SQUASH. When you hit someone with the ball: STROKE / YES LET

Рет қаралды 14,338

Жыл бұрын

After you hit someone with your shot in squash it's not always your point. It's important to remember that the ball needed to be going directly to the front wall (or otherwise be a clear winning shot).
As you can see here, Dussourd hits Masotti, but the decision is Yes Let and both point to the sidewall very early.

Пікірлер: 34

@cookesam6 3 ай бұрын

Ty for explanation! Yes let because it was heading to side wall. I will remember this

@michaelmitchell8567 Жыл бұрын

Yes Let. Conduct warning for hitting the ball, dangerous play. Next time hold the shot and get a stroke.

@oscarjeong9433 Жыл бұрын

만약에 홀드한다해도 스트록은 힘들어 보입니다 홀드해도 yes let

@michaelmitchell8567 Жыл бұрын

@@oscarjeong9433 The other player was trapped in the way, If he held you would have to give a stroke.

@Orbituation Жыл бұрын

Tbh if he held the shot and Masotti didn't move, it would have been a no let. I think it should still be a let because it was going to the side wall. I don't blame Dussourd for playing that boast, because it would be the most damaging shot to retrieve for Masotti. But quite disappointed he was asking for a stroke there.

@eoincoleman4537 5 ай бұрын

You only get a stroke if they're blocking the front wall, not the side wall.

@user-bf3zb6pf2o 4 ай бұрын

これは”ストローク　何故かと言うとストライカーの確定した権利を侵害する動きだから。サイドウォール方向の打球に当たった場合は基本的にその打球がフロントウォールに届いたと予想される場合”レット”となる。しかしこの場合、ストライカーは相手の直前のサイドウォールを正確に狙って有利に進められる体制が取れていたのでストローカーはストライカーが打ち終わるまで　その確定した権利を侵害する方向に動いてはならない。この動きは返球の妨害とみなされて”ストローク”の裁定が妥当である。

@cookesam6 3 ай бұрын

Brilliant explanation!

@stevehughes1510 Жыл бұрын

There's always controversy about this situation, however in this particular case you could also say that if the striker didn't hit the ball the referees might not have given him a let, I've seen that a lot lately with some numpty referees, they would argue that he could have hit it to the front wall, which he clearly could have.

@angadkumar4183 9 ай бұрын

No the problem here is that for the guy the only area of shot he could have played is to the left. What I think he was actually going for is take a shot right close to the opponent. U notice the opponent also predicted the shot to the left. It all finally boils down to how the referee is giving out let’s or strokes in this or previous matches.

@stevehughes1510 9 ай бұрын

@@angadkumar4183 Referees call of course, but I'm sticking with my initial reaction to this 3 months ago as above. The striker had options, his opponent didn't in that situation and he should have stayed on the sidewall and not moved at all, to move across and into the flight of the ball was stupid on his part.

@terrymanuatu6808 2 ай бұрын

If the ball was always going to the side wall (right where the non-striker was standing), could be argued that the striker was aiming for the non-striker, in which case this would be dangerous and reckless play and CS could be awarded. Alternatively, it could be argued the non-striker moved before striker had finished playing his shot, effectively creating the situation where he would get hit and therefore contributing to dangerous play situation, - in which case YL (because tracectory of the ball was to the side wall), - and a caution to both players regarding player safety.

@markhorley6871 3 ай бұрын

It's just a let...no need for the conduct warning some suggest as the opponent moved late. He knows if he stays against the wall he likely doesn't get the next ball back and the likely shot is a boast. By getting hit it can only be a let as ball heading to side wall first

@bart1591 2 ай бұрын

Honeslty it's only a let for me cause if he just stayed against the wall then the ball wouldnt have hit him and he could just hit straight

@keithmurphy9358 8 ай бұрын

It's a let, nothing to discuss, it was not going straight to the front wall, it was coming off the sidewall first

@kaihui1965 3 ай бұрын

stroke. i am surprised there is an argument

@cookesam6 3 ай бұрын

It was heading to the side wall you big bag of soggy wet chips! Only if it were heading directly to the front wall would it be a stroke

@FinancialFreebo Жыл бұрын

He should have chosen a shot to center or left, but he tried to take advantage of the situation and hit it into the right wall. Not a stroke...

@rnv2529 Жыл бұрын

Dussourd should never have even thought about hitting the ball, absolutely dangerous play. But stroke. Masotti in the wrong place and to make it worse, he runs in front of the player. duh

@eoincoleman4537 5 ай бұрын

Ball was going to side wall. It's a let.

@ronfreeman9385 6 ай бұрын

if the player had stuck to the wall the opponent must play the ball 👍 however player moved out ! so Stroke to the opponent 😎

@eoincoleman4537 5 ай бұрын

Ball was going to side wall, therefore let, as per the rulebook.

@ericdurand9593 Жыл бұрын

Yes let + conduct stroke against dussourd. There needs to be a negative incentive for hitting your opponent with the ball when he gives you full access to the front wall. Prevent players from choosing the boast as the opponent us trying to be at the limit.

@knirfja Жыл бұрын

Yes Let but Dussourd should have halted play and not taken the shot

@wooks2222 Жыл бұрын

STROKE 8.11.2 if the ball would first have hit the non-striker and then a side wall before reaching the front wall, a let is allowed, unless the return would have been a winning return, in which case a stroke is awarded to the striker;

@fkhan98 11 ай бұрын

That boast wasn't going to be a winning return... Not at their level anyway.

@davidbuxton7921 7 ай бұрын

You state their level , those shots frequently find the nick , who's to say that wouldn't?

@eoincoleman4537 5 ай бұрын

@@davidbuxton7921You could state that any shot had the potential to hit the nick, therefore every shot is a winning shot.

@farhanshah1427 Жыл бұрын

Stroke all day, The other player shouldn’t have ran in front in that position.

@cchsbball23 9 ай бұрын

I agree, the striker was already in his backswing before the other player decided to move to the t. If anything, the player that got hit should have cleared backwards to create room to the front wall. According to the rulebook, while unfortunate, this should be a stroke call

@eoincoleman4537 5 ай бұрын

Ball was going to side wall. It's a let.

@paran0idgaming595 4 ай бұрын

Why would you boast from from that position? Conduct stroke

@cookesam6 3 ай бұрын

For a good confident shot that you know your opponent will struggle to retrieve.... isn't that obvious?

@paran0idgaming595 3 ай бұрын

@@cookesam6 The player is standing on the side wall, to clear access to the front floor. So the striker is essentially hitting the ball into the player. It's very dangerous. It's not confident, it's stupid.