IHF DECISIONS AND ADVICE
REGARDING RULES INTERPETATIONS
Based on experience during Junior
and Youth World Championships
(Download pdf format)
The rules changes
that took effect on August 1 got an immediate test during the three
Junior/Youth World Championships during the month of August. As promised, on
the basis of that experience, the IHF is hereby offering more definitive rules
interpretations for all member federations. (We are asking federations to
spread the word to referees, teams, and delegates as quickly as possible). We
are pleased to report that the transition to the new rules was generally very
easy and successful. As on previous occasions, the concerns that had been
expressed about a quick and consistent adaptation turned out to be unwarranted.
However, the following points are worth noting:
1. The game is now
restarted with a goalkeeper-throw, if the opponents have interfered in
the goal area. Goalkeepers have already started adapting and are instinctively
throwing the ball from within goal area, often starting a quick counterattack
or at least gaining an advantage, precisely as was intended with this rules
change. The key is to have the referee help remind the goalkeeper by making the
hand signal for goalkeeper-throw in a very visible and emphatic way. (The signal
for entering the goal-area is virtually never necessary). By contrast, if the
referee decision is a free-throw, e.g., for an offensive foul just outside the
goal area, then the referee should clearly signal for a free-throw and support
this by pointing to the correct location.
2. The new
regulations for a free-throw after the expiration of playing time occasionally
caused some confusion. For the most part, the throwing team reacted correctly,
with only one player coming forward, ready to take the free-throw. The referees
should encourage this quick execution, as this is the best way of avoiding
other problems. The defending teams sometimes had misunderstood the change and
thought that also they were entitled to substitute one player (or a short
player in the defense simply ran off from the court out of old habit). The
coaches must be more firmly instructed, and the referees must pay attention in
the hope that they can prevent such an incorrect and punishable action.
3. Most teams came
well prepared and had a ‘vest’ in the right color for the case where a court
player is put in as goalkeeper in the last moments of a game. This temporary
goalkeeper is now only allowed if he/she wears the same color as the regular
goalkeeper. However, some teams came with a vest in a different color. Referees
or delegates should be encouraged to remind teams about this in the first games
of the new season, and teams should not be allowed to violate this rule. One
assumes that a team will quickly correct the problem after it has been pointed
out to them.
4. Finally, most of
the concerns or questions raised had been about the removal of the obligation
to give time-out when a 7-meter throw is called. Such time-outs are now to be
given on a subjective basis by the referees, depending on the circumstances in
each case. There had been concerns about a possible lack of consistency in
these decisions.
The key to the
correct interpretation is to follow the principles and criteria contained in Clarification No. 2
in the Rule Book. This is an integral part of the rules.
Here it is made clear
that a time-out is not justified, if
the thrower and goalkeeper are ready to go ahead with the 7-meter throw within a normal
timeframe, without any unusual delay.
This principle applies regardless of other considerations, such as the result
of the match etc. (This is in analogy with the situation where the ball
temporarily leaves the playing court but clearly is going to be back in play
within a few seconds). Such interruptions are a normal part of the game and a
time-out must be avoided.
If there is an unusual
delay, perhaps because the thrower or the goalkeeper is
substituted, or because the floor needs to be wiped prior to the throw, then it
might
be justified to give a time-out. The main consideration
is whether it would create an unfair disadvantage for one of the teams, if the clock was not stopped. This would primarily depend on the result
of the game and the remaining playing time. If the result is relatively
even, especially in the later stages of a game, then a time-out is obviously
warranted. (If the game is the second part of a
two-game “home and away” format, then it is clearly the aggregate result that
matters). Similarly, if one of the teams has a numerical advantage (because of a
2-minute suspension), and the game is not completely one-sided, then it would
be appropriate to give a time-out, so
that the effect of the suspension is not reduced.
Under these
guidelines, which were easy for the referees and did not create any problems for
the teams, this rules change was applied consistently in the World
Championships, with the intended result of avoiding a large number of clearly
unnecessary time-outs.