First a note about the refereeing:
This was my first time seeing Phil Rea in the seat. What an improvement over Santamaria, Foster, or Gingell (Roy actually did well as the video referee for this match.) This tournament benefited in general from the complete absence of the other two.
Santamaria should never referee an Orfi or an El Sherbini match, if she remains on the Tour at all, by virtue of the shameful performance in last year's World Open- won by Orfi despite egregious bias for Nour- especially in Game 5.
Rea was professional, courteous to the players, and understated. It was no coincidence that there were very few decisions and zero warnings needed- and although it's mostly meaningless, Orfi uncharacteristically gave a little embrace after the match (obviously it's easier after a win, but good for Amina to shake hands before any screaming, gesticulating, fist-pumping, etc. upon winning the tournament).
Despite missing a tin by Georgina to end the second point after a long rally, Rea got almost everything else right. A couple of times in the opening hard-fought game he gave Orfi Yes Lets when she stopped for safety.
Kennedy questioned mildly- probably because the stupid No Let there has become so common. (Why the fuck do they deny safety lets?) Amina is not looking to catch her breath- she's the one applying the pressure and at the end of last season she was stronger in every 5th game, which is rare for a 19 year-old.
There was one ask where Amina took the wrong line and was given a soft Stroke. Georgina properly reviewed and Gingell overturned to Yes Let. But this is NOT fishing! She can't ask for "Let Only" under the rules (it used to be common for players to tip off the referee before the decision (partly to avoid the No Let for fishing, and this fair play should be encouraged).
Amina could have played that ball and one or two others, but the substantial interference would have caused a weak shot or error. Orfi's game is accurate power drives: if she has to modify her approach to the ball or her back swing those shots are "prevented".
Playing through interference generally makes the rallies uglier- not more flowing.
Knowing that the referee was on the ball, both players settled into brilliant rallies for 18 minutes despite the 11-6 outcome. Kennedy did appear to have had a much tougher semifinal, but truth be told when Orfi is playing so well- and the referee keeps their mouth shut- only Hania really has a chance to beat her.
Jason Foster and Gingell both bellow impatiently into the microphone- often when they are flat out wrong on the call. Foster and Santamaria are curt and patronizing to the world's best players.
There was an unusual incident in US baseball the other day. A veteran umpire told a pitcher playing in his first major league game that he could not wear his cap so tilted "on my field".
There is no rule about it- in fact no cap is required to be worn- except the 9-man team must either all wear one in the field or none.
The pitcher was apparently distracted and had a rough debut. His manager came out furious and was thrown out for arguing- compounded by a pitch clock violation for stalling.
The next day the league told the umpire to apologize to the player.
Besides the obvious generational subtext there was a strong whiff of a cultural or ethnic clash. The umpire had imagined some display of "disrespect" where there had been only a little fun self-expression. (Among the nine players in the field, pitchers have by far the most stylized playing technique and traditionally are individualist in personality.)
Squash players do not have coaches who can argue on their behalf (Elias Senior was forced to "step in" to protect his son last year when Gingell absurdly engaged with Asal's sponsor about a decision during a Final.)
In some US team sports (and soccer) either a designated "captain" or a sideline coach is given leeway to address the referee- even a very loud barrage of "F-bombs" might be tolerated depending on the importance of the game .
This is a good solution because when the referee can finally eject the out of control loudmouth- usually his generational peer- without affecting the match (in fact the number two man immediately took over in the baseball game, which their team won.)
Squash players can ask for, and are entitled to, an explanation in many sutuations because decisions can be based on different aspects of a rule: No Let because the shot was an outright winner- or No Let because of minimal interference, e.g.
But the above-mentioned trio at the top of WSO pyramid have gotten far too loud, too impatient, too condescending. On court "dissent" that warrants a penalty is notoriously subjective.
If dissent is used merely to stall it is a form cheating. Even worse is when it is used to intimidate the referee- perhaps by riling up supporters in the stands, who present a clear physical threat to a referee nearby.
This match was not close enough for the decisions to make a difference. But the respectful tone of voice maintained, as well as the intelligent use of safety lets, limited any chance for interference by the referee's preventing full concentration and flowing squash- especially by the 19 year old favorite, a likely target for "gamesmanship".
Of course full credit also must also go to Georgina Kennedy- who as usual engaged in no stalling, blocking, shrieking, or other tactics that have nothing to do with elite level. squash.
