Unmitigated Disaster From: Anonymous March 8, 2014
Officiating Program
U.S. Squash says..."In
response to feedback from the junior squash community, US Squash is
adjusting the timelines surrounding the requirement of attending
in-club officiating clinics for junior players. All players planning to
participate in the 2014 U.S. Junior Championships (Closed), the 2014
U.S. Junior Silver Championships or the 2014 U.S. Junior Bronze
Championships, no longer have to complete an in-club officiating clinic
prior to the registration deadline. However, all players planning to
compete in any of these championships still must complete the new
age-appropriate on-line club-level referee exam by February 25, 2014."
They say that..."Since
November, more than 300 players have attended clinics. The clinics are
an integral piece of US Squash’s initiative to improve officiating and
sportsmanship at all events. The shift to a later date requirement is
designed to continue this momentum while still allowing players to
fulfill their busy academic and extracurricular schedules."
They say..."Juniors
will be required to complete an in-club clinic by November 4, 2014 in
order to remain in the rankings. Clinics are currently being hosted
across the country with new dates added to the schedule frequently."
However, wouldn't you
think...as a World Squash Federation member, U.S. Squash would have
consulted with the organization's Rules Committee before structuring
their junior Officiating Clinic course presentation. They didn't! As a
result, the course is an "unmitigated disaster," totally incompetent
and an embarrassment!
After careful review, it
was found that the best that can be said about the course is that it is
mediocre and amateurish. It is structurally illogical! The content is
deficient in several respects. Here are its problems...
Slide 1: The slide is inappropriate and unnecessary. Its two topics are more suited to advanced adult referees. Slide 2: "Confidence and Demeanor:" wrong words. How many juniors would understand the word Demeanor? Slide 3: Incorrect punctuation (colons, not semi-colons). Safety: players must put safety first -
but the heading says that this is the responsibility of the officials.
In any case, it is not
the "officials," but the Referee who is responsible for safety. Fair
play must be
"resumed." When was it suspended? Slide 4: Conduct Rules. There is only ONE. (Rule 15) Slide 5: Injuries: Presentation is inaccurate. Self-inflicted (add hyphen) "Accidental" and
"deliberate or dangerous" apply to both injuries and bleeding. Both
slides #4 and #5
should be moved to the end of the program. Slide 6: Should be the FIRST slide in the program! Slide 7: Add to the Marker's duties as the first item: Match announcement. Slide 8: Typo "not let." Should be "no let." Players do not appeal for lets, strokes and no lets. A
player may request a let - and a request for a let includes a request
for a stroke. No player ever requests a no let! The use of the word
"appeal" is incorrect in this context; A player
may indeed appeal against the call or lack of call of the Marker. This
needs to be added
to the slide. "Must also correct the Marker if the incorrect call is
made." Incorrect: the
Referee says nothing unless a player appeals. Add to Referee's duties:
Corrects the "score" if the Marker makes an error. Slide 9: "Post warm" - what is that!? Should be: "Post warm-up." Slide 10: Advanced Rule: there are no "advanced" rules. This slide needs to be expanded. (see below) Slide 11: Court diagram: Why is this in the program? Incorrect Heading: "Boundaries and
Outlines." Better: Court Markings. If retained, it should be placed
early in the program,
close to the Marker's and Referee's duties.
Obvious omission: No
slide on the most important aspect of the Rules: Interference! This is
the most difficult (and contentious) part of the Referee's duties - and
it therefore needs to be covered thoroughly.
Additionally, the
interference video examples are far too advanced for the typical
(especially beginner) junior player to comprehend and/or make decisions
on.
All in all, the
program is not satisfactory and should not (have or be) distributed
and/or presented by U.S. Squash or its' representatives as a standard
program to juniors (or anyone else) through which to teach the Rules of
Squash and Refereeing!
Post Script:
The International Olympic Committee gave the World Squash Federation
funds for development. The WSF Board decided to spend a certain amount
of that money on a survey of refereeing. The recommendations given to
World Squash focused on four identified areas: administration,
education, communication and rewards. Furthermore...an emphasis was put
firstly on differentiating refereeing levels (elite/professional versus
grassroots) - and secondly, on the different phases of the professional
refereeing life-cycle, recruitment, retention, development and
retirement. Wouldn't it have been prudent for U.S. Squash to take into
account (before structuring their "junior" officiating program) that
which World Squash decided to emphasize..."differentiating refereeing
levels (elite/professional versus grassroots).
