Review of the decisions given for the exercise revealed that the majority of referees of all grades either do not recognise blocking or are reluctant to deal with it by award of strokes. Replays of selected rallies from this game were included in the video clips of blocking on Day Two and suggestions were made on signals to look for to recognise blocking.
Word Test
The word test confirmed that recall was greatest from beginning and end of the list apart from unusual words that stuck in the memory of almost everyone. The exercise was intended to illustrate that a referee's performance will be considered good if the first few decisions and the last few decisions are correct and there are no howlers in between. Provided the referee has made a good start to the match, marginally incorrect decisions in the middle of a match are less likely to upset players or be remembered by the audience. It is therefore important to prepare appropriately prior to a match and not lose concentration towards the end.
Rules Changes, Singles
There was general agreement that the 2001 Rules revision had been beneficial with the inclusion of the requirement to make every effort to get to and play the ball particularly beneficial. Some minor ambiguities were identified where revision would be beneficial but the consensus was that the principle objective of the next revision should be to simplify the wording of the rules.
Doubles
Views expressed on the doubles game by those who had experience of the Commonwealth Games competitions were:
The game shows the tremendous speed of reaction and skill of the top players. Exhibition doubles is a great spectacle. Competition matches were too long. Suggestions for how this could be avoided were to make games first to nine PAR, to have a fixed time for each game or to require players to play alternate shots (as table-tennis). The game was perceived as potentially dangerous, requiring very good technique. There are too many lets. The application of the rules that evolved at the Commonwealth Games (no strokes awarded) is inconsistent with the rules as currently written. These specify award of a stroke for avoidable interference. An alternative form of doubles ("Jumbo Doubles"), using a longer court, is gaining popularity in Asia.
Video Analysis
Digital video clips were used to illustrate a number of interference situations. The value of these clips, with slow motion inserts, was generally considered an invaluable aid for refereeing courses and many delegates expressed an interest in purchasing copies. Most delegates also expressed a wish for a consensus "correct" decision to accompany each clip.
Blocking
Blocking can be used to obstruct the opponent from reaching balls in the front corners or to force the opponent to take a line to the ball that does not concede advantage in mid-court. Signals to look out for in support of a decision to award a stroke for blocking were identified:
The player, for example, tries to draw shoulders together, indicating that they know they are in the way. The position of the ball. Blocking is often used to prevent the opponent getting in front to attack a poor length shot. It is important for the referee in these situations to be able to judge that a poor length shot has been played and that the incoming player could have reached and played the ball on the attempted line of approach passing in front of the striker. The player tries to justify their position before the referee has given a decision, often used as a tactic to confuse the referee into giving a yes let decision when a stroke would be the correct decision. Belated second movement - "I know I'm still in the way".
Backswing Interference
The rules stipulate award of a stroke if a reasonable swing is prevented. The criterion for award of a stroke was suggested as both ball and opponent being simultaneously within the arc of a reasonable swing and the player ready to play a shot.
One indication that the opponent is too close is leaning of the body or movement of the head to avoid injury.
It was considered important to consider whether the player was ready to play a shot before award of a stroke. Balls coming out of the front-wall/side-wall nick in particular often warrant a yes-let decision rather than stroke if the striker is not fully prepared to play a shot.
Contact of the racket was an obvious indicator that the opponent was too close, but judgement is needed on whether excessive arc of swing contributed to the contact.
A point to look out for is entrapment where a player holds the shot beyond the point when it can be played hoping the opponent behind will be tricked into moving into the swing arc. A sudden and unnecessary movement backwards or excessive backswing of the racket should also not be rewarded with a stroke.
Other factors to be taken into consideration were identified as the quality of shot (a shot through the middle of the court being more likely to lead to backswing interference), and whether the opponent is moving towards or away from a position of interference.
Effort
It was emphasised that Rule 12 requires the player to make every effort to get to and play the ball. Therefore, having got past the point of interference, the player is expected to play the ball unless the interference has caused the player to reach the ball in a position that compromises playing the shot.
Points to consider when deciding whether a no-let decision is appropriate are the position of the player's body and racket in relation to the ball and the quality of the shot to be retrieved (it being considered more likely that a player will to choose not to play a tight ball).
Front Wall Interference
The criteria for award of a stroke when the opponent has failed to clear the front wall were discussed. The first criterion is based purely on geometry. For a stroke to be awarded the opponent must be within the triangle formed by the two sides of the front wall and the ball at the position where the player would have played the shot. However it is also important to consider whether the player would have struck the ball from behind his/her body. If the ball is played from behind the body it cannot be struck at an acute angle cross-court. A stroke should only be awarded if the player could clearly have struck the opponent with a ball travelling directly to the front wall and a yes-let decision may be appropriate in these circumstances even if the opponent has failed to fully clear the front wall.
It was also considered important to judge whether the player was ready to play the ball (racket ready) at the moment front wall interference occurred.
Code of Conduct
Video incidents of C of C offences were viewed in the knowledge that Graham Ryding (on behalf of PSA) had earlier confirmed that the players would like referees to exercise firm control of bad behaviour.
Considerable variation in opinion of the appropriate penalty for specific offences was evident, even among senior referees. Some believe that the use of strict penalties for a first offence sends a message that can help to control behaviour from the start, whereas some others were concerned that it was necessary to avoid penalties for minor infringements to ensure more serious infringements could be dealt with without recourse to award of game or match.
CofC offences such as racket abuse or audible obscenity were judged to warrant one step higher penalty if in response to a referee's decision rather a response to the player's own mistake.
The difficulty of dealing with abuse in an unfamiliar language was recognised and the consensus view was that a punishment should be applied even if it is not possible to understand what was said.
If a player leaves the court to argue decisions it was agreed a conduct penalty should be awarded unless the referee has given permission for the player to leave the court because of communication problems.
There was disagreement on how to deal with aggressive inter-actions between players. My personal view was that this must be addressed firmly and promptly at the first occurrence.
It was agreed that any non-verbal form of dissent should be dealt with but there was a lack of consensus on the severity of penalty to be applied.
The example of an extreme reaction to a referee's decision was generally thought to warrant award of the game. Prompt award of a conduct stroke in the early stages of the incident may have avoided escalation.
It was pointed out that players in the German league are fined for any conduct warning received.
General Comments
The small size of room dictated a theatre style layout for participants. More space with provision of tables would have provided the option for more effective syndicate group working. On the plus side the visual aids provided fully met expectations.
The range of refereeing experience amongst the delegates was too wide for the conference to have been of full value for all. In future it would be preferable to either restrict attendance to existing and candidate international referees or run parallel sessions for different groups of attendees.
A number of people put in a lot of work in preparation for this conference, and particular thanks are due to Lorraine Harding for all logistical arrangements and to Stafford Murray for his professional help with preparation of the video clips. I would also like to thank Kirsten Barnes for freely giving her time to prepare and present, with style, the session looking at what makes a great referee. The participation of David Pearson and Graham Ryding in this session was also appreciated by everyone present.
Bruce Kettle
Conference Facilitator
P.S. As promised in Vienna, please find attached:
Asia Regional Referee Programme (Word document)
An Introduction to the Conference (PowerPoint presentation)
Jumbo Doubles Tournament Information from Munir Shah (Word document)
Kirsten Barnes' Presentation (PowerPoint presentation)
Kirsten Barnes' Post Conference Report (Word document)
List of Attending for the Conference (Word document)
The Memory test (PowerPoint presentation)
Oceania Regional Referee Programme (Word document)
Anne Smith's Review of the IR Programme (PowerPoint presentation)
Vienna Presentation Documents - ZIP archive