Part 5: Silence, Support, and the Struggle to Speak Up in Irish Handball

Photo credit: Max van Kooy

Following Parts 3 and 4 — which examined club silence and athletes exclusion — this article explores how limited transparency and a lack of accountability continue to hold back Irish handball. It questions whether current systems support real progress or simply protect those already in power.

Beyond Participation — Towards Accountability

The lack of clear communication and transparency in decision-making doesn’t seem to concern many Irish athletes, as the majority appear primarily motivated by enjoying the game and its social aspects. In this context, “Irish athletes” refers to all individuals competing in handball within Ireland — regardless of nationality, playing level, or background. Their role in the community is defined by their participation, not by their place of birth — especially since relatively few Irish natives currently compete in the senior league.

Are Volunteers Supported or Left Behind?

Irish handball’s most committed volunteers — those coaching, refereeing, managing clubs, or promoting the sport — continue to contribute not only their time but often their own money, driven by a genuine belief in the sport’s potential. Their efforts deserve recognition, particularly given how few take on such roles — a reflection of the broader challenges facing the sport’s development. Meanwhile, some others receive compensation for their involvement, raising questions about fairness and how volunteer contributions are valued across the system.

At the same time, some individuals holding positions within clubs do not fully engage with their responsibilities — often taking a passive approach, neglecting to share key information with the wider membership, or placing added pressure on those already managing multiple responsibilities. Yet despite their limited involvement, they do not step aside to allow more committed individuals the opportunity to contribute.

For meaningful progress, the resources allocated to Olympic Handball Ireland (OHI) for club development must be used transparently and directly to support those clubs — by strengthening their administration, addressing local challenges, and fostering long-term growth, as successfully demonstrated by other emerging handball nations.

These funds — largely sourced through Sport Ireland and distributed via development grants — are intended to build grassroots capacity across all clubs. They are not meant to sustain central operations alone, nor to be managed without clear and accessible reporting.

This raises a crucial question: can genuine progress be achieved without transparent financial reporting from OHI, proper allocation of club-focused grants, stronger independent oversight from Sport Ireland, and a commitment from clubs to demand accountability?

Yet when questions are raised about how that money was spent, or why clubs and referees remain under-supported, these concerns are often dismissed as criticism — with some arguing that volunteers “should only be praised” for doing their best.

Recognising the hard work of volunteers must go hand in hand with questioning whether the systems around them provide the support and accountability needed to truly value and sustain their efforts equally.

Many of those working on the ground — in refereeing, coaching, or running clubs — do so with little training or no support. When these shortcomings are raised in connection to OHI’s responsibilities as a governing body, they are often dismissed as personal attacks — not only by OHI itself, but also by some club boards. This deflection reinforces a culture where silence and praise are valued over accountability and constructive reflection — leaving deeper structural issues unresolved, as highlighted in earlier parts of this series.

This situation is rarely addressed openly — and when it is, questions often go unanswered, with responses deflected toward unrelated excuses or redirected to other topics. There is often quiet acceptance of the status quo — with those who speak out being blamed, while those responsible for managing funds face no scrutiny.

In this environment, where constructive feedback is too often dismissed as personal criticism, discomfort is avoided instead of addressed — raising the question of how much this mindset has shaped Irish handball’s current challenges. If clubs had received the kind of structured development support seen in other emerging nations — including consistent training for coaches and referees, and meaningful investment in grassroots systems — might the sport now be further along? Would volunteers’ long-standing efforts have translated into measurable growth? Or has the continued reliance on praise and silence, rather than honest evaluation and accountability, ultimately limited the sport’s potential?

Given that clubs have gone years without meaningful support, it remains to be seen how the OHI board plans to assist in their development. The key concern is whether future efforts will prioritise the growth of all clubs equally — or continue to favour internal federation activity and international travels, instances of favouritism, and conflicts of interest, as has often been the case.

Real progress requires more than appreciation — even if well-intentioned, as some club representatives have expressed. It requires responsibility from both leadership and clubs to ensure volunteers are properly supported, and accountability to address where systems fall short. 

Inside the Clubs: Roles, Responsibility, and the Strain on a Few

In some clubs, board roles are not consistently respected. Key decisions are often made by a small group of senior figures — or, in some cases, by a single individual — without consulting the broader committee. This undermines the principles of shared leadership and proper governance, which should be upheld not only at the national level through OHI but within clubs themselves.

This lack of shared leadership often results in missed opportunities or poor coordination — especially when clubs are given chances to raise their profile or contribute to the sport’s development nationally.

Just Amateurs? Why Acting Professionally Still Matters

In one case, although the club had a designated marketing role — actively promoting the club through targeted advertising both nationally and internationally — a high-profile international collaboration involving a televised feature was handled exclusively by a few board members. The person formally responsible for marketing was not informed or consulted, despite the opportunity being directly related to their role.

Even in a volunteer-led club, defined roles and basic governance principles matter. When major decisions are made without involving those responsible, it highlights deeper governance issues — including weak internal communication, lack of transparency, and limited accountability.

When questions were later raised about the club’s benefit from the collaboration, one individual replied, “We did it for fun.” This response — treating a strategic opportunity as casual entertainment — raised concerns about how seriously the potential advantages were considered.

As a result, the club gained no structured media exposure, no follow-up engagement, and no tangible return. The televised feature, instead of building the club’s profile, was poorly coordinated, portrayed both the club and Irish handball unfavourably, and was never made available to the club, even for internal use. The programme only came to light through an athlete based in the country where it aired. Notably, the video was also restricted from being viewed in Ireland via the broadcaster’s official YouTube channel.

Saying “we’re just amateurs” shouldn’t be used to justify poor planning — especially when a rare opportunity to promote the club and the sport is treated casually and without accountability. It highlights a deeper issue: a culture where roles are not respected and strategic opportunities are dismissed as mere entertainment. If such moments aren’t taken seriously, clubs will continue to face challenges with visibility, coordination, and growth — no matter how committed some of their volunteers may be.

Development doesn’t require being professional — it requires acting professionally. That means treating opportunities with intention and planning for long-term impact, not just entertainment.

In amateur sport, every opportunity counts. Growth, recruitment, and support often hinge on how well clubs use these rare chances. When such moments are handled casually or key people are excluded, it reflects a governance gap — and a missed chance for the club and the sport to move forward.

What Democracy Means in Irish Handball

In a particular instance, a club member described his own club as “very democratic” — with others from the same club using the same description for the 2024 elections. However, if key principles such as open participation, equal opportunity for candidates, and transparent procedures were not upheld, then calling the process “democratic” raises valid questions about how the term is being applied.

In another club, a member noted that decisions were largely controlled by a single individual, leaving others with limited input. In a third club, another member said that only a small group of people were actively involved, with the main focus being on fielding a team — while governance was considered outside their interest. In a fourth club, a member expressed concern about the organisation’s future once the current president steps down. However, similar concerns in the past did not result in closure, as the club continued through persistence and by involving new contributors.

Across these examples, within the five active clubs in the national league, most members and athletes remained unaware of key board decisions or intentions — despite expectations for transparency and accountability within a Sport Ireland–funded structure.

These varied perspectives — shaped by individual experience and internal observation — reflect the diversity of governance approaches across Irish handball clubs. Yet despite differences in size or visibility, many of the same issues recur: limited transparency, weak accountability, and concentrated control. In many cases, what happens at club level mirrors the broader governance concerns seen within OHI — albeit in different forms.

Ultimately, governance gaps — at both club and OHI levels — not only weaken operations and deter new players and sponsors, but also risk losing the dedicated volunteers whose efforts the sport relies on.

Protecting Progress or Protecting the Status Quo?

A long-standing member of the handball community explained the reluctance to speak up about the governance issues within OHI, stating:

 “I don’t feel massively comfortable contributing to something that could impact funding levels for the Organisation. I think there are a huge amount of questions to be answered, but if we lose funding then João’s and Carol’s jobs will both be gone and the chances for future funding will be massively diminished, even if or when the board changes.”

This statement reflects a broader hesitancy among community members to speak openly, even when systemic issues persist.

It’s possible some clubs and athletes acted cautiously out of fear of losing funding and to protect the two staff roles — roles that, for some, may also carry personal ties. Yet these concerns were not matched by steps to improve governance or secure sustainable funding. 

When raising concerns is seen as a threat to funding — rather than as a necessary step toward securing it through stronger governance, development, and transparency — it becomes a barrier to real progress. Especially now that Sport Ireland has initiated audits, continued silence risks enabling the same issues to persist, making it harder for the sport to grow in a fair and sustainable way.

Given how governance has unfolded since concerns were first raised in May 2024, the question remains: are recent actions meant to protect and develop the sport — or simply maintain the status quo?

These patterns point to broader concerns about the direction of Irish handball and whether meaningful change is achievable. Real reform must begin with those closest to the system—clubs, and the athletes themselves—who have both the insight and responsibility to demand greater responsibility, accountability and transparency.

If governance standards continue to be overlooked — even under Sport Ireland’s oversight — and if clubs accept flawed processes as “democratic” while dismissing valid concerns as mere criticism, it raises important questions: What does true democracy in Irish governance look like? What does real accountability require? And are core principles like fairness and transparency genuinely upheld?

These questions go beyond individual decisions — they challenge whether the sport’s current structure can truly support its long-term future.

As Irish handball enters a new season and Sport Ireland’s audits continue, the real question is no longer just whether change is needed — but who is willing to take responsibility for making it happen.