Rules Frequently Asked Questions

Welcome to the new Rules FAQ, where you get the chance to ask our experts questions on the Rules of Squash, and to browse through already answered questions.

Search the FAQs

Use the form below to search the FAQs


Browse Questions by Category

Latest Rules Questions

Displaying 1 - 20 of 56123

Referee and Marker, what's the difference ?

The Referee is in charge of the overall match - timing, appeals and discipline. The marker announces and keeps the score and repeats the referee's decisions after an appeal.

What happens at ten-all ?

In normal play, you need to win by two clear points, eg 12-10, 16-14, and the game continues until someone has that two point gap.

In doubles, it's sudden-death at ten-all, so the next point wins the game.

How long is allowed for the warmup ?

4.1. At the start of a match the players go on court together to warm up the ball for a maximum of 4 minutes. After 2 minutes the players must change sides, unless they have already done so.
4.2. The players must have equal opportunities to strike the ball. A player retaining control of the ball for an unreasonable time is warming up unfairly and Rule 15 (Conduct) must be applied.

I’ve been watching a lot of PSA squash recently. One thing that intrigues me, is as I unsersatand it, that a player must make a reasonable attempt to clear the ball so their opponent can have a clear shot. So often I see the striker hold their ground not making any effort to clear the ball (I.e they simply stand their ground) and their opponent calls a let and that’s what they get, irrespective of a video review. Why is this? Often the rationale is the striker had a clean line to the ball. If however, the opponent had made a reasonable attempt to clear the ball the striker would have had a chance to play a much better shot. It seems to me that the rule is you can interfere with your opponent’s shot as long as they could return a shot which puts them at a disadvantage. You only have to listen to the commentators expert opinion and the video review to see how their interpretation of the rule differs. Could you please clarify the rule to me. Thank you.

I obviously cannot comment on the specific decisions or the commentators expressed opinions but there remains the duty of the striker to play a shot that he/she can clear to provide his/her opponent with a path to get to and play the ball. The referees are required to determine whether this was done sufficiently and especially at the PSA professional level players are required to continue play if they have a line to the ball even if it is not perfectly ideal...in the effort to keep play continuous with fewer stoppages for appeals and Lets and more entertaining for television.

Regarding the new rule 8.9.3 if the striker holds for fear of hitting an opponent and ask for a let then if there's no interference the referees decision will be no let? is this removing a safety let?

The application will remain the same in that the referee will need to determine whether there was a reasonable fear of hitting the opponent. If the opponent was well clear and the striker misjudged his position then it is a No Let as previously but there may well still be instances where "safety Lets" are appropriate if the opponent was possibly in danger of being hit.

Displaying 1 - 20 of 56123

Ask a Question

Use the form below to ask a question

Your Name

Fill in your email address

Back to top button