|
WSF REFEREESí REVIEW |
Editor: Bill West
It has been
a while in the making, but here at last is the new Review.
Searching
for inspiration through back issues, I came across this in Issue Number
One..... ëStep forward all of you who thought that the newsletter did not exist
any moreí (Many thanks to my predecessor from Upper Hutt for that.) And this
got me thinking - sticking to deadlines is made that much more difficult when
the deadlines are in the near future. So, expect to see the next issue of the
Review before the year 2010!
Also,
in Issue Number Two, Chas Evans managed to get 5 referees, from the 473
recipients of the newsletter at that time, to put pen to paper and send in
articles - Iím hoping to beat that. In those days the process involved pen,
paper, envelope and postage, but now with our modern technology and ease of
e-mails, things couldnít be easier. So, I await refereeing stories with baited
breath.
This
issue, Number 9, has it all.....
Fitness
training, millionaires, wealthy referees, ageism, apologetic referees, bad
lights, doubles frilly knickers and more.
Graham
Waters gets things rolling with the Directorís Report.
Thanks
go to Squash Australia for permission to use articles from their ëRules and
Refereeing Committee Newsletterí, as well as to ëThe Squash Playerí magazine
for allowing the reproduction of some material from Issue 1 (2002).
Editor
š š š š š
FROM
THE DIRECTOR ...
Another
year has passed, and the WSF Referee Program continues to have mixed success.
There have been several world events that have plagued the major professional
circuits and, by extension, the assigning of referees to those events. From
ìhoof and mouthî to the horrendous events of September 11th to the
general economic slump and the financial problems of event sponsors and
underwriters, they have all combined to wreak havoc on our sport, at least at
the world level. We can only hope that things will improve in 2002. We did
manage to assign a number of referees and assessors to a variety of events in
2001, and a complete list of these can be found below.
The
annual Referee Review was completed during the first half of the year, this
year including more players on the Review Board in an attempt to give them
greater input into the appointment process. We lost some more colleagues who
did not stand for reappointment, and I wish Gavin Whyte and Quintin Hill the
very best in their future endeavours. The same goes for John Robinson who has decided
to step down from his Assessor position. On the other hand, we welcome Jill
Wood, Ian Cherington, John Massarella, and Mike Riley to our ranks, and
congratulate Nasser Zahran on his promotion to World Referee.
On
the negative side, the WSF has received reports about unsatisfactory
performances by WSF Referees at a number of events, and we will be looking for
ways to eliminate that. Assessments are the key to recognising problems when
they occur, and we must all attempt to do our fair share of these whenever
possible. We have also received (thankfully, only a couple) negative reports
about WSF Refereeís attitudes and behaviour at events. We must all realise that
we are there for only one reason, and that is to provide the best possible
refereeing to the players participating in that event. Yes, we should be
treated properly and our agreed upon expenses covered by the promoters and
organisers, and we are taking steps to try to ensure that happens. However,
once assigned, we must devote our full attention to the task at hand, and treat
everything else as secondary.
The
Refereesí Conference in Melbourne was successful, attracting 56 participants
from 20 countries and every WSF region. There was much open and frank
discussion and exchange of ideas, and this can only be positive in improving
the overall standard of refereeing. The WSF Referees present (I think there
were 14 of us) met and reviewed some aspects of the program, leading to the
revised assessment form, the introduction of a Marker Assessment Form, and the
revised Tournament Promoterís Agreement, which you all should have received by
now.
Jack
Allen and I had a very interesting discussion with Geoff Hunt, who believes
that referees pay too much attention to the effort being made by the incoming
striker, and not enough attention to the clearing effort on the part of the
outgoing striker, particularly at the front of the court. We certainly
understand his point, although we believe that both are equally important.
A
number of WSF Referees also met with Gawain Briars, the Executive Director of
the PSA, and Omar El Borolossy, one of the PSA Board members. We watched a tape
of the Super Series Finals match between Jonathon Power and David Palmer, which
was a brutal affair with a lot of physical contact and far too much discussion
with the Referee, most of it not very polite. The purpose of this meeting was
not to castigate the poor Referee who had to try to deal with it at the time,
but to learn so that we can better deal with the problem in the future. Both
Gawain and Omar agreed that the behaviour on court in that match was
unacceptable, and the match was certainly no advertisement for the sport. They
both suggested that referees must issue Conduct Warnings at the first sign of
trouble, and must not be reluctant to escalate the penalties if the behaviour
persists. Iíve seen it done, Iíve done it myself, it really works, although
there will obviously be some situations (and players) more challenging than
others.
While
on the PSA, by now you will all have seen the new PSA Conduct Form. They insist
that these must be completed and returned to the PSA office within 48 hours of
the offence occurring, presumably by FAX. Only then, they claim, can
appropriate action be taken in a timely fashion. I also asked Gawain if he
wanted those forms completed on PSA players who were competing in non-PSA
events, such as the World Team Championships. His answer was a categorical NO.
Conduct violations should be reported to the sanctioning body of the event
(WSF, National Association, etc.). Speaking for the WSF, we will forward any
Rule 17 Conduct Report Forms on to the playerís National Association for
consideration of further sanctions, AND, if deemed appropriate, to PSA or WISPA
for their consideration. In any case, the Tournament Referee must submit these
forms immediately after the event is complete. Any penalties or sanctions must
be applied as soon as possible after the incident occurs for maximum effect.
A very positive note this year has been the decision
by ManCom to tangibly recognise the achievement of all Referees who are
selected to referee the final match at World Championship events. These events
include the two World Opens, both PSA and WISPA, the World Junior Individual
Championships, all four World Team Championships, and the Commonwealth Games. I
am sure that the Olympic Games will be added to this list in due course. All of
the Referees at this yearís World Championship events (Penang and Melbourne)
were presented with their plaques on court during the other presentations. We
have also been able to compile a list of all Referees who have refereed these
matches over the past few years, dating back to 1997. Those Referees have all
now received their plaques to commemorate those occasions as well.
In
closing, I would like to take this opportunity to wish you all the very best
for 2002. I sincerely hope that we can continue to improve the WSF Referee
Program, increase the number of events to which we can assign WSF Referees,
foster better relationships with both professional associations, event
promoters and organisers, improve our credibility with the players themselves,
and provide more training for referees in countries without formal programs of
their own, all for the betterment of the sport.
š š š š š
Seen recently on a notice board beside the squash
courts in one of those trendy and expensive new multi-sport fitness clubs:
7pm.
Monday evenings
Fitness
training for squash players
To
include:
Warm-up
/ Warm-down
Stretching
Court
movement
Sprints
Refereeing
and Marking!!!
..... You
have been warned!
Is it true that a certain (nameless) Referee, who had
been assigned to officiate at an eveningís challenge match between two top ten
players, decided to take the afternoon off work so that he could get to the
venue early and check out the conditions. Upon eventually inspecting the show
court, he said to the club owner ìthese lights are a bit dim...î. Upon which
the owner replied: ìNot as dim as you mate, the match is tomorrow nightî.
š š š š š
This football article
appeared in a British newspaper six years ago:
ëYou could probably cut out this article and use it
again, or something pretty much like it, in 20 years from now.
When I was a lad, and all that, the football world and
his wife were always moaning about referees and refereeing inconsistencies.
Itís the same today. And, I wouldnít mind wagering, itíll still be the same
when I go to that great press box in the sky. What gets me is itís all so
tiresome, so pointless, so predictable - and so boring.
On Saturday night it was Howard Wilkinsonís turn to
whinge, about Gary Kellyís sending off at Anfield. We were told on the TV
programme ëMatch of the Dayí, that Bruce Rioch was seething too. Okay, so all
the big time managers have livelihoods on the line. But they win some and lose
some in the refereeing game. It all evens out. Rioch wasnít exactly thumping a
tub in the name of justice when David Ginola was booked for what was clearly
not one of his occasional dives at Highbury the other week - and Nigel
Winterburn escaped without punishment. And I canít recall Wilkinson rallying to
the cause of Derbyís Gary Rowett when he was sent off, for a less clear-cut
foul than Kellyís, against Leeds.
That refs are on a hiding to nothing was evident at St
Jamesís Park last Wednesday when Stephen Lodge was made out to be the villain
of the piece by the home fans in Newcastleís FA Cup exit against Chelsea. He
may have sent off Darren Peacock, for a second bookable offence, but he awarded
Newcastle a penalty they shouldnít have had and missed a blatant tug by Warren
Barton which stopped Terry Phelan as the Chelsea full-back tore towards goal.
Not all referees can be as perfect as Keith Cooper,
the Welshman in charge of Newcastleís match against Bolton on Saturday. He
missed nothing (including a Barton tug on Sasa Curcic, which led to Boltonís
goal), helped the game to flow, and displayed admirable restraint - settling for
strong lectures, for instance, when Philippe Albert showed dissent and when
Barton made a tough challenge. The result was no cards (not even the hint of a
yellow), two happy managers, two satisfied sets of fans - and a thoroughly
entertaining match. The chances are, though, that Mr Cooper will be embroiled
in some so-called controversy before the season is out.
Referees are (whisper this to managers and fans) only human. Everyone makes mistakes.í
After
the extensive press coverage of Vicky Botwright during last yearís British
Open, are we to see more of the players in the future and could it prove a
distraction for the officials?
There
are similarities with tennis as the following article shows:
ëOne
of the worldís top tennis stars has attacked rival Anna Kournikova as a ìblonde
cash machineî, accusing the sportís officials of preferring players to be
pretty rather than talented.
In
a sensational inside account of the game, French ace Nathalie Tauziat rubbishes
Russian Kournikova as a ìLolitaî and reveals how other women players take
malicious pleasure in proving that her good looks do not win tournaments.
ìAgainst
her, they all play harder to make her realise that on court, being the
prettiest is useless,î says Tauziat, 32, in a new book. She is critical of the
Womenís Tennis Association. ìFor the WTA, Anna is a really powerful cash
machine, a blonde godsend,î she said.
Recalling
the match in which American Lindsay Davenport was ìlynchedî by the crowd with a
barrage of boos and jeers while Kournikova claimed victory, Tauziat complained:
ìFor completely anti-sporting reasons, no one at the WTA even blinked an eyelid
to see Lindsay lose.
ìAesthetics
and charisma are seen as more important than sporting performance and it wonít
change as long as the box office puts Kournikova ahead of Davenport just
because she is prettier.î
Tauziat
also singles out former champion Chris Evert, once famed for flaunting her
frilly knickers.
ìFor
the public, Evert was class incarnate,î she writes. ìShe was gracious,
feminine, all smiles...but as far as we players were concerned, she was the one
who best knew how to influence the linesmen in her favour. This no longer works
as the officials have become as professional as the players.î
Of
Kournikova, Tauziat comments cattily: ìHer modelís body is the origin of her
colossal fortune - colossal compared to her results. But Anna sells. Everyone
around her is actively dreaming up more and more ingenious plans to reinforce
the image of the Lolita with the perfect figure.î
In
her book The Hidden Side of Womenís Tennis, Tauziat comments that: ìOnly Anna
could inspire a television programme about how difficult it is for linesmen to
concentrate when they are behind her.î
We in squash are very fortunate that our officials are
trained not to be so easily distracted!
š š š š š
During the last Junior Menís World Championships in
Milan, an SRA official who was on hand to help with the refereeing, needed some
spare cash so he went to a cash machine and withdrew some Italian liras. Not
being used to the currency, he ended up inadvertently asking for the wrong
amount resulting in the machine dispensing millions of liras. The next day,
after the error had been pointed out to him, he was obliged to return to the
bank and change the bulk of it back. But it was good while it lasted.
William Winter feels that
there needs to be some clarification of policies between the governing bodies
and he writes:
ëWhile
most senior tour players behave better than for many years, some most
definitely do not. Criticism of Referees is rife and I suppose if the cap fits
we had better wear it.
But
am I dreaming when I suggest that just possibly some of the current players
have taken conning the Referees to a fine art. If they spend so much time
trying to con, is it surprising that they get some decisions with which they
disagree plus a sprinkling of just plain bad ones? Just how often do some
players I can think of go for their opponent rather than a determined effort to
play the ball? In all honesty there are no Referees who can spot them all.
Instead
of this constant criticism of referees, is it remotely possible to suggest that
the players should concentrate on cleaning up THEIR act. From a developing
referee in England who recently refereed a pro match and (rightly) penalised a
player for hurling his racket across the court but got hell for it afterwards,
I received the following:- "...why, oh why, don't these so-called pros try
to win a game with their undoubted talents and not by 'conning' the officials.
Paying spectators including youngsters should not be exposed to this petulant
behaviourî.
I
have not resigned from refereeing but with my confidence and desire to be
involved very low, I am taking a back seat for a while. I would guess that all
but the thickest skinned of us have suffered from lack of confidence at some
point in our careers as referees and my heart bleeds for the writer of that
letter. Am I getting old and further to the right of Genghis Khan or is the
solution for all of us lucky enough to watch and officiate the top exponents of
the game to get seriously tough with any perceived or imagined 'conning' and
tell the PSA that this is why and if occasionally we get it wrong and someone
is unjustly penalised then tough, the players are getting what they do really
deserve. I think I'm on track here; I think the referees' committee of the WSF
should think about setting a lead, laying down some clear policies and agreeing
them with PSA and WISPA. Strike a chord with anyone??í
Graham Dixon felt
strongly enough about some recent press reports to write to The Squash Player
(Issue 1, 2002). Because of the important nature of his comments and that
magazineís editorial response, they are reproduced in full:
ëAs
a past referee I cannot resist the opportunity to comment on the general health
of refereeing as highlighted in some of the press articles I have read
recently, particularly 'Murder on the Squash Court' on The Squash Player site
(www.squashplayer.co.uk).
I
cannot remember a time when there was so much negative reporting on refereeing
decisions and players' reactions to them. That is not to say the '70s and '80s
didn't have their share of problems. There were many difficult players around
in those times and consequently difficult games to referee, but rarely did
matches get out of hand or were won and lost because of poor decisions.
In
the SP article Jonah Barrington suggested that changes in the game had
contributed to the problem, even implying that there is more "cut and
thrust" in today's game. I disagree, although I do agree that there is
more "trading of drop shots at the front", which contributes to some
of today's problems. More importantly, what is the solution?
First
of all, let us not blame it on the players, as often seems to be implied. The
general standard of sportsmanship is certainly no worse than in the past and I
would suggest better. The rules have been sufficiently tuned over the years
(albeit not in every case positively) that referees can control any match and
any player satisfactorily. This should ensure the right outcome to a match and
also ensure that behaviour stays within acceptable bounds. And by this, I don't
mean to suggest that players all have to behave in the same way. There is ample
scope in the rules to accept different personalities. What we need to ensure is
levels of sportsmanship that don't damage the fabric of the game. Especially
when its future is precariously balanced in the eyes of the media, on whom the
international game is largely dependent.
So
I don't think we should blame the players or the rules. So what is left? The
referees themselves have to take the main share of the blame (as they always
have). How then do we improve the standard?
We
can train existing referees better, or attract people with a better
understanding of the game (or both). Training involves assessing and counselling.
But that has its difficulties:
1. Assessing and counselling is
less attractive than refereeing.
2. It is difficult for a
tournament to justify money for assessing. Can the governing bodies afford it,
and if they can, will they allocate some money in that direction? (When I was
an international assessor, in five years I was invited to one tournament.)
3. You can't make a silk purse
out of a sow's ear.
The
solution is to make refereeing more attractive so that we can pick from a wider
base. And what makes it attractive at present? Only kudos, travel, and a love
of the game. It is not enough. You have to reward it financially or at least
ensure that the person is not out of pocket. Much as I, and no doubt many
others, would have loved to go to Melbourne, it is difficult to justify the
expenditure and time to yourself, let alone your spouse and family. Along with
the financial reward, there needs to be genuine gratitude and appreciation, and
this includes a balance between criticism and praise. The media can play its
part.í
ëThe
perennial problem of refereeing and player behaviour has once again reared its
ugly head following Alan Thatcher's article and Jonah Barrington's comments
that can be read on The Squash Player site www.squashplayer.co.uk. Perhaps the
sense of crisis, however, is overstated.
Graham
Dixon writes to The Squash Player on the issue and he is able to take the long
view.
It
is easy to see disciplinary action as a panacea to the problems but as Dixon, one
of the most experienced and respected international referees, points out it is
largely the referees' own fault. Having for years imposed a policy of 'tough
refereeing' on the sport by excessively rewarding and penalising players with
points, they are surprised at players' inordinate attempts to influence their
decisions and seek points by not playing the ball.
The
solution is not that difficult but it is not immediate. We want a ëculture'
where players look to play the ball and we cannot even remotely approach this
when referees continually reward players for not playing the ball by awarding
easy points.
Perhaps
referees should be mindful of how they would like the game to be played, for it
is not obvious in watching many of the 'top' exponents.
Squash
is a brilliant sporting activity that requires co‑operation and
sportsmanship of those who participate in it. Is it sometimes only when we put
a referee in charge that the competition becomes less fair and less edifying
for spectators?í
Some
strong opinions there and although I think many of us would go
along with the
editorial view that the sense of crisis is overstated, it is nevertheless true
that there are issues which need addressing.
Whether
the playersí behaviour towards the referee was better in the '70s and '80s than
now is open to question. I remember seeing several matches during the ë80s
where certain players behaved very badly, in some cases affecting the refereeís
decisions. I also recall matches where the officials lost control during their
matches and were then replaced (in one horrendous match, the replacement
himself was replaced after only a few minutes as the encounter descended into
farce!) There was also the occasion when one official, deciding that he had had
enough of the playersí persistent arguing, threw the marking board onto the
court telling them to do it themselves. And this was during major events!
Grahamís
point about there needing to be genuine gratitude and appreciation of the
referee is a valid one and his highlighting of the need for a financial return
is perhaps a timely reminder of this thorny subject (see the article ëDo Squash
Referees Need To Be Independently Wealthy?í later in this review).
Confidence
is critically important to be able to referee correctly and if there are
problems with regard to an undermining of the referees, then they need to be
looked at. William mentions the difficulties when players try to con the
referee - something which can affect decision making - and as he says, there
are no referees who can spot all the conning situations. So, at some time or
other, all referees are going to have their confidence dented by one player or
another.
The
Squash Player editorial wants a ëculture' where players look to play the ball -
as do all referees - but in practice it is not that easy. The vital
requirements mentioned are the co‑operation and sportsmanship of those
who participate in the game - the players and referees.
Graham
feels more predisposed to blame the referees for the current problems and suggests
that if the job were made more attractive then there would be a larger group of
referees from which to chose.
It
could be said that some of the problems highlighted in the letters are not of
the referees making and that these are the very things that can make the job of
refereeing unattractive. A financial return for the job - either full or
part-time - would be welcome and would obviously make the position a lot more
attractive, but whether it would avoid the difficulties which can lead to an
undermining of confidence is another matter. (Editor)
š š š š š
Overheard
during the last Junior Menís World Championships in Milan:
A woman
spectator watching the first round action taking place, says to her husband -
ëIíve never seen so many fit young men at a major sporting event like this who
need to wear spectaclesí.
š š š š š
When
should referees be retired?
It
may not yet be that easy to set certain age limits, as this article suggests:
ëFootball referee Steve Lodge is set to win a reprieve
from retirement following his threat to take the English Football Association
(FA) to court under the European Human Rights law. The Act out-laws ageism, but
the FA argues that Lodge signed his seasonís contract before the Act was
passed.
A
rules change is on the way after a Dutch case in which Dick Jol has been
quietly allowed to carry on after threatening to sue his association if he was
stood down at 45. Lodge insists on carrying on to a later cut-off age of 48.
Both
sides are poised to emerge with a dignified compromise.í
š š š š š
1. Jahangirís
ball rebounds from the front wall, over his head. Rodney asks for a let. The
referee had decided he would allow a let. Before the referee could say
anything, the ball went out of court.
What
is the refereeís decision?
Which
rule is applicable?
2. During
the Menís World Open in Amsterdam in 1988, which famous jazz trumpeter fell to
his death outside the playerís hotel?
Was
he pushed?
Was
there also another death beside the hotel during the same event?
Was
it murder?
(Answers
on a postcard to the Dutch police.)
3. At
which event did the roof fall in on two W.S.F. assigned referees?
What
nationality were the players involved and how many floors above the refereesí
room was theirs?
4. In
Milan, why did the referees have to eat the same food for dinner as they had
eaten for lunch?
5. At
the same tournament, who was the referee who ordered ëSteak Tartareí and got a
shock when raw meat arrived?
š š š š š
As there are now a number of squash courts around with
differently coloured walls as opposed to the standard white, does Rule 7.1 need
to include a proviso that the substitute court has the same colouring as the
original one? After all, sensitive players may not be able to handle a sudden
change of colour, so wouldnít it be safer to give them the opportunity to
refuse to move on the grounds of colour?
š š š š š
Is
it a sign of the times or is it just me that thinks there are less helpers
around at major squash events now-a-days? Iíve noticed that at some
tournaments, referees seem to be landed with extra tasks like looking for
sweeping brushes (hidden in locked cupboards), towels (for the court floor),
drinking water, light switches, heating controls, chairs, as well as closing
windows, mending court door catches, bandaging players and non-players,
arranging the meal times, driving players in the courtesy cars, organizing the
last bus to the hotel, translating, telling the players where to go (to find
the courts) and telling the television cameramen where to go (to get the best
shots, of course!). And in between all this, giving precise calls and making
excellent decisions for which some players would seem to be eternally grateful.
(Editor)
š š š š š
Recently
heard quotes:
An
ex-professional cricketer reminiscing about times past:
ì......The
spirit of the game used to be - the refís decision is final. So, irrespective
of whether you got a good decision or bad decision, you accepted it - you
turned and walked off or you accepted that was the end of the matter. Not any
more......î
Another
quote (fill in your own sport):
ì......Players
must perform well - they must win. If they donít win, they must take it out on
someone. If they canít take it out on themselves, theyíll take it out on the
referee......î
ëAn England league football referee is facing libel
action if he does not apologise to a player he sent off for abusive behaviour.
Steven Edwards alleges ref. Alan Purnell libelled him in his match report to
the Gloucestershire Football Association following a game between Fishponds and
Park Rangers in May 2001.í
š š š š š
Professional
squash referees is something the game doesnít yet have, but the subject keeps
cropping up. Jonathon Power recently said that in his view, it was the next
step in improving the game and he commented further.....
ëYou canít have elderly amateurs refereeing young
professionals any longer. Its got to change. Itís time we had more
ex-professionals in charge instead of these amateurs. The game is too fast for
them to cope. If people are going to put money into improving the game then
they have to make this a priority.í
Where
do we start here? There are so many issues..... ëelderly
amateursí, ëyoung professionalsí, ëex-professionalsí,
ëgame is too fast for themí.....
Without
taking the generalising path, perhaps a debate (amongst all concerned) wouldnít
be amiss to consider these and all the other points.
It
might, nevertheless, be an opportune moment to consider other sports and their
arbitrators.
The
following two articles appeared in the British press three years ago and give
the low-down on officials from different sports:
Fiona
Edwards, 31, has been a professional tennis umpire for the past year. She
umpires at the four major Grand Slam tournaments which include Wimbledon.
Iíve
always enjoyed the game although Iím not a great player myself. About ten years
ago I saw an advert in a Wimbledon programme and thought it would be the ideal
way to see the tournament for free and without having to queue in the rain.
None,
apart from a love of the game. To become a member of the British Tennis Umpires
Association (BTUA) you have to complete five training days, a weekend course
and then pass a test on the rules of tennis.
Everyone
in the BTUA is a volunteer and starts out calling lines and umpiring in lower
level tournaments. You move up a grading system according to the number of
matches youíve umpired and after enough experience get to work on the
international circuit. There are very few professional umpires. Iím one of only
eight who work for the International Tennis Federation.
Usually
about two and they vary in length depending on the surface and whether itís men
or women playing. As a female umpire I tend to do the womenís matches, which
are shorter. At Wimbledon you donít know which games you are going to be
umpiring until the day.
Not
really, although you always get a few who give you a hard time. I havenít had
any of the big players shouting at me yet.
I
did the Ladies doubles at Wimbledon last year and umpired the Ladies semi-final
between Arantxa Sanchez Vicario and Lindsay Davenport in the recent French
Open.
Iím
a flight attendant with United Airlines which means I donít get much free time.
When Iím not flying Iím umpiring. United are quite flexible and I can swap
flights with other attendants when the tennis season is in full swing.
Apart
from going to the Grand Slams in France, Australia, America and the UK I have
done tournaments in Croatia, Italy and Germany this year and Iím going to
Madrid after Wimbledon.
As
a professional I get paid about £650 a week (900 US dollars) and I have a
10-week contract. Volunteers only get their expenses although experienced
umpires sometimes get a fee as well, but it depends on the tournament.
You
get to see all the top tournaments although you can be called away to umpire a
match before the one youíre watching finishes which can be frustrating. You
also get to buy or are given tickets for your friends and family.
I
love feeling a part of a big tournament such as Wimbledon because itís so
exciting.
At
the moment I enjoy doing both but ultimately Iíd like to concentrate on
umpiring.
Barry
Dudleston, 52, has been a cricket umpire for the last 15 years. He started by
playing the game professionally and now umpires at first-class fixtures, Test
matches and one-day internationals.
To
work for the English Cricket Board you have to pass an exam on the rules of the
game and get at least one yearís practical experience as an umpire on the
reserve list. Most umpires have been cricketers beforehand.
I
get to the cricket ground at about 9.30am, matches start at 11am and play
usually finishes at 6.30pm.
A
white coat, white jacket and navy blue trousers. On Sundays we wear a coloured
jacket because the ball is white.
Itís
important to know when to concentrate and when to relax. You have to be
completely keyed up when the ball is being bowled but after itís gone through
to the wicket keeper you can switch off.
In
one game the wicket keeper threw the ball at the bowling end which hit me on
the back of the head and I had to have six stitches. You donít get hit very
often but itís dangerous when you do because youíre so close to the action.
I
go all over England for games but have yet to umpire a Test match abroad.
As
a reserve you start on £23,000 (32,000 US dollars) and it ranges up to about
£30,000 (42,000 US dollars) for the 26 umpires on the first class panel. Thatís
for working 90 days over 20 weeks. You get an extra fee for big games - for
Test matches itís about £2,400 (3,400 US dollars).
You
get to watch cricket from the best possible position!
Umpiring
a Test match at Lordís. When the ground is full, Lordís is a magnificent sight
with a really great atmosphere.
Definitely,
itís the perfect way for cricketers to stay involved in the game after theyíve
stopped playing.
Referees
in the English Premiership are now estimated to be earning £65,000-plus a year
(84,000 US dollars) and even as part-timers, some of them were previously
taking home over £50,000 a year (70,000 US dollars).
Further
FIFA wants to retain some referees on full-time terms and a starting figure of
£100,000 (140,000 US dollars) has been mentioned.
In
the last World Cup, each referee was paid £15,000 (21,000 US dollars) for the
tournament, given free board and lodging and £125 (175 US dollars) a day pocket
money. The official given the honour of refereeing the final would have taken
home a pay packet containing about £20,000 (28,000 US dollars) for the five
weeks of work.
Money
could also be coming into the pot from advertising following FIFAís decision to
sanction the wearing of advertising logos on refereesí shirts. Sponsors seem
interested, though an early approach from a firm of optical specialists has led
some to question whether this kind of advertising could lead to ridicule.
Presently,
squash referees can only dream about this kind of revenue, but would it be
dreaming to think that, if indeed it would improve the game, some of the money
needed to fund professional referees could come from the playersí prize fund.
After all, referees usually lose out financially when refereeing at events
through lost earnings and unseen incidental costs. Maybe as an acknowledgement
of our financial involvement we should already be getting our names on the
tournament poster as official sponsors.
š š š š š
The following came from a
seventeenth century sports almanac (apparently!).
ë.....
a long time ago, on one of those balmy summer evenings, I was watching a very
entertaining and exciting match between two world class players. The rallies
were long and absorbing with both players demonstrating a full repertoire of
shots, the highlight of which for me was the fantastic lob one of the two was
using to great effect. When he served, the ball seemed to be in the air for
ages, with it eventually glancing the side wall just below the out of court
line and then dieing in the back corner. One of these serves was so close to
the line it brought gasps from the spectators and I recall thinking to myself
ëthat must be outí - but there was no call - then I remembered I was marking
.....í
š š š š š