Decisions, decisions…

we take a deep dive into a phenomenon on the PSA Tour that merits attention: refereeing decisions. We add concrete numbers to the debate around stop-start squash.

Two feisty rivalries, two injuries, two refereeing decisions on Game Ball. At the 2022 World Tour Finals, Nouran Gohar drilled the ball into the calf of Hania El Hammamy. El Hammamy later shared striking images of the injury she sustained during the interference, which had resulted in Gohar being awarded a Stroke. For all El Hammamy’s undoubted anger and pain, she let the incident pass with minimum fuss. No words. No complaints. She was even the quicker player back on court for the start of the new game.

At the 2023 Houston Open, Mostafa Asal caught Marwan ElShorbagy in the groin with his follow through. What initially appeared an innocuous incident turned out the opposite: ElShorbagy was left writhing on court, coiled and screaming; the footage is distressing viewing. After a 15-minute injury break, the referee concluded ElShorbagy could not continue: Asal was docked a Stroke for the interference, but walked away with the match. To describe this encounter as stop-start would be an understatement: Asal won 7 of his 11 points in the opening game via Stroke decisions alone.

Incidents like these leave the squash community with a certain perception: while the women’s tour is a no-nonsense competition in which players accept contact and play on, a ‘culture of interference’ has become established in the men’s game, with players ever more frequently appealing to the referee to award the point.

To add hard evidence to the interference debate, we analysed over 20,000 rallies from the PSA World Tour to examine whether refereeing decisions play a bigger part in the men’s game than in the women’s – and the conclusions aren’t as straightforward as you may think.

Total decisions made

On the women’s tour, the referee is called upon to make an interference decision – that is, awarding a Yes Let, a No Let, or a Stroke – on average 4 times per game. On the men’s tour, referees make 1 call more, at an average of 5 decisions per game. With matches lasting 4 games on average, the typical number of refereeing decisions per match is 16 on the women’s tour and 20 on the men’s. The men’s game does indeed contain more interventions.

Men play longer rallies

But this may not be surprising. After all, the men’s game – with an average of 15 shots per rally – typically consists of lengthier exchanges than the women’s game (11 shots per rally). Longer points offer more opportunities for interference. When the number of refereeing decisions is compared across an equal number of shots, 7 of the top 10 spots for interventions come from the women’s tour. Matches involving Joelle King, Nour El Sherbini and Tesni Evans all require more than 2 decisions per 100 shots. Matches involving Paul Coll require referee intervention more than 5 times per game but, given the Kiwi’s inclination for gruelling exchanges, this translates to only one decision every 70 shots.

Rallies ending in a decision

The number of refereeing decisions per 100 shots is revealing, but problematic. It overlooks the fact that 100 shots equates to roughly 9 full rallies on the women’s tour, but only 6 or 7 on the men’s. It’s natural to expect more decisions from a higher number of rallies.

Perhaps the fairest way to examine the number of refereeing calls, then, is to ask ‘What percentage of rallies end in a decision?’. On the men’s tour, 24% of rallies result in a refereeing decision; on the women’s tour, this drops to 20%. Phrased differently, 1 in 5 rallies on the women’s tour end in a decision; on the men’s tour it’s 1 in 4.

Asal tops the rankings, again

One thing’s for certain, though. No matter how you cut the data, Mostafa Asal comes in at the top. Games involving the 21 year old Egyptian require on average 8 refereeing interventions, 3 decisions more than typical for the men’s tour. You can expect over 30 decisions to be made when watching a typical Asal match: one decision every three rallies.

It is worth remembering, however, that these stats do not assign responsibility for the interference to either player. Fans of Asal may see such high numbers as vindication that their man has gained an unfair reputation among referees, leading to opponents asking for more interference calls. Others will see these stats as proof that Asal seeks cheap points and pushes the boundaries of ‘fair’ play. Either way, one third of Asal’s rallies ending with an appeal only detracts from the spectacle that is watching the World #1 in action.

We will be revisiting this topic in the future, breaking out interference calls by decision: the number of Yes Lets, No Lets and Strokes awarded. When quantity of data allows, we’ll break out players by the opponent they play (based on the charts above, we suspect encounters between Marwan and Asal will have high numbers of interference, while battles between the Gilis sisters should be free flowing), and even by referee.

As ever, tune into our Twitter and Facebook feeds for the latest data we publish. And check out a version of this piece we guest contributed for the SquashMad website.

Previous
Previous

Speaking to SquashIQ

Next
Next

Asal reaches the summit