TRYING TO KEEP REFEREEING SIMPLE

By Stu Hadden

(and Mick’s 2¢)

Refereeing in my opinion is one of the major problems which faces squash, particularly in relation to its exclusion from the Olympics. It seems that even seasoned pro refs barely have a basic grasp on the rules at times and so where on earth does that leave the average spectator? In part I think this is due to the PSA trying to minimize interference to make the sport more watchable but it has left a lot of confusion and almost a different rule set for pro and amateur players.

I’ll jump in early here. Refereeing at the pro level is emphatically difficult. Made even more so because as far as I know, none of the official world referees have ever played squash at the elite level. Understanding the pace and nuances of the game is virtually impossible if one has never personally experienced it. Olympic exclusion is because of many reasons (money being one them!), and undeniably refereeing is up there. But, I also think that many of the players’ negative reactions to the referring has a significant bearing on it too. That’s a story for another day, however.

I feel that the rules need to be simplified somewhat as it has all gotten a little bit confusing at the pro level and that going back to the normal rules would help tidy up the sport. A let is usually called by an incoming player looking to play a ball if the opponent has obstructed the path to it. A basic perspective on this is that a let should be awarded if the opponent is in the way of you moving to the ball. This is contingent on the opponent trying to clear the shot, however if one makes no effort to clear the ball and you would have reached it, then that is a stroke. Obviously as pro athletes, top players are expected to do a better job of clearing the ball and so the margins for clearing at pro level are finer than what is expected of an amateur player, and therefore lets would be given in a more lenient fashion. A basic ‘no let’ is given if the incoming player has looked for the man and has no intention of playing the ball, should have played the ball, or could not have reached it because the shot was too good. 

The expectation of the striker to make every effort to hit the ball and the non-striker every effort to clear the shot is simple enough to comprehend. Interpreting an on court situation in real time in a split second is not. What is considered “every effort”? What is the right path to the ball? How much does the non-striker have to clear? It’s probably impossible to define. No two scenarios are identical, and the conundrum that the referee has to contend with is that they are asked to predict what would have happened if there wasn’t any interference to begin with. 

There are times, more so in pro squash than amateur, where a basic let can become a stroke because the outgoing player has deliberately blocked the opponent. This can be very confusing to referees and spectators who have not played at the pro level because blocking is, sadly, as close to an art as rolling a cross court nick from a backhand overhead. The better a player is at blocking, the harder it is to tell. The most subtle of movements onto an opponent’s hip as they are coming round is just enough to put them off balance, but they are still allowing them to get through to the ball, thus hugely interfering with their shot but making most referees take the opinion of, “Mr Hadden, you needed to play that ball.” This can lead to situations where players are gaining an upper hand by purposefully creating interference as a tactic. The more experienced the referee, the more subtle and minimal one must make the interference in order to get away with such behavior. This is considered bad etiquette at best and outright cheating at worst depending on your perspective on such matters.

The “minimal interference” rule was introduced a few years ago, which I believe has made the application of the let even more inconsistent. The premise behind it was to stop asking for “soft lets” and force players to accept “minimal” contact and not continuously stop rallies to ask for a let. But what may appear to be minimum or innocuous contact between players is often significant enough to completely affect a player’s movement or stroke. As Stu just mentioned, some players have turned this tactic into a finely tuned skill: blocking. So is this still a let? Or even a stroke? Very often, a no let is awarded, which just encourages the blocker to continue the practice. 

Generally speaking, a stroke is different from a let in that the opponent is interfering with you striking the ball so long as it is going directly to the front wall as opposed to you moving to it. Again, the striker may be penalized with a ‘no let’ if they made no effort to play the ball and instead wrapped their racquet around the opponent looking to create the interference. In essence, the rules generally look to penalize a player for creating any type of interference, whether it be a failure to clear, a failure to attempt to play a ball, or a deliberate ploy to try and manufacture interference in order to get a cheap point. A referee must be experienced at the level they are officiating in order to make quick game-time judgment calls on overlapping and grey areas.

Blocking is the main situation in the pro game where a let is not a let. There are, however, common situations more so at amateur levels where a stroke is not a stroke. The  primary ones which spring to mind are examples of what is termed as “dangerous play”.  If a player turns on a ball and then hits the opponent with it, even if the ball is going directly to the front wall, this is a stroke against the striker for dangerous play. Should the same situation occur again, at any level, it is common practice for the referee to continue using the code of conduct and give a stroke as well as a penalty point. If it happens again it would be conduct game. This is because when you turn on a ball you completely lose perception of where your opponent is on the court and so hitting it directly to the front wall is considered dangerous. In this situation amateurs should absolutely not play this ball. There will be times when top pros will turn and play this shot, although just like the margins for clearing being finer, the margins for dangerous play are also finer. I have watched Daryl Selby thread a squash ball through a toilet roll live on Instagram on his first attempt from 20 feet. These guys have awareness and ball control far beyond our comprehension and I have never seen it happen where they have turned and hit a ball anywhere near the opponent.

Turning also puts the non-striker immediately and directly in the way. They simply have nowhere to hide. Although turning is part of the rules, I strongly believe it should be banned at the amateur level. All too often I have seen members turn unnecessarily. I would venture to guess 95% of all turns are unwarranted and are done because the player is either too lazy to back up and hit it on their backhand, or simply don’t like the fact that the ball is too deep in the back wall / corner to return effectively and the easiest way to get out of it is to turn. The other 5% is when a turn would be the absolute only option to return a shot and if that ever happens, then one should never hit the ball. Ask for a let. One more point - turning should also never happen on a return of serve. 

Dangerous play in amateurs is not only limited to turning on a ball though and the same line should be taken for any situation in which one player consistently hits another with a ball. Even if the opponent is heavily encroaching, you should not hit them with the ball more than once. One thing which we commonly see is when a player hits a decent straight drive, stands on the T and then the opponent from the back wall tries to hit an extreme angle and hits the opponent with the ball. This is not a stroke, and not only is it not a stroke but it is terrible etiquette, bad sportsmanship and dangerous play. If you find yourself consistently hitting different opponents with a shot, particularly going cross court off the back wall when they have not taken up an extreme T position, then you need to select a different shot. Chances are it is you creating a dangerous situation for your opponent and you creating the interference to try to gain the upper hand from a deservedly bad position while buried in the back of the court. To put perspective on it I have hit one person with the ball in a match since college (I framed it into Mick Joint’s back).

I am questioning Stu’s “frame” shot…! 

This goes both ways. As discussed before, the non-striker has the obligation to clear their shot. We often see a player hit a ball down the wall into the back corner and in the attempt and belief that they are returning to the ’T’, frequently plant themselves close to the service box instead. This is cutting off the angle for the striker to be able to hit a normal (non-extreme angle as Stu put it) crosscourt and have voluntarily, albeit unaware, put themselves in harms way. One major reason players do this is because they are not watching the ball, but are staring at the front wall instead and have no idea what is happening behind them. If a player is struck with the ball in these situations, they have no one else to blame but themselves. It’s also a clear stroke. It not only hurts, but you lose the point as well. As the striker, Stu said you shouldn’t hit your opponent more than once… I’d rather you didn’t hit your opponent at all to be honest! 

Overall I think it is fair to say that the interference rules are there in order to create a fun, safe, and free flowing game, and when people view it like that and observe them properly we will create a more enjoyable sport with less arguments and a fairer outcome than we often see. Clear your shots, play the ball when possible, and do not hit the opponent with the ball or racquet, it really is bad form.

I can’t argue with that. Apply common sense. At the club level, it is best when you look at the let rule as straightforwardly as possible without the ‘fluff’. 99% of the time, you will be playing without a referee and adjudicating yourselves. You should know if you are making every effort to get to the ball, making every effort to clear the ball, whether you could or couldn’t reach the ball. Last consideration: If your opponent is asking for a let it is because they think it is one. Arguing ‘no-let’ is rather pointless. And unless it’s an obvious stroke… play a let. Safety and sportsmanship first.

QUARANTINE SQUASH - THURSDAY FITNESS 4

Yay! Another fitness Thursday is upon us! And as an added bonus, for the first time, the weather isn’t all that terrible. That should be the perfect motivator for this week’s session which will focus on the all important topic of power. 

For squash players, power is an integral part of the movement. It is vital that we are able to be explosive from a standing start in order to be able to move to the ball efficiently and get ourselves prepared to swing early. The other reason is direction change. All players - amateurs and pros  - will often initially move in the wrong direction when trying to read our opponents and being able to stop that early momentum and adjust is a valuable tool to possess.

Stu takes you through a session of plyometrics which involves power jumping, power push-ups and explosive bounding. Apart from not needing much (or any) equipment to perform, the advantages of building up this type of fitness are numerous. They burn a considerable amount of calories as it utilizes major muscle groups and that can also assist in weight loss. It increases muscle strength and explosive power, which in turn will improve your speed - especially off the ’T’. 

You do need to be careful, however. The nature of the exercises can cause considerable stress on the joints so it is crucial to slowly build up and start with lighter exercises and a lower volume in order to decrease the possibility of injury and it is very important that you warm up thoroughly before you start. You should have a decent foundation of fitness before jumping into plyometrics too rigorously. 

MEET A PRO - 5

If any of you ever watch the PSA videos for “shots of the month”, you will regularly see this veteran professional in contention. At the ripe young age of 37, he joined the PSA tour way, way back in 1999. He won the British National Championships in 2011 beating the then world number one and reigning world champion Nick Matthew in the final, and was a member of the English team that won the 2013 world championships. He reached a career high of 9 in the world in April of 2010, and was in the world’s top 20 continuously from November 2009 to September 2018 - except for one solitary month where he dropped to 21 in May 2016 - a remarkable 106 of 107 months. Currently ranked 26, he’s squash's version of poetry in motion, a one-man highlight reel…

MEET… DARYL SELBY

The Squash Joint (TSJ): G’day mate! Thank you for taking your time to answer these questions and welcome to Detroit (virtually) and the Squash Joint! You have been on the PSA tour for many years. How has your approach / methods to training changed over the years from when you were a teen to now in your later end of the 30’s? 

Daryl Selby (DS): Firstly thanks to The Squash Joint for asking me the questions and showing a bit of interest in Bobby the Dazzle. I’ve been on tour 17 years, was on for 2 months and then went to university, and then started again at 21. Training has definitely changed, the rise of the Egyptians has made the game faster and more dynamic. The days of me going and smashing out a load of 400’s has gone because I don’t need to stay on court for that hour and a half length based games. It’s led to me doing a lot more speed sessions and speed endurance. That isn’t to say the game is any less physical though – I would even say that the stress it puts on your body is higher now but it definitely hits you differently.

TSJ: In February this year while playing a tournament, you copped a squash ball in the eye. A freak accident in the pro squash world to be sure. You have now vowed to wear eye-guards for all your future matches. Was it a difficult thing to get used to playing with and do you think wearing eye-guards should be made mandatory for all amateurs and /or professionals world wide? 

DS: Yeah mate, got the ball in the eye at the nationals in February. Complete freak accident, Ive spent thousands and thousands of hours on court and never even come close to it. Obviously with kids and stuff I don’t want to take that risk anymore, eyesight is so important and not having it would restrict me in so many ways. I started looking around for eyewear to get the best pair I could and was so lucky to find a specialist company called “Ria”. Their eyewear is top, top class, the lenses are really good, far better than anything I’ve ever seen before. They aren’t paying me or anything and I’m not doing anything for them they genuinely are the ultimate glasses. They don’t mist or fog up and the lens quality is stunning, I think the fogging was always the problem in the past but these are brilliant I don’t even realize they are on. I never have to take them off and wipe them during the game. I’ve worn them for every PSA event after and it has had no impact on my events, I’ve beaten Joel Makin in them and almost got Momen wearing them so yeah, I really don’t see why everyone can’t wear them. It’s just hard to make something mandatory because people hate change but it protects people and saves eyesight so I think everyone should wear them.

TSJ: I saw on social media that you reached 100 on the frame challenge. Stu and I did this for our members and almost jumped in front of a truck with the frustration this caused us. Did you find this relatively easy and how much practice did you need to get to the triple digits?  

DS: Yeah the old frame challenge and trick shots in general I love because it is like a process. If you go on youtube and type in “dudeperfect” those guys do trick-shots in a lot of different sports and I've listened to them a lot. I love the trials and tribulations of a trick-shot, because you go from being so far away to being so close and eventually getting it. I love creating the trick-shot and then going through. It took me about 2 hours total to get to 100, I started it and went from getting 10 or 20 and eventually got to 50. Once I got there I managed to get to 80-90 once or twice and then broke 100 after that. Crazy you think I practiced 2 hours and went from nothing to being able to consistently get 100 after that. No wonder you guys found it difficult it is a really tough one.

TSJ: You reached a career high of 9 in the world and have beaten players in the top 5 - such as Nick Matthew, Mohamed El Shorbagy, Tarek Momen. Clearly you are capable of going toe-to-toe with the best. What do you think sets apart the players who are capable of reaching the top 10 to the ones who plateau just outside the top 20?

DS: It’s a tricky one because there is such finite margins from being a top quality player in the 20’s to breaking in the top 10. At the top of the game it really is about bettering yourself in each area by 1%. As I touched on a bit earlier in the trick-shots, a lot of it is about belief. A lot of the guys out of the top 20 have never beaten a guy in the top 5 for example and therefore they can’t get to that next hurdle. Once you’ve beaten a guy in the top 5, you know you can do it and you know that they deserve their ranking and they belong there. That gives you so much self-belief and often it runs from there because next time you play a top 5 player you know that you are good enough to actually beat them. Always you need to beat the guys below you and then start looking to take some scalps above you. I’d say a lot of them are fit and need to develop their skillset or vice versa, everyone in the top 20 has one or the other so its about developing the individual game to make those inroads into top of the sport. The top 5 guys are so good at wearing people down so the lower guys need to make sure they have the gas tank to match them.

TSJ: The Egyptians are currently dominating squash and it looks like they will be for the foreseeable future. Do you think this is bad or good for squash? Which of the current top Egyptians do you find most difficult to play? 

DS: I don’t think its good for the game, I think a few of the Egyptians have even said that in interviews. We need a variety of nations and players at the top to make it interesting. That isn’t to take anything away from the Egyptians or their quality coaching system which is clearly working very well. For the enjoyment of the fans we need different cultures, different personalities etc, to get fans across the world more heavily involved. If you have Diego Elias or Paul Coll in a major final you’ll have people from Peru or New Zealand tuning it. Just because they are Egyptian doesn’t mean they are all the same - they have different swings and personalities - but you want people from different countries supporting their players.

2^nd part of that question: Do you know what? I don’t necessarily find the Egyptians hard to play. I find them hard to beat. Mohamed El Shorbagy, Ali Farag and Tarek Momen aren’t hard to play or are even in the same ball park as the guys like Amr Shabana, Greg Gaultier and Ramy Ashour and I was playing them when I was a better player. I say “better player” more when I was higher ranked. I’d say my all round game is the best its ever been now but I’m 38 so not as physically able. Obviously all of those guys have fantastic qualities but I would say the most difficult to play is Mazen Hesham just because of his strange technique and he is incredibly skillful. He doesn’t give you any rhythm which is something I really like. The guys like Mohammed or Ali still give you rhythm which means I don’t find them anywhere near as tough to play against. Another one I find very awkward is Fares Dessouky, I have only played him a couple times so haven’t had time to work him out yet.

TSJ: Tell us your favorite…

1. Squash hero when you were a junior? Peter Nicol or Amr Shabana
2. Non-squash sporting hero now? The Fed, Messi, Rory McIlroy
3. All-time movie? Lock, Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels
4. Vacation destination? Sunny beach, Maldives
5. Shot to play on a squash court? It’s got to be anything through the legs don’t it?
6. Couch snack? If you have a beer with it, crisps

TSJ: For any reason, which one:

1. Jahangir or Jansher? Jansher
2. Geoff Hunt or Jonah Barrington? Jonah
3. Karim Gawad or Ali Farag? Farag
4. Sarah Fitzgerald or Nicol David? Sarah
5. Nick Matthew or James Willstrop? Nick
6. Peter Nicol or Jon Power? Nicol
7. Nour El Sherbini or Raneem El Welily? Raneem
8. Thierry Lincou or Greg Gaultier? Greg
9. Ramy Ashour or Mohamed El Shorbagy? Ramy
10. Roger Federer or Rafa Nadal? Federer

TSJ: What does life after the PSA tour look like for Daryl Selby? 

DS: Hopefully still be involved in sports. I have a sports management company going - “Dynamic 7” - where we manage athletes in other sports. A bit of coaching would be good, I like guiding and directing younger athletes and helping them enjoy the sport so that they can get the most out of themselves.

TSJ: Complete these sentences. Feel free to elaborate!

1. The worst movie I ever paid to watch in the cinema was… Hot Fuzz, Nightmare before Christmas
2. The one song I can’t help but to sing along with is… Bohemian Rhapsody
3. The one thing in life I haven’t yet done but would like to is… Skiing or snowboarding
4. My greatest pet peeve is… People with no manners, lack of consideration – parking
5. The one famous person I would love to have dinner with is… Tiger Woods, Maradona, Obama – Yeah actually I’m going Barak
6. The fastest speed I have been in a car is… 323kph on the autobahn (200 mph), Audi RS6+ one of 150 made and it was a rocket…

TSJ: During your career, have there been any unexpected obstacles that you have had to overcome? 

DS: Not really to be honest. Not having a coach and logistically living a bit out of the way meant I trained a lot by myself but nothing major I would say.

TSJ (Stu): Daryl, over the years I've followed your career very closely as you played for my team at St. Georges Hill. I was very influenced by Tom Richards as a junior and copied his style. One thing in particular that he said to me was "pace is everything". When I watched you play I noticed you didn't volley as much and played in a slower, more methodical rhythm. In the early days you also didn't take the ball short as much compared to a lot of the other guys. What did you like about this play style and what do you think made it so effective?

DS: Haha! That’s a classic Tom Richards comment that - "pace is everything" - haha!. Yeah, I play slower for sure. I think you need accuracy, Tom to be fair, plays fast and he is able to combine that with accuracy. But for me, changing the pace of the game and the subtleties of slow to fast and high to low helps having that bit of delay on your swing. Chucking up a lob sometimes stops your opponent from knowing what is happening and slows them down, making them quite uncomfortable, so in my opinion it’s a more effective way to play.

I didn’t take the ball short as much in the early days, that’s the way I was taught by Neil Harvey between the ages of 14-19 to have a fantastic base length game with a little bit of variety. It did make me very hard to beat but not necessarily hard to play. I think the way the games has changed has meant I always had that in my locker and was able to build stuff on top of it. I don’t think I have the worlds softest touch but I can do a lot with my hands, a lot of spin or changing the direction of the ball at the last minute with my wrist. As I’ve got older I’ve had to use that to still be able to compete.

TSJ (Stu): People always talk about Mohamed El Shorbagy or Nick Matthew as being the toughest players out there mentally, but there is a solid case to be made for you to be right in  there with them.  I remember in 2010 you had just gone on a run of events in Canada that would propel you into the top 10 for the first time where I believe, you came runner up to Thierry Lincou then beat LJ Anjema and maybe Hisham Ashour in the other tournaments. You then flew back to England and the same day miraculously beat current world champion Tarek Momen, looking like a jet-lagged zombie in an epic 5 gamer. The next year you beat Tom Richards in round one, 11-9 in the fifth after he saved 14 match balls and you are one of only two players to ever beat Nick Matthew on PSA from 2-0 down. On top of all that, I have never seen you do anything outside of the rules to win which I can't say for most of these guys with reputations of being ferocious competitors. Can you speak a bit to your toughness but fair playing style and how you have consistently won matches in difficult circumstances over the years?

DS: That’s a good effort, Stu! Blimey, haha, you have a better memory than I do! Think you’re spot on there, though, I remember that run of tournaments in Canada that took me into the top 10 and I think you’ve nailed those results. Oh yeah, that’s true that I beat Momen that day. I mean I've come back from 8-0  and 10-5 down in the fifth a few times, against Nikki Mueller and Greg Marche. But yeah, I will always teach kids and I will always expect from my kids to never give up on anything and to fight right until the end. I always believe on giving it all because it is never over until the handshake. It’s nice of you to notice the mental toughness mate. I do make sure I always play within  the rules but I definitely push the limits of it with gamesmanship and talk to my opponents to put them of, but I always make sure that I do it in the right way and just within the rules!

TSJ (Stu): You beat Nick Matthew in the final of the British nationals in 2011 and in your post match interview, you mentioned your work rate that day was a fair bit above his that day. Given he was one of the most physical players of the modern era I am wondering what was your game-plan that day and how on earth you managed to not only keep sight of it, but keep your discipline and execute it so well under such extreme physical duress?

DS: I always try to remember that British nationals final. I’m very disappointed England Squash lost the recording of that British final so I can’t watch it back to know what happened. I only have a few memories of the fifth and winning which I am trying to cling on to. Physically I was in great shape and I don’t remember much of it other than the last few points. Not having the tape is one of the saddest things of my career but I guess a lot of guys in the old days had to just remember their best matches from their own memories. I really just wish that I had the tape because like I said I don’t remember too much of it.

TSJ (Stu): You were well known in your prime for hitting a great length and absorbing pressure like a sponge thus being extremely difficult to break down.  I feel as your career wore on you became much more unorthodox and more of a shot player. For example, we regularly see you winning PSA “Shot of the Month”! Why did you evolve your game like that and do you ever wish that you had done it a little bit sooner? 

DS: I wish I had expanded my game earlier, but when you’re in your 20’s, you are fit and strong and just want to play a tough physical game. To an extent though, what got me in the top 10 was playing a hard physical game. I wasn’t playing all the flashy shots back then, I was just playing a brutal length game. As you get older the skillset and knowledge improves, it is about finding that peak where your physicality and skillset both peak at the same time.

 TSJ: I am sure you have had some memorable night outs with the lads during tournaments over the years. Care to indulge us a little on one of the more noteworthy - or dare I say ‘infamous’ - evenings?

DS: Haha! YESSSS! Nights out with the lads, Stu you’ve been on tour, you know how it is. The tour is a much busier schedule now, though back in the day going out after you lost was always part of it but I don’t always have the time for it now. Most of my craziest nights out were with the English or the Aussie guys. Peter Barker, Cam Pilley, Nick Matthew and Adrian Grant were always good for it but to be honest I can’t think of any stories that are suitable for a nice family podcast haha!

Fantastic stuff from a world class athlete and world class personality. Hopefully Daryl has heavy involvement in the world of squash after his playing career, maybe he should also try to get a some commentating gig? His insights would certainly be tremendously valuable and no doubt entertaining. We look forward to when the PSA tour resumes and can start to again watch one of the most enjoyable players to grace the squash court. 

QUARANTINE SQUASH - PODCAST 4

The Bogan and the Brit are back at it! We take a slightly different tact this week as we dive into this one with zero plan or specific topic whatsoever and just see where the conversation takes us. We are calling this "Office Talk"!

Since Stu and I talk all the time in the office about all sorts of things, we thought it would be an idea to try it on the podcast... hope you enjoy it!

Mick · The Bogan and the Brit - 4

QUARATINE SQUASH - CHALLENGE 4

The pressure is on. Welcome to the fourth challenge is this quarantine series. Last week, the accuracy challenge was won by Stu and he managed to redeem himself and even up the scores to one win, one loss, and one draw for each of us. The winner this week takes the all important lead and bragging rights. 

We once again will test our accuracy. This time, it’s all about distance. The assignment: To hit a target from as far away as possible. There will be one relatively small target to aim for, and starting at a distance from 10 meters away (or 32 feet - roughly the length of a squash court), we will try to hit that target. Every successful bulls-eye increases the distance by 5 meters. No limits on the amount of attempts - so if we are so inclined, can spend all day on it. (I gave it a couple of hours…) 

Of course I needed a lot more space and room for error, so my back yard wasn’t going to cut it. So on to the little league baseball diamond across the street! Incredibly, even though I did spend a fair amount of time looking for the balls after every attempt, I didn’t lose any. Don’t worry, it hasn’t encouraged me to take up golf again any time soon!

I found this one to be quite difficult. I was close to hitting the target countless times, but actually hitting it was anything but easy. Kudos to the patience of my very helpful camera-woman, Katja, and ball-girl, Maya! The hat this week is a pink winter beanie that we bought in San Diego all the way back in December of 2005. 

Stu, riding his momentum of last week’s convincing victory, would be eager to win back-to-back challenges. Did his persistence here pay off? I managed to hit the target from 20 meters (65 feet) and I hit it twice from 25 meters (82 feet) off the bounce. For Stu to win this challenge, he will need to hit the target on the fly from 25 meters. On the bounce from 25 meters and it’s another tie. If he can hit it from 20 meters, but not at all from 25 meters, then victory is mine!

Recap of the weekly challenges:

Week 1 Frame Challenge - Draw. 15-each.

Week 2 Handle Volleys Challenge - Mick 20 v Stu 5… blood bath. 

Week 3 - Accuracy Challenge - Mick 12 v Stu 3 (lowest score wins)

Week 4 - Distance Accuracy Challenge - Mick - 20 meters v Stu 20 meters (Mick wins on tie-break)

Current Standings:

Mick - 2-1-1

Stu - 1-2-1

A great challenge for you - the member - to try! If you can beat 25 meters we would love to see it!

JUNIOR DEVELOPMENT

By Stu Hadden

(and Mick’s 2¢)

Introduction

As a kid I loved playing games and as a young teen I loved playing sports. Once I turned 15-16, I just wanted to win. The purpose of this article is to examine the different stages of athletic development in children and what role we as adults can play to help our children get the most out of sports. 

Youth Sport in America

Kids sports are big business in America, something I don’t recall us having in the UK – even when I left in 2016. If a child can create value on the field or the court, then that can attract college or even high school coaches to recruit them. This can potentially save their parents huge amounts of money on tuition fees, not to mention giving the child the opportunity to get into schools they otherwise wouldn’t gain entry to and ultimately get the experience of playing sport on a big stage. With these huge positives at stake for the few who make it, there is also a chasm full of kids who fall by the wayside, get injured either physically or mentally and never go on to achieve their dreams. But are we missing the point? The next section will look at the stages of athletic development in a child’s life and how we can approach them in order to maximize their development and minimize these potential negative impacts that draw so much media attention. 

Youth sports in the US and how it is conceived could be a never-ending article of arguments and counter-arguments and no doubt would open a can of unappetizing worms. That being said, I will dare to slightly crack open that can and take an eensy-weensy peek inside. One of the slightly disturbing characteristics I find in youth sports is the future potential of college sports scholarships that can be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. Very often it’s not the child that really wants to or cares to succeed, but the parents. Many parents want to live their athletic dreams through their offspring and from a very early age on, push their kids into sports they don’t love, into training and coaching sessions they don’t want to do, and into competitions they aren’t ready for. Good days and bad days hang on whether the child wins or loses. 

Obviously every family dynamic is different and every child responds to stimuli in their own individual way. The role of the parent is a vital ingredient to their children’s sporting success, the line between too little support, too much overbearing support and just the right amount is agonizingly thin. Figuring that out as a parent is just as much a challenge for them as what it is for the child learning and succeeding in their chosen sport. 

The potential to earn big dollars (or save big dollars on college scholarships) can blind parents into forgetting who exactly is playing the sport in the first place and making the journey all about them instead of the well being of the child. They may be shocked to actually learn their child possibly does not want to take the sport that seriously. Food for thought.

Building an athletic foundation 0-7

Research shows that between the ages of 0-6 is when children start developing their basic athletic foundation which will provide them a springboard to learn sports well later on. This includes basic co-ordination, strength and speed as well as their social development and their attitude towards physical activity. In my experience as a coach I have seen that the children who are 5-6 years old and are very active and relatively coordinated, usually have gone on to enjoy sports later on and often turn out quite good at all of them. During this time, it is important that the parents and teachers encourage them to make up games, climb trees and play throw and catch in the garden with their parents, brothers, sisters, and friends. By developing this foundation, they are able to move their body in a lot of different ways early on. In this stage, habits are often formed and it is important that we as adults help them form good habits so that they can have the strongest possible base going into the next phase of their athletic development. 

The emphasis should always be on making everything fun and encouraging them when they do things well. Sports are an integral part of our society. They are important for people’s physical and mental health, social skills, and teamwork. So getting kids to enjoy sport early sets them up with a good chance of reaping all of the rewards that playing sport can bring in later years.

Growing up in the 70’s and 80’s (yes! I am old!), we really did have an advantage… We didn’t have cell phones, social media, video games, cable television or home computers! So during our down-time, we spent most of it playing outside. Playing cricket or footy on the street with our neighbors and siblings for example, or tag, or hide and seek. We simply mucked around. Today, kids are surgically attached to electronic devices and are addicted to social media accounts. The distractions are plentiful and it is a particularly difficult cord to cut. 

Stu is spot on. Unstructured physical activity for young children is tremendously valuable. It can build overall hand-eye coordination, creativity, an outlook that exercise is enjoyable, social skills, problem solving, and self confidence. Giving kids too detailed technical instructions at this stage can be a sure way to turn them off sports all together. 

That being said, I was 6 years old when I played my first squash league match. I lost 0-9; 0-9; 0-9. Fortunately, it didn’t discourage me, although no doubt I wasn’t particularly happy. Maybe my competitive spirit was deep back then. But I also believe that learning about winning and losing early on, definitely helped me. The key is figuring out the right time to place your child into competitions. 

Building sports specific skills 5-13

During this age range is the time that you would look to begin developing sport specific skills on top of the child’s athletic foundation. I have deliberately overlapped this age bracket with the last one because every kid advances at a different rate, but one who has a stronger athletic foundation will find it easier to pick up sport specific skills and at a younger age than one who doesn’t. 

I started coaching aged 22, and frankly I was terrified of coaching total beginners especially 8-13 year olds that were completely uncoordinated. I had a huge group of 8-12 year olds who couldn’t catch, let alone hit a ball, which would be a great source of frustration for them. Many of the kids couldn’t do a single push up and I had parents holding me solely responsible for a group of demotivated kids becoming good squash players. In order to rectify this I had to go right back to basics and practice stuff with them which I felt they would have had far more fun learning by themselves in a child structured, rather than coach led, environment. In order to produce a varsity level athlete, it is important that in this stage of their development they are able to work on the sport specific skill development such as swinging a baseball bat to hit a moving ball, throwing a left jab or hitting a straight drive. If by the middle of this stage the child is still primarily working on its foundation skills, such as throwing and catching or being able to stop a moving ball with their foot, they will be playing catch-up with a lot of their peers. That isn’t to say they can’t still be very good at something, but they will have to work much harder and possibly specialize in one sport earlier in order to put in a good showing, something which in itself can lead to its own set of issues.

Don’t forget here, that the key is enjoyment. The motivation to learn and grow in a chosen sport does have to come form the child, not from the parent. If a child has fun, they are more likely to want to continue to get better. And let’s face it - winning is fun. It is also addictive. Success can be measured in may different ways, however. You don’t necessarily have to win the squash tournament (for example) in order to consider the performance a success. For some, maybe just getting in the draw is a step forward. It shows that their ranking is improving. 

Overall, the emphasis should be on long-term development and the pleasure of playing. Since all kids have vastly contrasting paths in how they progress, it is never a good idea to compare them to others. Their improvement should be measured against their younger selves.  

Training to compete and specialization 11-17

During this phase is when kids will start training more intensely and playing the proper rules of the sport or adapted rules of an actual sport. Even if they are just playing soccer with kids from their street they would still have goals, play offside and have fouls for example. The key to this phase is letting the kids play the sport they want to, and usually as a parent it means trying to not get too involved. 

There are a couple of different philosophies on how this phase should be handled. For me the two best are the Tiger Woods Model and the Roger Federer model. Tiger was a golf specialist early on, hitting his first ball at age 2 and playing tournaments consistently from age 4 onwards. All he ever played was golf. He has obviously gone on to become one of the world’s greatest golfers but there is academic argument surrounding whether or not this background has actually hindered him. He had a huge wave of initial success on the world golf tour and got remarkably good very quickly, but the argument is made that a slightly slower development curve would have led to a far longer and more dominant spell at the top for two main reasons. It is widely speculated that his injuries would have happened to far less of an extent if he had balanced his body out by playing other sports and not overusing his body on a one-sided motion so early on in his life. It’s easy to see how golf would develop muscle imbalances even worse than tennis or squash because you only hit off one side. It is also speculated as to whether he would have developed differently on a social and psychological level had he not been so laser focused on one thing his whole life, which may have led to less personal issues that have undoubtedly and seriously hampered his career at a time when he was in his prime.

Just to add on here, it was clear that from a very early age, Tiger Woods’ (and his father) one and only goal was to be the world’s best golfer. All the training, practice, learning was laser focused toward that one goal. I don’t know about Tiger’s childhood, but I’d place a fair wager that he didn’t play a lot, if any, other sports. It’s impossible to say whether or not he would have reached his level of success had he not followed this path. 

His injuries may be very well associated with this singular focus, but in hindsight, if he could go back in time, he would probably have countered the unbalance in his body (and avoid many of his injuries) with supplementary exercises. The focus however, would have still been golf. For the next golf prodigy this world produces, chances are they will train smarter.

Roger Federer is a different kettle of fish altogether. He hit his first tennis ball aged 8 and played badminton, basketball, cricket and squash growing up. The Fed was national junior champion age 14 but only specialized in tennis very late at age 16, much like yours truly into squash! Nadal also played soccer during this athletic development stage but because Federer is the GOAT I will focus on him. He is still playing tennis at the top level, still making the finals of slams and he is 38 years old. That is something that in the pre Federer era was unthinkable. His body has held up well and he has not burned out despite all of those years on tour. Remarkable and something that many attribute to his path to reach this point of the journey. 

Clearly Federer had/has significant natural athletic talent. But it was also 24 years ago. Things have changed considerably since then: training methods, level of competition, the money. Being a part of the junior tennis world in the US, I seriously doubt that the Federer method would work very well now. The level of play amongst middle teens is border line professional. Coco Gauff is an obvious (albeit extreme) example. Of course, the question here beckons - does your child want to go pro? Or maybe college tennis is the goal? Or maybe just high-school? Assessing goals is unquestionably crucial as that would plainly affect the child’s level of commitment. And once again, the goals here are the child’s goals, not the parent’s. 

Personally I much prefer the Federer route but I believe in letting the kids ultimately decide what sports they play and which they want to specialize in. The parent or coach can voice their opinion to guide them. So long as they present it in a way which puts across a rational argument and don’t make an emotional appeal, children shouldn’t be forced to do something they don’t want to do. 

To conclude

In order to give your child the best chance of playing sports at a good level and getting the most out of them, it is important to help them develop an athletic foundation early on. Playing catch with them when they are young and encouraging them to physically play games as much as possible is the key to doing this. They can then start building sport specific skills such as striking a squash ball over the top of their foundation, which are then transferable between sports and so when they find a discipline they enjoy, they can get more involved in it. Specialization is a tricky one and I personally believe that for their long term development not specializing before the age of 14 in most but not all cases is a smart move. That being said, every child and every family is different, and there is absolutely more than one way to skin a cat. I just hope that I can share something that will help someone somewhere. After a lot of reflection, I can safely attribute a huge amount of my athletic success to the way in which I was raised as a young lad, before I started playing organized sports. 

It is definitely exceedingly beneficial that athletic activities start at a young age in order to build a solid sporting base. Parents play a vital role in that. How much of a role? That’s a question that each parent needs to hold up a mirror and ask themselves. However, I do sincerely believe that parents do need to push their child at least a little, regardless of what level they want to get to. Instilling discipline, reliable and honorable work ethics, and always putting in maximum effort, are traits that the coaches shouldn’t necessarily be having to worry about. And those qualities are not just for the sporting arenas, they translate 100% to every other facet of life.

QUARANTINE SQUASH - THURSDAY FITNESS 3

And suddenly, it was Thursday again. And apparently, in Michigan, Thursday means the weather is dreadful and we are all forced to stay indoors. If it’s not snowing or freezing temperatures, it’s raining. On the positive side, it is the perfect weather for another stay-at-home fitness routine!

So far we have covered some ghosting (court shadow movements) and core. This week we will be utilizing parts of both of those along with a healthy variety of other fitness requirements: Circuit Training.

There are numerous benefits to circuit training and probably an infinite number of exercises to choose from. That’s great news if you wish to keep it interesting and continually challenge yourself. It can also be done without any equipment whatsoever - your own body weight can be more than sufficient - which means this can literally be done anywhere. 

Circuit training can be tremendously efficient. A 25-30 minute intense session can combine both a cardiovascular and strength workout, making it one of the more optimal ways to not just gain a higher overall fitness level but achieve weight loss as well as it targets all areas of the body. The effectiveness of this type of training can increase your metabolism as it keeps your heart rate high through the entire work-out, increasing your metabolic rate through the day which in turn burns more calories. 

It can be a distinctly strenuous exercise, but consistent circuit training regimes will not just help you to stay motivated longer, you may actually see the results of that training sooner than what you would if you ran on a treadmill or hopped on an elliptical for 30-40 minutes straight. Not as boring either! 

Remember - the most important detail of doing these exercises is to execute them with the correct form. Don’t rush or cut corners. You will reap greater rewards that way and it will also help prevent injuries. 

Stu takes you through a circuit training session below - this is more specified for the squash court of course - plenty of lunges! - but there is no reason out can’t be used for a general work out either! His recommended musical accompaniment for today the relatable  “Beer Fear” by Lucy Spraggan.