UKC

Beach Handball - run by perverts ?

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
 fred99 13:29 Thu

Strange this hasn't been picked up by anyone on here before, but the news in this sport (not a sport I've ever watched I hasten to add) that the Norwegian Womens' team were fined for not wearing the "correct" clothing.

They weren't wearing anything objectionable - on the contrary, the players objected to wearing clothing that I can only describe as "titillating", and not necessary for sport. They wore clothing that was perfectly appropriate in all other sports, and refused to wear BIKINI BOTTOMS - which the governing body demands, and which quite frankly seems to indicate that those in charge are more interested in perving than running a sport.

Thank heavens for the Norwegian Governing body, which paid all the fines.

How long before this sexist and pervy rule is got rid of ? - preferably along with ALL the people currently forcing its' continuation.

 Jenny C 13:42 Thu
In reply to fred99:

Unless (as with swimming where fabrics can give an advantage for streamlining) the choice of clothing impacts on the athletes performance to the point where it could be argued to be an unfair advantage, then I don't see why they shouldn't wear a full tracksuit if they want to.

Same with the argument over swim caps for those with afro hair. I assume a larger cap will create more drag so be a disadvantage for the wearer, in which case that's their choice and I see no need to authorities to object.

Post edited at 13:43
 tjdodd 13:57 Thu
In reply to fred99:

I can't believe that the International Handball Federation rules force the wearing of bikini bottoms.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/handball/57890430

At about the same time another athlete was being told their shorts were too revealing.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/disability-sport/57887715

Surely athletes should be able to wear what they want.  We are no longer in whatever age such attitudes were the norm.

In reply to tjdodd:

> I can't believe that the International Handball Federation rules force the wearing of bikini bottoms.

> At about the same time another athlete was being told their shorts were too revealing.

> Surely athletes should be able to wear what they want.  We are no longer in whatever age such attitudes were the norm.

Well one is an international organisation and the other is a random official at the England Athletics Championships afaik.

Totally agree, the IHF regulations need updating to allow for shorts. The Olympics have 4 options for volleyball which includes a option for shorts and sleeves, I'm not sure why handball couldn't do the same. 

 elsewhere 14:49 Thu
In reply to fred99:

Force the governing body to wear bikini bottoms for winter training in Norway. That should sort it out pretty quickly. 

In reply to tjdodd:

> I can't believe that the International Handball Federation rules force the wearing of bikini bottoms.

International Handjob Federation, more like...

 Lankyman 15:29 Thu
In reply to fred99:

Surely everyone has to have an equal chance of sand in the crack?

Message Removed 16:03 Thu
Reason: inappropriate content
In reply to fred99:

I checked what the mens kit was and saw that pic that's doing the rounds.

However, snopes suggests it's genuine. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/beach-handball-uniforms-photo/

Bikinis for the women and speedos for the blokes or shirt and shorts for both. To suggest otherwise shows it's not just the game you're watching.

In reply to fred99:

This has come up before, think it was the Chinese who were fined some years ago because their "bottoms" weren't revealing enough.

Basically, IIRC the sport was "founded" when the "appeal" was seeing fit, honed bodies sprawling in the sand and the skimpiness was to ensure/bolster that appeal. However, the sport still seems to be living in the age of the dinosaurs and what might have been acceptable then (although even that is questionable) is certainly unacceptable blatant sexism now.

The fact that the sport came from the beach where similarly scantily clad people may or may not be visible is irrelevant. It is the imposition of such rules, rather than athletes voluntarily deciding to dress like that.

To not be sexist, surely the men's apparel rules should be similarly revealing - from the relevant document this is obviously not the case...

I. Men’s tank top / Women’s top style The style of the tank tops / tops must be in accordance with the graphs shown. The men’s tank tops must be sleeveless and close fitting, and respect the space for the required brandings. The women’s tops (a midriff design) must be close fitting as well, with deep cutaway armholes on the back, always respecting the space for the required brandings. T-shirts that are worn under the team’s official tank top are not allowed.

and...

II. Men’s shorts / Women’s bikini bottoms style Team members must wear identical shorts/bikini bottoms. Male athletes must wear shorts as per the enclosed graph. The players’ shorts, if not too baggy, can be longer but must remain 10 centimetres above the kneecap. Female athletes must wear bikini bottoms that are in accordance with the enclosed graph, with a close fit and cut on an upward angle toward the top of the leg. The side width must be of a maximum of 10 centimetres.

If the style of the men's apparel is not impacting their ability to perform, then I can see no reason why similar apparel for the women would be any different.

I applaud the Norwegian team's position and hopefully this will end up with the removal of this blatant bit of sexism.

 Pedro50 16:43 Thu

Is beach volleyball the same?

In reply to Pedro50:

> Is beach volleyball the same?

Worse, if anything. From their regulations:

Men

The TANK TOP must fit closely to the body and the design must be with open arms, respecting the
space for the required placements of the manufacturer trademark, player number, country flag and
country code, also respecting the place for the player’s name.
The SHORTS must be in accordance with the enclosed diagram and not be baggy.
For all players, the bottom of the shorts must be a minimum of 15 cm above the top of the knee cap.

Women

The TOP must fit closely to the body and the design must be with deep cutaway armholes on the
back, upper chest and stomach (2-piece), respecting the space required for the manufacturer logo,
player number, country flag/country code and the place for the player’s name.
The BRIEFS should be in accordance with the enclosed diagram, be a close fit and be cut on an
upward angle towards the top of the leg. The side width should be maximum 7 cm.
The ONE PIECE uniform must closely fit and the design must be with open back and upper chest,
respecting the space for the required inscriptions to be made.

 mutt 17:02 Thu
In reply to fred99:

~I suspect not. I think, recalling the hoo haa when the sport was included in the olympics it was to 'respect the origins of the sport', i.e. Beach volleyball played .... well .... on the beach.

 SAF 17:18 Thu
In reply to fred99:

My understanding is that there is a move towards shorts/leggings being worn with a leotard in women's gymnastics.

I hope this is all a general move towards seeing women for the talented athletes that they are rather than as sex objects. It will also make sports more inclusive to women from more conservative religious groups and cultures. 

I've switched to only buying swimsuits with shorts style legs which are becoming much more widely available now.

 Moacs 17:29 Thu
In reply to fred99:

Lets go back to the original Olympics - naked.

I really can't see why people can't wear as much or little as they choose in any circumstance.

 nniff 17:36 Thu
In reply to fred99:

You must not lose sight of the fact that the UCI goes around measuring the length of riders' socks to make sure that they are within regulations.  These things are important to someone.....

 FactorXXX 17:37 Thu
In reply to Jenny C:

> Same with the argument over swim caps for those with afro hair. I assume a larger cap will create more drag so be a disadvantage for the wearer, in which case that's their choice and I see no need to authorities to object.

Think the reason for swim caps having to follow the contours of the head is that any leeway could result in designs being made that are more hydrodynamic efficient. 
 

 Rob Parsons 17:41 Thu
In reply to dread-i:

> I checked what the mens kit was and saw that pic that's doing the rounds.

> Bikinis for the women and speedos for the blokes or shirt and shorts for both.

Jeez - and compulsory amputation of legs below the knee, it looks like.

Tough sport.

In reply to fred99:

Anyone involved with the governance of this sport that thinks the current women's uniform should continue to be enforced, regardless of the player's wishes, is a prick. There is no excuse.

 Andy Hardy 18:10 Thu
In reply to Jenny C:

The advantage of shorts over bikini bottoms presumably being you're not playing with your arse crack full of sand having fallen over once

 Tringa 19:09 Thu
In reply to elsewhere:

> Force the governing body to wear bikini bottoms for winter training in Norway. That should sort it out pretty quickly. 


Not a bad idea but perhaps instead the officials at each beach handball match should be require to wear the same kit as the players.

Dave

 Yanis Nayu 20:09 Thu
In reply to fred99:

It’s all a bit funny considering most women do athletics in their knickers these days, but I agree, it’s a stupid rule and they should be able to wear shorts without sanction. 

In reply to Yanis Nayu:

But that's an athlete's choice, if they want to wear shorts, or leggings or whatever then they can.

 Yanis Nayu 20:54 Thu
In reply to Michael Hood:

I quite understand the logic; I’m just saying it’s funny that’s all. 

 tjdodd 21:12 Thu
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

Why is it funny?  The rules for track athletes state 

"In all events, athletes must wear clothing which is clean, and designed and worn so as not to be objectionable. The clothing must be made of a material which is nontransparent even if wet. Athletes must not wear clothing which could impede the view of the Judges."

This sounds sensible to me and gives athletes personal choice as to what to wear.  Of course there might be different views on what is objectionable but overall this seems to strike a sensible balance.

The handball rules basically give no choice to the players and many people consider the rules are designed to objectify women.  The handball federation is something from the dark ages and I am surprised that they have not been subject to severe sanctions by now for their attitude to women.

The two situations are completely different, one allows personal choice and one does not.

In reply to nniff:

> You must not lose sight of the fact that the UCI goes around measuring the length of riders' socks to make sure that they are within regulations.  These things are important to someone.....

I'd be hoping they are keeping an eye on colour coordination too. Obviously category winners need to have multiple outfit options to account for any Jersey colours. 

In reply to Andy Hardy:

> The advantage of shorts over bikini bottoms presumably being you're not playing with your arse crack full of sand having fallen over once

The reverse surely. 

 Andy Hardy 22:15 Thu
In reply to Robert Durran:

I'd have thought shorts being higher at the waist and longer in the leg would be less prone to the ingress of sand than bikini bottoms. Assuming cycling type shorts here, not baggy running shorts

Edit spelling

Post edited at 22:16
In reply to tjdodd:

> Why is it funny?  The rules for track athletes state 

> The handball rules basically give no choice to the players and many people consider the rules are designed to objectify women. 

Is there any substantive difference between beach handball or volleyball and the non-beach versions apart from the titillating clothing? If not, then surely the beach versions should just be binned from the Olympics.

In reply to Andy Hardy:

> I'd have thought shorts being higher at the waist and longer in the leg would be less prone to the ingress of sand than bikini bottoms. Assuming cycling type shorts here, not baggy running shorts

Ok,  I was assuming baggy rather than tight. Tight clothing does make sense to stop sand getting in.

 oaktree 23:16 Thu
In reply to fred99:

> How long before this sexist and pervy rule is got rid of ? - preferably along with ALL the people currently forcing its' continuation.

Beach volleyball doesn't want to be a normal sport, it wants to sell beach lifestyle, 'physical beauty' is right there in the marketing material.   They've got their business model figured out and it is bringing in the TV, corporate entertainment and brand sponsorship $ which pay for the circus and the prize money.

http://www.fivb.org/EN/Marketing/Leaflets/PDF/FIVB_3_BeachWChamp.pdf

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

That sort of corporate bollocks make me puke.

In reply to tjdodd:

*Whoosh*

In reply to Robert Durran:

> Is there any substantive difference between beach handball or volleyball and the non-beach versions apart from the titillating clothing? If not, then surely the beach versions should just be binned from the Olympics.

Not sure about the rules but IIRC beach volleyball is only 2/side rather than 5 (? or is it 6), and the sand allows you to repeatedly crash onto the floor without too much pain. If you did that all the time on a wooden court I imagine you'd end up with some impressive bruising. The combination of those two differences makes the beach version more sprawly, the non-beach version more upright and I think the rallies tend to be longer in the non-beach version.

Post edited at 08:39
 Lankyman 11:02 Fri
 wercat 11:44 Fri
In reply to fred99:

it seems to me that if men were to be treated the same way there should be a close fitting codpiece trunks with a tight fitting "nose" contouring all anatomical details

 Ian W 12:22 Fri
In reply to Michael Hood:

> Not sure about the rules but IIRC beach volleyball is only 2/side rather than 5 (? or is it 6), and the sand allows you to repeatedly crash onto the floor without too much pain. If you did that all the time on a wooden court I imagine you'd end up with some impressive bruising. The combination of those two differences makes the beach version more sprawly, the non-beach version more upright and I think the rallies tend to be longer in the non-beach version.

That about covers it. Indoor VB is 6 a side. The differences in the game are that indoor is much faster, much more tactical, and it is more of an advantage to be tall. When i played in the 80's I was the smallest out of 10 in the team (i'm 6' 3"). There's no gain in being 6'10" when you are grovelling in the sand for the nth time in the last 5 mins.

Interestingly for a comparison with the climbing world, those who play "proper" volleyball tend to look down on the beach game as a bit of a holiday pastime.........not unlike trad / bouldering comparisons.

On the subject of the pervy uniforms, since beach VB is an established olympic sport, it has moved away from its trunks / bikini origins, and now there is a choice for the female players of what to wear, so if they choose the shorts and vest option, their uniform is pretty much the same as the mens.

https://inews.co.uk/sport/olympics/olympics-kit-rules-explained-beach-volleyball-bikinis-size-tokyo-2020-restrictions-1114025

What the beach handball lot were thinking, i dont know. Indoor handball is played by male and female teams wearing broadly the same stuff - t shirt and shorts, and since the beach version is just the same thing played on sand, there is absolutely no reason to change the clothing required except for the - ahem - "visual appeal". At least beach and indoor VB are demonstrably different sports based around the same skillsets (think trad and bouldering again). But if all a spectator wants is to see a girl in a bikini, surely there are other places available online for that??

In reply to fred99:

I think that the answer to the original question "run by perverts?" is not necessarily; they just know that putting a lot of fit female bodies on show with little left to the imagination is going to pull in an audience and hence sponsorship and cash.

 SAF 16:26 Fri
In reply to Robert Durran:

> I think that the answer to the original question "run by perverts?" is not necessarily; they just know that putting a lot of fit female bodies on show with little left to the imagination is going to pull in an audience and hence sponsorship and cash.

So older, presumably mostly, men financially benifitting from exploiting young women as sex objects.  "Perverts" sums it up fairly succinctly!

 fred99 17:20 Fri
In reply to Robert Durran/SAF:

I think that the answer to the original question "run by perverts?" is not necessarily; they just know that putting a lot of fit female bodies on show with little left to the imagination is going to pull in an audience and hence sponsorship and cash.

> So older, presumably mostly, men financially benifitting from exploiting young women as sex objects.  "Perverts" sums it up fairly succinctly!

Actually, in response to Robert Durran, I now think that maybe "pimps" might be more appropriate for the people running the sport - though there's no reason for me to not use the term "perverts" as well. How long before it's sponsored by either a mag from the top shelf or a "questionable" website ?

Post edited at 17:21
 fred99 17:26 Fri
In reply to tjdodd:

> I can't believe that the International Handball Federation rules force the wearing of bikini bottoms.

> At about the same time another athlete was being told their shorts were too revealing.

> Surely athletes should be able to wear what they want.  We are no longer in whatever age such attitudes were the norm.

This coming Sunday I'll be officiating with someone who was actually at the Meeting in question, so I'll ask her if she knows anything about it. If I get any concrete info I'll pass it on.

In reply to SAF:

> So older, presumably mostly, men financially benifitting from exploiting young women as sex objects.  "Perverts" sums it up fairly succinctly!

No, I don't think so. They are just financially exploiting perverts, or, perhaps more accurately voyeurs. I don't think they are necessarily perverts or voyeurs themselves. Just like you could have a vegetarian butcher.

 fred99 19:57 Fri
In reply to fred99:

 I can't believe that the International Handball Federation rules force the wearing of bikini bottoms.

> At about the same time another athlete was being told their shorts were too revealing.

> Surely athletes should be able to wear what they want.  We are no longer in whatever age such attitudes were the norm.

> This coming Sunday I'll be officiating with someone who was actually at the Meeting in question, so I'll ask her if she knows anything about it. If I get any concrete info I'll pass it on.

Update after a phone call to organise Sunday:

It appears (unofficially) that the young lady in question had her "lower body apparel" "ride up" whenever she jumped, and what it covered in the normal standing/walking/running position wasn't necessarily covered whilst jumping. Added to which the photographers were positioned (as normal) beyond the far end of the Long Jump pit to get the head-on shot. It should be noted that Long Jumping involves both legs forward (the leg shoot), and generally the knees are not exactly together - you can imagine what was, or could be, on show.

The (female) Official in question advised her that she was showing more of herself than normal and that the photos could prove embarrassing, hence the advice regarding clothing.

As an addition, it also appears the young lady may well be obtaining a modelling contract - no publicity is bad publicity ??

Post edited at 19:58
Message Removed 20:08 Fri
Reason: inappropriate content
In reply to fred99:

I think I've seen something similar in a cheerleader doing high kicks...

In reply to SAF:

> So older, presumably mostly, men financially benifitting from exploiting young women as sex objects.  "Perverts" sums it up fairly succinctly!

I don't see how anybody is getting exploited,  the beach volleyball circuit is about selling 'beach lifestyle' as well as the sport. 

Companies trying to sell swimsuits to young women who want to look like beach volleyball players need the beach volleyball players to wear swimsuits.  Companies trying to sell beer need to have it look like a beach party.  If you take away that aspect the sport wouldn't pay as much.   

It's the Olympic 'respectability' that's dragging it away from its commercial roots and bringing in athletes who aren't interested in the commercial side.

Post edited at 07:54
 Yanis Nayu 08:08 Sat
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Indeed - it’s hardly surprising that people playing beach volleyball wear beach clothing. It’s also hardly surprising that people like looking at it. It would be more surprising if they didn’t. That said, I couldn’t care less what they do or don’t wear and find it odd that they’ve codified it and enforce it - if the women want to wear shorts, let them. 


Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
Loading Notifications...