Rogulj, N., et al.: Expert and quantitative evaluation of game phases in handball Sport Science 13 (2020) 1: 23-29 23 EXPERT AND QUANTITATIVE EVALUATION OF GAME PHASES IN HANDBALL Nenad Rogulj, Nikola Foretić and Marijana Čavala University of Split, Faculty of Kinesiology, Croatia Original scientific paper Abstract The research has been conducted with the purpose of doing expert and quantitative valorisation of the importance of four game phases in handball: position attack, position defence, transition attack and transition defence. The sample of entities involved 19 elite international handball experts and 44 matches played at the World Handball Championship for Men. We established defence phases are more important than attack phases in addition to higher efficiency and significance of transition phases compared to position phases. With regard to the research findings, we quantitatively determined the most efficient game phase combinations in handball, separately and integrally with the opposed team. Research results can contribute to the efficiency of the training process by using most useful contrasted game phase models, but also to the quality tactical preparedness and in addition to managing the match itself. Key words: team handball, tactical activities, coaching, attack, defence, transition. Introduction During its historical development, as any other sport game, handball underwent a kinesiological adjustment following the change of the rules, enhancing material-technical and organization conditions at training and competitions, and particularly due to implementation of new and scientifically based training processes and selection methods (Bjorndal, Luteberget, Till, & Holm, 2018; Wagner et al., 2019). All of these factors added to the fact handball is nowadays one of the most popular and most widespread ball games. It is characterized by a simply defined aim, and that is scoring as many, i.e. receiving as few goals as possible. This aim is affected by a large number of factors, particularly by technical and tactical knowledge, physical potential, morphological characteristics and mental-emotional features of players, by the opponent’s performance and outer environmental influences (Weber, Wegner, & Wagner, 2018). Accomplishing the partial game aim in attack or defence, i.e. scoring or preventing to score, does not entirely depend on the activity and abilities of a player immediately involved in finalisation, but is, to a large extent, the outcome of cumulative performance of other players and their synchronized group and collective actions followed by the activity of the opposed team. A handball game is performed within a time framework defined by its single time periods, i.e. game phases. Game phases are determined by ball possession and temporal-spatial features of technical-tactical activity implementation (Rogulj, 2003). Regarding ball possession, we distinguish two basic game phases, attack and defence, while with regard to kinesiological aspect of the game, there is attack and defence game transition (Foretić, Rogulj, & Trninić, 2010a). Thus, phases present separate time units of the game with a distinguishing and specific kinesiological structure, performed in different order combinations during a game. Problem In practice, coaches are not sufficiently familiarized with the valuation and significance of a certain game phase, and they are even less focused on the frequency of certain phases in a training process in accordance with their contribution to the result efficiency. Due to not understanding or not being aware of the importance of a certain game phase, training time is used in a wrong and irrational way where training phases least important for the result are most frequently practiced, and those of the greatest importance are practiced occasionally or almost never. Due to the lack of deeper consideration, empirical knowledge or scientific proofs, this is how trainers most frequently view the hierarchical order and their frequency in training: 1 – position attack, 2 – position defence, 3 – transition attack, 4 – transition defence. Logics suggest that defence is more crucial than attack, since if we are efficient in defence, and inefficient in attack afterwards, we are not losing, we are equal. However, being inefficient in defence does not suggest we are winning even if efficient in attack, we are simply equal. In order to bring ourselves to the point of being efficient in position defence, primarily we must return to the zone of position defence action, thus, hypothetically, transition defence is being imposed as the most important game phase in handball. The importance of a certain game phase and its contribution to the match outcome can be established by experimental and empirical procedures (Foretic, Rogulj, & Papic, 2013). Experimentally we have to determine the relation between playing position and transition frequency in winning and losing teams, average efficiency of a certain phase with relation to scoring or not receiving a goal and the difference in the efficiency of performing the finalization of certain phases between winning and losing teams. Empirical procedures analyse the expert knowledge of top handball scientists and experts with the