied a lot on reputation, they used their proud French team as the ‘poster boys’ par excellence, and they seemed to feel it would be a bit too ‘gauche’ to do any heavy selling of their bid. This may have been a major faux pas. By contrast, the Qatari spared no effort (or riyal) to draw attention to their bid and to what would be special about a Championship hosted in their country. The rented a banquet room and hosted a reception in what looked like a large-size Bedouin tent, with Middle Eastern food as the piece de resistance, but also with plenty of sophisticated advertising material and some small souvenirs available.

Of course, advertising and appearances are not the only considerations. In a global sport there are different ways of enhancing the growth outside the traditional handball countries. One of them is to allow a non-traditional, non-European country to host the Men’s World Championship every now and then. After four consecutive events in major European handball countries 2007-2013, perhaps it is ‘comme il faut’ that one of the few non-Europeans that is likely to have capacity for such an event gets a chance in 2015.

Moreover, when Spain applied for 2011 (and later on were rewarded for 2013) they argued rather awkwardly and arrogantly that they should get the votes for 2011 simply as a major handball country that had never organized the event. At least they were correct on the fact. But France organized the Men’s Championship as recently as in 2001 and the women’s event in late 2007. So are they really overdue for another chance?

I do not personally know if Qatar ‘deserved’ to win, whatever this means. But I have the sense that just because there were/are some concerns about football and 2022, it may be too easy to taint handball and 2015 with the same brush. Also, the ‘noveau riche’ do not tend to get much respect. But just as we accept that our teams are winning and losing, I think it now behooves the international handball family to rally around this event and do everything to ensure that it creates the global propaganda that we all are hoping for and that our sport needs.