From the very first call this game this was a Yes Let fest. A good portion of the Let appeals in this game would not be granted today. Greater onus on players to go and get the ball, to actually play the ball, to play through minimal swing interference. Biggest change in player requirement is to review their access options, hence today’s often heard referee explanation: “there was another line to the ball”, or “you took the wrong line”. Cool review of the evolution of the rules and it’s interpretation in the bid to make the game flow.
That was delightful. Palmer always seemed to take soft lets and in this match he looked like he was blocking access whenever he hit something weak as well - still can you blame him when the refs pandered to it? Amazing calmness from 10-6 down in the fifth, his share of the $100k prize fund on the line, Palmer goes straight through to 12-10. Great to see a young(er) John Mozzarella in the chair too :D
Can you explain what the logic is behind the let at 36:27? Nowadays that's a stroke, no questions asked, but what was the logic behind the call back then?
Things were different back then...players regularly asked for lets if they felt their opponent had knocked them out of balance on their way to a shot...even if the interference was minimal. Power and Palmer had a long, well-documented history of heated matches, so maybe this 'soft let' was intended to disrupt the momentum of Power...just my two cents.
I am so glad that we have player review and video referee now. there are so many times Palmer tried to block Power with false movement.
Great match and golden age of squash. Excellent filming and great commentary. A personal thanks to all involved and to David and John.
From the very first call this game this was a Yes Let fest. A good portion of the Let appeals in this game would not be granted today. Greater onus on players to go and get the ball, to actually play the ball, to play through minimal swing interference. Biggest change in player requirement is to review their access options, hence today’s often heard referee explanation: “there was another line to the ball”, or “you took the wrong line”. Cool review of the evolution of the rules and it’s interpretation in the bid to make the game flow.
Thanks for posting. David Palmer didn't half farm some lets, eh...
That was delightful. Palmer always seemed to take soft lets and in this match he looked like he was blocking access whenever he hit something weak as well - still can you blame him when the refs pandered to it? Amazing calmness from 10-6 down in the fifth, his share of the $100k prize fund on the line, Palmer goes straight through to 12-10. Great to see a young(er) John Mozzarella in the chair too :D
That was epic!
I know!
@@squashvids1032 thank you for uploading this ...
Can anyone remember what that head racket the David palmer was called?
네 헤드에서 나온 라켓인데 빨간색이고 open throat 이고 무게는 120g정도 됩니다. 아주 오래전에 나온 라켓이죠. 근데 라켓이 너무 약해서 잘 깨지는게 흠이었죠.
Can you explain what the logic is behind the let at 36:27? Nowadays that's a stroke, no questions asked, but what was the logic behind the call back then?
Things were different back then...players regularly asked for lets if they felt their opponent had knocked them out of balance on their way to a shot...even if the interference was minimal. Power and Palmer had a long, well-documented history of heated matches, so maybe this 'soft let' was intended to disrupt the momentum of Power...just my two cents.
Sooooooo many lets. Terrible game
Too many strokes are decided as let. power's anger is reasonable.