What’s the Point? #2

Feedback from the World Refereeing Conference
Since returning a few weeks ago from the refereeing conference and the World Men’s Team Championship in Germany, I have had some time to reflect on a few points. The conference opened my mind to the complex analysis that is applied to improving the rules and refereeing (application of the rules) and gave me an increased understanding of the background and interpretation of the rules.

 

It seems everyone has a lot to learn, players and referees alike. I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to discuss a few topics on an informal, one-on-one basis with various international referees. Their advice seems fairly consistent: be prepared to learn and encourage discussion and debate – referee to player, player to player and referee to referee; don’t be too fixed in your ideas, even if you are experienced; be humble enough to admit where you can improve. These top referees say that they learn more from every tournament, even those who have refereed for 40 years. On a personal basis, for example, I reanalysed a match I had previously analysed before my trip and ended up changing a number of my decisions. For me this was a positive thing – clearly the trip, discussions and opportunities to referee have been a great learning opportunity.
Another focus was the implications of the Olympic bid on refereeing. The future of squash is looking very promising with more people taking up the sport every day. Key to achieving Olympic status is (1) the need for improved “flow” during games (reducing excessive interruption during rallies, for example repetitive lets) and (2) the improvement of the level of professionalism in the game. The burden of both falls upon the various officials involved in squash. In terms of refereeing, it means the need for a re-visitation of the application of the rules to improve flow, increasing the overall standard of refereeing and improved management of the conduct of players.
There were many topics covered during the conference, most of which related to advanced refereeing concepts and I will cover these where relevant in future articles.
The framework for refereeing decision making
Two concepts which are fundamental to refereeing are the “line” of decision making, and the time of appeal. It is important to bear these concepts in mind when reading this series of articles
Refereeing is not an exact science. It is a combination of an art and science. It is unusual for a referee to get every decision correct but the objective is to reduce the number of incorrect decisions – far more complex than its sounds. One of the ways this is done is for a referee to take a line in their decision making. This means adopting a decision-making framework that is consistent and clear to the players. The objective of the rules is a fair outcome for both players. Where a referee has reasonable parameters that are consistently applied and clear to players, a fair outcome is more likely. If a referee in some cases awards a let for lack of effort and sometimes awards a no let for lack of effort, the players will not be able to identify the framework within which to play. This is unsettling and results in less flow during the game – frustrating for the players and spectators.
Another important concept is the time of appeal – the moment in time where the players actually appeals to the referee. This is not always easy to determine because it is often a body language cue (stopping play or lifting a hand) rather than a verbal appeal. This issue is dealt with specifically in the rules (read the rules and guidelines on this subject available on http://www.worldsquash.org). The referee must judge where the player stopped play. This may be a few seconds before actually saying “let, please.” A common example is where the opponent was clear at the time of appeal but the ball continues moving toward him/her after the striker stopped play, which can give the illusion of being a stroke situation. It is very important to note that it is often incorrect judgement of the time of appeal that leads to incorrect decisions.
My thanks to Sven and Cecile van Rie, Mike Collins, Craig Sadler and Lee Pearson for an incredible trip to Germany and for including me in the team.
The next article marks the beginning of coverage of major areas of contention and the related specific rules and their application. As always, I appreciate any feedback or suggestions regarding the content of future articles. You can reach me at squash.referee@gmail.com.
As a side note, all articles are uploaded to the KZN Squash website on the Refereeing page under “Development”.

Cheers, Alex