What you don't hear on TV! What the referees REALLY say during a squash match 👀
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 09. 2024
- We're taking you behind the scenes of a PSA World Tour event, and today it's time to see what happens in the hot seat(s)!
Referees Andrea Santamaria and Nathan Turnbull held the responsibility of refereeing Marwan ElShorbagy vs Auguste Dussourd at the Hong Kong Open 2023. With microphones attached to the referees, we're giving you an exclusive insight into the discussions that take place between the referee and video referee throughout a match.
Note: Unlike most matches, the Hong Kong Squash Centre doesn't have screens inside the arena displaying the match and instant replays. Under normal circumstances, the Match and Video Referees will watch a review together.
Watch Squash LIVE and ON DEMAND on SQUASHTV
bit.ly/Subscrib...
Subscribe Today on CZcams for all our updates
www.youtube.com...
Become a CZcams member to get access to perks:
/ @squashtv
Website: psaworldtour.com
Facebook: / psaworldtour
Twitter: @SquashTV @PSAWorldTour
Instagram: @squash.tv @psaworldtour
TikTok: @squashtv
PSA Foundation: psafoundation.com
#Squash #PSAWorldTour
Do you agree with Andrea and Nathan's decisions in this match? Which referees would you like to see in the hot seat? 👀
I’d love to see an episode with Roy 🙌
@squashtv I get that your trying to generate a discussion, but asking for comments on whether we agree with the decisions themselves is missing the point of a really good video here - interesting how squash uses the TV official to add value, and all behind the scenes stuff that I had no idea went on.
I'm really surprised that the referee's discuss and influence each others decisions. Why aren't they only asking for the VRs opinion when it goes to the VR decision? Very disappointed. Makes a sport where the rules are subjective even more so with this setup.
Completely disagree with 6:45 and not just in relation to this specific example but insofar as it seems to have become the current standard in the PSA.
#1 I have no doubt that in absence of the interference Dussourd can and would reach the ball
#2 the ref makes it clear he isn't ruling Dussourd couldn't reach the ball but rather he could have gone more to the right - he could indeed have gone more to the right but this would disadvantage him and advantage Shorbagy
#3 The shot isn't just not a winner it is actually quite a poor shot and Dussourd would actually have an advantage if he were allowed to go straight to the ball on his chosen line (which wasn't an unreasonable one)
#4 Dussourd's line to the ball is exactly the line you would take if Shorbagy didn't exist; if anything Dussourd would stay even more to the midline, no one wants to approach a ball by going out first and then up (this is exactly what I coach to my son, up first then out, or directly diagonal, but never out first then up)
#5 Shorbagy contributes to this interference by stepping directly back after hitting; if he had put any effort into moving to the left it would give Dussourd more room to continue his chosen line (this is indeed Shorbagy's responsibility, to make every effort to clear, which he doesn't really do)
So, in summary, it seems to be the PSA's current standard on these sort of drops is that the incoming striker must go out and around the interference because there is "a line" there, nevermind that doing so completely disadvantages them, and there doesn't even seem to be consideration to cases where the shot isn't even good and/or the other player doesn't put in any real effort into clearing. The old standard was something more to the effect of "you don't get to use interference to get a point where the quality of the shot wouldn't be sufficient to earn the point without the interference" even if it wasn't specifically stated that way in the rules.
Hats off to Andrea and Nathan for their great achievements in squash refereeing and for taking part in this new level of transparency. I agree with most decisions. Some problems arise because Andrea does not appear to have sufficient kit to see the slo-mo replays. Two minds are better than one, but that benefit is largely lost here.
That said, this video reveals how some cultural aspects of WSO and its officials, leads to less than optimal officiating. If WSO consults with the officials of some even more established sports, that have grappled for longer and more deeply over the science of refereeing, (boxing being one of many examples) they will find the following confirmed:
This clip shows a surprise in the somewhat condescending/judgemental attitude towards the players (it’s not Andrea or Nathans fault, its the way WSO culture has developed). Refs should keep in mind that that the payers are their clients/customers, to whom officials are providing a refereeing _service._ Yes, this this means making judgements. But they should not see themselves as sitting _in_ judgment _over_ players. The attitude is something along the lines of eye-rolling at the players, or viewing the players as the problem. It’s a bit similar to some I.T. support departments, that start to consider the behaviour of their computer users to be the failing they have to heroically cope with, rather than seeing their computer users as their customers. This is important in refereeing as the former clouds judgement, while the latter enhances unbiased decision making.
This goes hand in hand with a related issue that is also apparent from this clip: that is _The principles of emotional control in refereeing._ Andrea’s tone shows that she is feeling irritated with the players sometimes. Yes, of course, top players competing for highest recognition and a lot of money will frequently behave in extremely irritating ways. But it is vital that officials are in a framework and mindset where they never feel irritated during a match. Instead they should be able to completely rely on their confidence, their authority, the robust decision making process provided to them, and their calm assertive projection. Why is this important? - because emotions such as irritation, cloud judgement in refereeing. But official are humans I hear you cry! Yes, but their emotions should be postponed until after the match. Again, this is no negative reflection at all on the very distinguished Andrea, who is doing a lot better most could, under the circumstances. But the circumstances are that Squash refereeing is in a form of infancy compared to many sports, in terms of kit, rules, insight, culture and psychology; and it is those things, especially the often-overlook last three, that I think/hope are on the WSO agenda.
To answer the other part of the question posed here by WSO : Roy and John, of course. I’m sure they will want to lead from the front, and set an example to show there is nothing to fear from this excellent kind of transparency, and the advantages that come from it.
This is so interesting. I would rewatch a match with the referee pov.
Sounds like an extended cut could be on the cards for the next one! 🤩
I love these videos : bring back day in the life and whats in my bag
Plenty of really interesting videos on the horizon! Which players would you like us to film with? 🤝
Thanks Nathan and Andrea, great to see behind the scenes!
That was better than the regular SquashTV commentary
This really underscores the challenging job referees have, some great insight
Thank you for this video. It was a great insight into the mentality of the referees going into and during a match.
the refs shouldn't have to say "no comment" repeatedly, really makes it look unprofessional. The players should know they cant keep talking to the ref without being told
Very cool to see this insight. Would love to see more of these
Which players or referees would you like to see next? 🤝
These 2 players are a nightmare to referee!
We definitely picked a tough match for Andrea and Nathan's on-camera debut! 👀
@@squashtvI hated refing Nathan! Maybe because of his ref knowledge or because he does argue or both😅
The thankless job
A special thank you to all our PSA referees reading these comments! 🙏
Played through junior years with nathan, good to see him still taking it seriously. Good calls too.
This is very interesting and helpful to understand what goes on, thanks.
Very cool video! Great work behind the scenes! Reffing is super difficult.
With today’s technology could set up beam to confirm if ball is out or not. Cheap and no dispute
Great refereeing - calm, firm, specific, collaborative.
And what a sport. Greatest in the world, held back from mainstream popularity only by restricted audience numbers and squash simply not translating to screen it's truly dynamic nature..
Maybe one day :)
6:25 - how this is no let? He went to the ball, straight line to the ball, Shorbagy was blocking the direct path to the ball. Shorbagy stood there without intention to clear.
This is a very poor decision. Referee said that he has to go to the right of the Shorbagy, why???? To the right the path was longer and harder to play
Refs cannot just force the player to take the path they think is suitable, players can take ball early or late, it is up to them to decide.
I’m in agreement, unplayable with where shorbagy is on court
Agreed. Path to the right isn't just longer, it is very difficult to effectively strike a ball that is directly in front of you. Ideally Dussourd doesn't even want to go to the ball, he wants to go to a position that is several feet to the "inside" of the ball, which isn't possible if he goes around to the right.
This is awesome.
this is an awesome video. more in the future please!
This was super insightful I must say. Respect for the refs.
Loved this, great insight. Hard match to referee, well done.
Im glad im not a ref at these games😂 very impressive handling of the situations
Very nice to see this. Didn’t realise they freely talk to one another during rallies, which is a little distracting to the main ref. Squash is really unique in the racket sports due to this very phenomenon of the physicality of being on the same side of the court. The subjective decisions can be very tough to make on the fly without video backup. This is a good arrangement, but it’s still not ideal with so many decisions to be made.
This is great to see
Great video
I don't understand how a point can end on a conduct stroke, mainly the 11:28 one. Dussourd lost the point from making the error, shouldn't the conduct stroke only be applied in game 3, rather than overriding the game ball?
Hats off to Andrea and Nathan for their great achievements in squash refereeing and for taking part in this new level of transparency. I agree with most decisions. Some problems arise because Andria does not appear have sufficient kit to see the slo-mo replays. Two minds are better than one, but that benefit is largely lost here.
That said, this video reveals how some cultural aspects of WSO and its officials, lead to less than optimal officiating. If WSO consults with some officials from even more established sports, that have grappled for longer and more deeply over the science of refereeing, (boxing being one of many examples) they will find the following confirmed:
This clip shows a surprise in the somewhat condescending/judgemental attitude towards the players (it’s not Andrea or Nathans fault, its the way WSO culture has developed, and it can easily be changed). Refs should keep in mind that that the payers are their clients/customers, to whom officials are providing a refereeing _service._ Yes, this this means making judgements. But they should not see themselves as sitting _in_ judgment _over_ players. The attitude is something along the lines of eye-rolling at the players, or viewing the players as the problem. It’s a bit similar to some I.T. support departments, that start to consider the behaviour of their computer/software users to be the failing they have to heroically cope with, rather than seeing their computer users as their customers. This is important in refereeing because the former mindset clouds judgement, while the latter enhances accurate and unbiased decision making.
This goes hand in hand with a related issue that is also apparent from this clip: that is _The principles of emotional control in refereeing._ Andrea’s tone shows that she is feeling irritated with the players sometimes. Yes, of course, top players competing for highest recognition and a lot of money will frequently behave in extremely irritating ways. But it is vital that officials are in a framework and mindset where they never feel irritated during a match. Instead they should be able to completely rely on their confidence, their authority, the robust decision making process provided to them, and their calm assertive projection. Why is this important? - because emotions such as irritation, cloud judgement in refereeing. But official are humans I hear you cry! Yes, but their emotions should be postponed until after the match. Again, this is no negative reflection at all on the very distinguished Andrea, who is doing a lot better than most could under the circumstances. But the circumstances are, that Squash refereeing is in a form of infancy compared to many sports, in terms of kit, rules, insight, culture and psychology; and it is those things, especially the often-overlook last three, that I think/hope are on the WSO agenda.
To answer the other part of the question posed here by WSO : Roy and John, of course. I’m sure they will want to lead from the front, and set an example to show there is nothing to fear from this excellent kind of transparency, and the advantages that come from it.
Very interesting to see!
do not see why the referees should talk to each other if this is not the call for "video referee decision"
The rally with shorbagy’s dodgy movement half way through ended in Dussord missing and not appealing the movement. Should this not have made the score 12-10, and then the conduct stroke made it 12-11?
Andrea made the point that Dussord should have stopped and appealed. What happened here is that essentially she has appealed on his behalf. Seems a bit strange.
Tough job. Probably doesn't pay a million bucks either👍
I remember the days when the rules dictated the player was allowed a clear and unobstructed path to the ball. Not to the right or left…it’s created a monster. Roy Gingell and DC Foster would remember those days
Im curious what PSA thinks of players like Mo that block every game. Table tennis hands out pretty swift bans for stuff like that but PSA almost promotes it on their CZcams channel.
2:41 Bread n Butter Stroke.
Match referee Monday?
Great ref’ing and good video concept. But by god were both those two players playing like children in that match. Pathetic honestly. Imagine Peter Nicol ever being like that? Me neither.
Great video and insight. Feels inappropriate to me that the referees can communicate to eachother though. You could see how one referee could influence another whereas if they were deciding independently with very limited communication it might be less biased. For example, the judges in boxing don't discuss their scorecards before completing it - they fill them out independently on how they see the fight.
On the flip side, you can see many scenarios in this clip where, as they have been able to communicate, better refereeing occurs. E.g. telling the video referee what you thought you saw which needs checking, or what to look out for etc.
Weird to bring up bias? All refs are as independent as they can be, no? I think the question is 'How do we make sure that two refs are better than one?' I think the bigger risk is a clash of personalities or communication styles, but not bias.
@@siongardner1483 Biased was probably the wrong word from me. If referee A particularly values referee B's opinion/comments then they could be swayed whereas if almost nothing is said between them then no influence can be made. It's not a criticism of the individuals - just human nature.
@@siongardner1483 The bias doesn't have to be deliberate though. If a referee unconsciously starts noticing things more from one player, and they have regular communication with the video ref throughout the games, then the video ref will unconsciously start fixating more on that player too.
Also the video ref will, understandably, be largely influenced by the live refs comments on big calls, and potentially won't want to disagree with them as well, as they are a close knit team. So think it is easy for players to get unconsciously picked on, or for clearly harsh or wrong decisions not to be overturned as the video refs opinion will likely be swayed by the comments and decision of the ref before.
Think a bit more separation between the ref and video ref would be better personally, but is a tricky balance
@danludlam1562 true. I'm involved on officiating (different sport, different level) but you do need to be careful of the central ref vs assistant relationship. One person wears the calls ultimately.
I don't envy anyone in this video
6:45 the left side?
thank you to the refs
I would say at 3:12 that was a let as the player turned after misjudging the ball and shaping up to hit ball in the first position.
No comments, please.😀
Why?
I dont like the fact that the VR person is a bit chummy with the ref. They should be neutral to each other as it could influence the decisions
Nah, they're working well as a team. And decisions are being overruled so it's not like he's kowtowing to her.
Think there needs to be more separation between the refs, otherwise they can influence each other too much, aren't fully independent and are more prone to bias.
Conduct stoke at 11 minutes is v harsh imo, very minimal movement and Dussourd plays through it. Can't expect players to be completely balanced and still at all times, sometimes they will move back after hitting the ball.
That being said, the refs do a great job under a lot of pressure!
Exactly what I was thinking...The main referee and video referee must be able communicate only final decision or specific point of action... otherwise video referee may get influenced.
@@imkuldeep Yeah, otherwise the video refs are likely just to look at whatever the main refs have said to them, and are less likely to review any decisions completely independently.
3:00 if you turn on the ball it can only be let. Its in the rules but not used by refs, does anyone know why?
Except that isn't a turn under the rules, does anyone know why?
@@robbinburns6329 What? Its on the left wall and he turns to play it on his forehand.
The ball had never passed behind Auguste, so not technically a turn in this instance, more a pivot.
8.13 Turning - Turning is the action of the player who strikes, or is in a position to strike, the ball to the right of the body after the ball has passed behind it to the left or vice versa, whether the player physically turns or not.
@@PeterP.-xx5wi See the explanation given by squashtv. But also, even if Dussourd had actually "turned" under the rules, there still exists the possibility of a stroke due to interference with the swing itself, although the chance of the call being let would likely increase a lot.
On the first decision it should have been a let. Yet they called it a no let. If you watch the players backhands you'll see they never ever do a follow through that will take off somebodies head. Yet Auguste did just that and Marwan rightfully said "hey, this clown did that on purpose. Give me a let." These judges... One admits they were not looking and the other wakes up and reviews just the last shot and does not get the context. Truly awful judging here.
Scumbagy vs Dicksword
Don’t be mean. You’ll feel better about yourself.
@@57pickles The alternative is to praise cheating
حكم
غير عادل
Un fair refereeing
Which points would you have refereed differently? 👀
@@squashtv Probably the stroke at 9:08. I understand the reasoning but the shot is so bad that ever if Dussourd made an effort to the ball, it wouldn't have made a difference