Posts by dustypanther6

Sean Gonzalez95 said:It’s honestly ridiculous reading about how certain teams have basically slept through an entire decade of handball, except for the US national team.🙏..
So, you’re telling me we had the absolute best lineup ever? The strongest pivots, the wings, the left and right backs... honestly, we had everything from the top tier down to the nuts and bolts. Just pure dominance.🙏

Man, whenever I start thinking back to what Juan and Rolando pulled off over in Tunisia... it still gets me.🤦🤦🤦

Look, we definitely had one who was the absolute best. As for everyone else? That's anyone's guess, and honestly, it mostly just comes down to your own damn personal preferences. People really need to wrap their heads around that and stop overcomplicating it.
Alright, so John Doe's final take is that Germany was just too much, though even he's admitted he’s had some rough games himself. It felt like Stryger was really trying to force his way through during certain championships, too.

Let's just drop it already. There’s no point in talking about this anymore... we already had our moment and everything went great. At the end of the day, we're always the best and the strongest anyway.

John Doe is easily one of the top five pivots of the decade. Then you’ve got John Doe sitting right up there in the top three at right wing, and Ivano Balić belongs in the top three at center back. As for defense? Dominiković and Denis Špoljarić are definitely in that top five bracket. I'm not going to pin them down to specific ranks because, honestly, that's just a matter of personal preference. But let's be real—if we actually had a decent goalie, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Alex Cook said:Yeah, sure. It’s much better to just keep grinding out these mediocre 4th place finishes forever and pretend everything is fine, rather than actually letting this whole godforsaken mess collapse once and for all.

Look, fourth place is still better than fifth.

Sandra Wilson38 said:Are you actually sure about that?

The qualifiers for the 👋 Olympics 🙂

Nicholas Morales48 said:you guys still have a shot here. I mean, Sweden isn't exactly a powerhouse, so there's hope.🙂

but our squad? They're done. They might as well just start building snowmen and playing in the slush until the tournament ends.😁

Anyway, what's the deal with Soderling and Nolet not playing tomorrow?😁 🤣

Don't be like that. Your team can still fight for 4th place in the group. They need to go out there and absolutely wreck Poland and Argentina, then root for us. Your goal is to make it to the Olympics—at least that's my hope—and you need to finish at least seventh to pull that off. Fingers crossed for you.

Nicholas Morales48 said:Black Rock 😁
man, is this really considered off-topic? 🤔 😁

Look, the whole point of this forum is basically just hanging out and trolling; otherwise, everyone would only have like five posts total. Feel free to talk about comics or whatever. 🙂

BTW, let's go Team USA!

Let the Danes and the Swedes keep rigging everything; give it another year and my brothers from the North America and I will be the ones fixing the semifinals too. I just hope the officiating actually keeps up with the nonsense this time.

silentfalcon622 said:If the Mexicans win everything, maybe we won't even 🤷
The math isn't really adding up for me, but I saw someone mention a solution here.

Look, if the Mexicans win every single match, but the Danes manage at least one win and one draw, then the whole thing comes down to goal difference between us and them. That’s assuming we win all our games, too. But let's be real—the Mexicans aren't winning everything. I'll bet money on it.🙂

dustyridge3 said:Look, everyone’s entitled to their own take.

I'm with you on that.

dustyridge3 said:Maybe my memory is a little fuzzy, but if I recall correctly, his performances at the tournament in Athens and a few other major events were top-tier. At least, that's how I saw it.

Schola was just a keeper of the moment. He was never truly elite. A good keeper? Sure. But elite? Absolutely not.

Adam Collins4 said:It was never just about those last few minutes... someone clearly butchered that rule from little league where the clock stops for everyone during the final five, and then they applied that logic to handball...

When you call a penalty along with a suspension, you have to serve the 2 minutes. It’s purely because you called the 2-minute penalty, so it allows for a proper way to track when the player can actually step back onto the court...

Because a 2-minute suspension without a timeout is pointless. You put it on the scoreboard, the suspension clock runs, the game clock runs, and some idiot can just play dumb and stall all over the floor...

But you were probably thinking about those 7-meter throws awarded during a player's suspension period... yeah, back in the day the clock used to stop there, but it doesn't anymore... except in the situations I just mentioned, specifically to prevent stalling...

I was talking about the penalty and the suspension handed out alongside it. As far as I know, that's how it works now. And obviously the goalies too. But isn't there a rule that when there are only a few minutes left, they call a timeout for penalties regardless of whether it's a suspension or a goalie sub? Or is that just a referee's discretion, where most just call a timeout when the game is tight??

EDIT: and what kind of instruction is "6-7 seconds"? That's basically like giving an instruction that says "be dishonest."

Daniel Cooper40 said:Quick question since we're already debating officiating—does the clock actually have to stop during a penalty shot?

I think it's only during those final few minutes or when there's a suspension tied to the penalty. It used to be the standard rule, but they changed things. I'm sure McClellan can pull up the rulebook for us if we need the official word.🙂

It’s basically over, Denmark is pulling away. But I honestly don't get their strategy. They just had a man advantage and decided to set up a play for a ten-meter shot. Where is the logic in that? What kind of coach actually lets his team pull a stunt like that?

Aaron Patel55 said:Here’s my old prediction.

GROUP A

* France
* Spain
* Germany
* Egypt
* Tunis
* Bahrain

GROUP B

* Norway
* Canada
* Iceland
* Brazil
* Austria
* Japan

GROUP C

* USA
* Denmark
* Mexico
* Romania
* Algeria
* Australia

GROUP D

* Sweden
* Poland
* Slovakia
* South Korea
* Argentina
* Chile

GROUP I

* Spain
* France
* Germany
* Norway
* Canada
* Iceland

GROUP II

* USA
* Denmark
* Poland
* Sweden
* Mexico
* Slovakia

SEMIFINALS

* Spain - Denmark
* USA - France

THIRD PLACE MATCH

* Spain - France

FINALS

* Denmark - USA

Elizabeth Newman2 is back. Come on, give us an all-time greatest lineup or something, you've been gone too long.

Adam Collins4 said:First off, it all comes down to how bad the foul was. That’s what the refs use to decide whether they're filing an official report or not...

If it was just an accidental foul—you know, just being careless—a disqualification is usually the end of it. There isn't some extra punishment like a suspension for the next game (or the next few)...

On the flip side, if that red card comes from a blatant intentional hit meant to injure someone, or if it's the result of a brawl, spitting, or cursing out the officials, then yeah, a formal report follows...

It really boils down to the referees and how they judge the situation. But trust me, if a player is stupid enough to do any of the stuff I mentioned in that second paragraph, no amount of authority is going to save them, not even if Jesus Christ himself stepped in...

The report gets written right after the game, basically on the court, so there's no room for outside influence (like having someone like unnamed pull strings)...

Once the refs file the report, a commission is formed. They determine the penalty based on the report and the statements from the refs and the observers, but also from the penalized player, who gets to give their side of the story...

At major international tournaments, the commission meets regardless of whether the refs file a report. But if the refs don't submit that additional report, the only real penalty is that the player loses their minutes in that specific game; there's no suspension for upcoming matches...

So, it’s case-by-case. Everything depends on the type and severity of the foul...

Sorry for the tangent, but can you tell me what the current rules are for the American leagues? If I remember correctly, there used to be an immediate red card and an instant report. I remember once having to write a statement like, "In the xy minute of the game, in the heat of battle, I committed an inadvertent foul that unintentionally endangered an opponent and rightfully received a straight red card. I regret my actions and will act in the spirit of fair play in the future."

Ryan Moore68 said:How are you guys reading this? I know things were pretty uncertain back then, but is this actually possible?
I mean, this was five years ago, but I just stumbled across the article. After that happened, Arpad Šterbik stopped playing for the national team.

Arpad Šterbik showed his patriotism at the arena.
Honestly, the idea of match-fixing wouldn't even surprise me. In the US, it’s basically an open secret—you see it all the time in various leagues where teams just sort of let certain opponents slide, like how a mid-tier college team might let a powerhouse through to keep the bracket interesting (just giving you a rough idea). I personally know from experience that in our local circuits, we’d sometimes go easy on the neighboring teams if we were sitting pretty at the top of the standings while they were fighting just to stay relevant. Then a few years later, the roles would flip and they’d be doing us the favor. Or, if a weaker team really wants to make a splash in the Cup, a bigger team might show up with their B-squad, though they'd have to bring the starters when it actually matters for the championship. Since there are so many little instances of this happening locally, I wouldn't be shocked if it happens on the big stage too, with teams looking out for each other like neighbors.

Personally, the whole thing makes me sick. I wouldn't let my best friend score a cheap honor goal in the final minute even if we were up by ten. I'm just not built like that. I give everything I've got until the final whistle, and only *after* the game are we friends.

Roger Allen3 said:So what does having 30 handball players from a single city in our top league actually mean? It just means there are 30 students or working adults who play handball in their spare time.

I know plenty of people like that. We're talking about kids, college students, or professionals who have been training handball three to five times a week since they were little. Personally, I trained five days a week for eight years straight, right up until college. Just because they can't make a living off the sport doesn't change that. You can't compare them to those guys playing recreational soccer twice a month just because their company paid for a registration fee or a friend talked them into joining some local club when they're already over 20. I'm exaggerating, obviously, but you get my point.
In handball, you don't see that kind of casual stuff. I knew this one Taekwondo guy—total grouch—who was talked into trying handball at age 25 because we desperately needed a big guy on defense. He’d played a tiny bit in high school. That man lasted exactly two weeks.
When you call someone a handball player in this sport, they actually *are* a handball player. It doesn't work that way in soccer.

Don't get me wrong, it's not like I hate soccer. Soccer is massive specifically because you can play it anywhere. Give a guy a ball and some street corners, and he's playing. Almost every guy out there has kicked a ball around at some point; they love it and they know how to handle it. Naturally, they end up convincing each other to join a club in the next county over, or just doing it for the social aspect, the jokes, or grabbing a beer afterward. I wish handball had that kind of accessibility, but it doesn't. For handball, you need twelve players, goals, specific positions, referees, and so on—that's why it hasn't spread like soccer. But that's exactly why the raw number of registered soccer players can't be used as a metric to define your supposed "talent base."

Paul Jones7 said:quality is directly tied to the size of the athlete pool actually putting in the work; the bigger the base, the higher the quality. It’s simple math. if you have 1,000 athletes training hard, you might end up with maybe 10 elite players and 1 or 2 outliers. but if you have 10,000 athletes, you're looking at 100 elites and maybe 10 or 20 outliers. it's all about proportions. obviously, from those 10 or 20 outliers, one or two will become absolute legends. there's always going to be a peak, but a wider base just ensures that the peak is significantly better.

We really ought to run some actual research on how many kids in, say, 4th grade, are actually training for handball versus soccer. And I mean *training*—hitting the field at least three times a week—not just being part of some small-town recreational league out in the sticks where they show up once a week for a practice and then a game. A "wider base" doesn't just mean a higher number of registered players. About 20% of the players registered with US Soccer are probably just people who signed up after age 15 just to play for their local town or county team.

Roger Allen3 said:half of them aren't even playing organized sports, and the other half are just playing soccer. don't be dense. 🙂

Look, sorry, but have you actually watched any real youth athletics?? Kids from preschool all the way through maybe 2nd or 3rd grade should be enrolled in universal sports academies. We're talking programs designed to build general athletic skills tailored to their age, where actual scouting happens. Parents should be guided toward specific sports that fit their kid's current abilities (and interest, obviously).
At three years old, 99% of kids are just sprinting around like maniacs—if they're doing anything at all. What three-year-old can actually pull off a change of direction?

BTW, I started playing handball when I was 9. At our first practice, there were maybe 70 of us, whereas that same generation of soccer players probably had 100. So don't come at me talking about a "wide talent base" (at least not here in the States, which is a powerhouse for handball). Just because some small-town clubs out in rural towns might have 50 people registered doesn't mean those are 50 athletes. It means 50 guys who love to grab a beer, swear at the refs, and happen to own a pair of cleats and occasionally kick a ball into a net.

redpuma49 said:I don't get it either.
If I recall correctly, the French national team has been running a three-righty setup on the perimeter for years now. And hey, it works.
From what I can see, Kopljar just isn't built for the big stage—he doesn't have it in him.
What's the problem with our own version of the Valcic-Duvnjak-Balic combo? You can rotate anyone in, and besides, you've still got Laco and Vukovic, or even Buntic if things go south...🤷

Still, Jerome is truly one of a kind. He’s easily one of the most underrated players ever, but man, he is such a pleasure to watch. BTW, these kids are absolutely ripping from the right wing now; I was actually shocked when they started raining down shots like that.

electricotter6 said:But this is just pure nonsense—allowing this kind of stuff to happen in handball.
It really ought to be handled like soccer. If you were born in the country, or even if you're an American living abroad, you should have the right to play for them. Or at least let in a few foreign players.
The way things are, the Americans nearly lost out on three top-tier players because of all this drama.

honestly, none of that matters anyway, it's all useless crap