What We Think But Don't Say: Part I

[also Read Rod Symington's Recent Article on Refereeing]

A Guide to Improved Player-Referee Relations
Part 1 - Officiating     [also read Part 2- Players]

Physical contact taken to the extreme (photo © Stephen Line)

A few months back, I witnessed total chaos ensue in a first round match between two top twenty players in the world. The game, which had been outrageously physical right from the start was resulting in a large amount of let-calls, and mounting frustration levels from both players and referee. At one point, the ref deemed the physical play of one of the competitors to be too excessive and issued a warning. At the same time, the other player, who was visibly annoyed by the erratic, stop-and-start nature of the game, threw her racquet disgustedly at the wall.

When asked by her opponent as to why similar punishment was not being awarded for racquet abuse, the referee explained: “I don’t believe that she threw her racquet intentionally”….??? Yes, apparently the racquet, of its own volition, had flung itself out of the player’s idle hands. Needless to say, the crowd burst out laughing, the players drew one step closer to all-out hysterics, and the referee’s sense of control quickly dissipated. The match, which devolved into something akin to world war three, was enough to make even the greatest squash enthusiasts cringe with dread.

Palmer and Power take the discussion to the referee (photo © Debra Tessier)

Sadly, this is only one of the many matches that I have seen end in complete disarray, and it is mostly due to the poor behaviors and flawed dealings between players and referees. Despite being a player myself, I don’t pretend to support one side over the other; both parties have been guilty of appalling conduct at one time or the other. It is not my intention to point fingers here, but rather to air out some of these problems in the hopes of reaching a better understanding between players and officials. At present, the sport of squash is facing more international scrutiny than ever before (being one of the 5 sports vying for a spot in the Olympics), which makes it a worthwhile cause to try and clean up the officiating process (from both ends) and help lower the levels of argumentation and controversy on the court. Let us start from the officiating side…

Rather than reiterate the basic principles of refereeing (ie. being consistent, etc.) I have decided to use this time to discuss the more subtle aspects of the officiating process that may not always be dealt with explicitly. Writing this from a competitor’s point of view, these are some hints as to what officials need to be wary of with respect to players’ on-court tactics, as well as an inside look into what players see as the most exasperating elements of officiating, that can lead to heightened tensions over time. With these pieces of information in hand, I believe that referees can make their work much easier on themselves, as well as greatly improve the on-court environment by producing more civil interactions between players and referees during competition.

Linda Elriani and Rebecca Macree - elbow to elbow (photo © Stephen Line)

1) There are two main physical tactics that players employ on the court to gain advantages over their opponents: blocking and playing the body.

i) “Blocking”– refers to players who hit the ball and then instead of providing a clear path for their opponents to go through, back right out into them. It is a tactic invoked generally to frustrate opponents and/or to force players to take the long way around, thus making them work twice as hard (and leading to major mental and physical fatigue over the course of a match). Watch for signs of a player hitting a similar shot over and over (ie. drop shot from the mid-court) and consistently disallowing his/her opponent to get through to the ball, forcing a let situation.

ii)“Playing the body”- refers to a competitor getting in the way of the opponent instead of taking the more direct route to the ball, in the hopes of getting an easy let (typically done when the shot that was played cannot be reached). Always look at the trajectory of the ball and where the opponent has made the let-call. If there is a large discrepancy between the two (namely, where the ball has bounced and where the competitor has called the let) chances are that he/she is playing the body.

These two on-court tactics, though not used that often are still considered to be forms of cheating, and there are definitely a few players on tour who are notorious for such patterns of play. Know who they are, and be ready to take action early on (after all, it is no secret who these competitors are- I barely follow what goes on in the PSA for example, yet I am well aware of those men on tour who are known for their underhanded playing styles).

There are a variety of physical contact tactics. (photo © Debra Tessier)

Not dealing appropriately with these two strategies can give unfair advantages to one player over the other and even influence the outcome of the match. Players would agree that being at the brunt of these devious tactics is extremely frustrating. Identifying these subtle forms of cheating early though, and awarding punishment accordingly will remove any incentives for players to begin doing it, and correct the behaviors of those already trying it.

2) Quick, concise calls- As a referee, the objective should be to assess the play once it stops and make the necessary judgment as quickly as possible. Hesitation denotes uncertainty, which is not what the players want to see. Whether one is sure of the call or not, it is absolutely paramount to maintain the appearance of authority and confidence at all times. This is achieved by making calls quickly and firmly (and by no means should a call be reversed once it is made!) Sometimes officials are prone to watching the body language of players after the play has ended- ie. watching for competitors going to the service box or getting ready to return serve. Players are very savvy in this regard; once they notice that a ref is being influenced by what goes on after the play, it is not unlikely for both players to start exaggerating their actions to receive favorable calls.

Furthermore, if an official seems to be easily influenced by competitors’ “preemptive argumentation” (meaning, what is argued even before the call is made), then both players are again likely to use this tactic in order to get

The referee needs to make a rapid and decisive decision (photo © Debra Tessier)

the best calls possible. Even though it may seem petty for players to resort to such tactics, it is in fact a necessity in some cases, because if one player chooses to take the ‘high road’ so to speak and avoid strategies that can influence the referee’s perspective, he/she can be severely affected if the other does not do the same, and as a result gets away with the bulk of favorable calls. In order to minimize the chance for players to get caught up in these sly influencing strategies, it is absolutely crucial for officials to make their calls quickly, and without consideration of factors that occur once the play has ceased.

3) Explanations- Once a call is made, do not engage in dialogue with the players. Again, one has to establish and maintain a position of authority, which will only be weakened by trying to explain oneself to an angry competitor. Additionally, as we saw from the “unintentional racquet throwing” debacle, if one’s reasoning or explanation of the reasoning is suspect, it will only lend fuel to the fire for competitors- something we would like to minimize as much as possible. If one is 100% confident about a call, a short, one or two word answer will suffice, otherwise, it’s “play on please”.

The players will get dramatic as they sense that the referee has lost control of the match (photo © Debra Tessier)

4) Enforcement- I think the single most important thing to keep in mind with regards to officiating is that referees have ultimate power in the end, and they must enforce it. As we have seen throughout this article, players- much like children- will try to test and push the limits of what they can get away with, using any tactic imaginable to gain an edge over their opponents. If refs do not set the boundaries of what is acceptable right from the start, they will lose control of the match. Use warnings early on for poor behavior, in order to show both players that this kind of conduct will be met with zero tolerance. One will be amazed to see how quickly competitors straighten up, because at the end of the day most players (even the most troublesome ones) will not risk getting penalty strokes against them.

Particularly at the professional level where every point counts, a player is more likely to clean up his/her act than continue on a disruptive path that could lead to a loss of points or even games.

5) Remain impersonal- Officials do what they do simply because they love the sport, and it is normal for them to have an affinity for the players with whom they see and ref so often. As a result, this last suggestion may be the hardest to swallow, but it is critical nevertheless. Referees should try and remain as impartial as possible by refraining from engaging too heavily with the players (this means, limiting the amount of conversation to brief exchanges). I say this only because it is all too easy to become emotionally involved when one develops too great of an acquaintance/familiarity with another person.

The players have hooked the referee into a pointless discussion (photo © Debra Tessier)

Countless times, I have seen officials approach players after their matches to apologize or give explanations for their actions. Countless times, I have seen referees making calls that are partial to players from their home country. And countless times (on a more basic level) we have all seen referees who try to “balance” out calls when they feel that they have wronged one player over the other (by being lenient to that same player in subsequent calls). These are all functions of emotion at play, which generally arise from forming attachments to players (and it does not take a lot for this to occur- we are human after all!). This can cloud a referee’s judgment and lead to subjective calls. At the end of the day, the more emotions are removed from the equation, the more clearly and objectively the calls will become.