Rules Proposal:
"Towel Breaks"
rev A, 2008-11-18, by Rules Officer Hans Mullamaa
Original proposer: Marcel Weigl (Austrian rep, FIR President)
_________________

Revision History:
rev A, 2008-11-18: First version.
_________________

1) Original Wording of Proposal (e-mail from Marcel 2008-02-26)
Regarding rule 2.5d:

Restricted Pausing.
Players may pause for a brief drink and to towel down every five points only (so after 5, 10, 15 points, etc), if this is breached the umpire may penalise the offending player. If sweat has dripped onto the table tennis table, badminton court, etc, then of course the player may use a towel to wipe that away at any time.

This rule I think comes from Tabletennis and is complete nonsense and if it stays I will leave the squash court after every five points from now to drink, because this is what the rule allows. In my opinion  there should be no break allowed until the break at 11 points unless a player asks the referee to towel down or wipe the floor and the referee gives his ok. Or if no referee is present it is courtesy to ask the player for permission.

2) Amendment by Rules Officer

2.1) Existing Rule

2.5 Time Intervals & Continuous Play
a) One minute at 11.
A maximum break of one minute shall be allowed at 11 (i.e. when 11 points is first reached by any of the players) in each set.

b) 3+3 minutes between sets.
The break between sets shall be maximised at "3+3" minutes meaning: (a) Warming up at the next sport has to commence within 3 minutes after the end of the previous set. (b) The next set has to commence within 6 minutes after the end of the previous set

c) Continuous play.
Play must be continuous at all times (as far as can be reasonably expected). Umpires and referees have the right to penalise players under the misconduct rule should they breach this.

d) Restricted pausing.
Players may pause for a brief drink and to towel down every five points only (so after 5, 10, 15 points, etc), if this is breached the umpire may penalise the offending player. If sweat has dripped onto the table tennis table, badminton court, etc, then of course the player may use a towel to wipe that away at any time.

2.2) Wording Proposed by Rules Officer (if proposal is accepted)

Below follow two options within this proposal. Both are designed to replace rule 2.5d above on "Restricted pausing".

OPTION A; "Continuous play" is enough.
Option A implies the deletion of rule 2.5d with no replacement under the assumption that rule 2.5c) is enough regulation of pausing.

OPTION B; Pausing only if permitted

d) Restricted pausing.
Players may pause for a brief drink and to towel down at the consent of the referee only (or if no referee is present at the consent of the opponent). If this is breached the referee may penalise the offending player. If sweat has dripped onto the table tennis table, badminton court, etc, then of course the player may use a towel to wipe that away at any time.

_________________________________

Attachment:
 Comments by Rules Officer
rev B, 2009-01-01, by acting Rules Officer Hans Mullamaa
_________________

Revision History:
revA, 2008-11-18: First version.
rev B, 2009-01-01: Added a record of the final AGM decision.
_________________

1) Aspects
As regards the reason behind the existing rule I believe it is to  restrict pausing rather than the opposite. (The emphasis is on the fact that the players are not even allowed to towel down during 4 out of 5 points.) But the proposer (Marcel) is probably right in implying that it might be perceived as allowing clear breaks every five points (which few people are likely to endorse).

Regarding the choice between option A and B my intuition tells me that 2c is enough at this moment. It does leave room for a bit of interpretation on behalf of the referee (or the players) since it is not exactly defined what "continuous play" is - but I think this is fine (and I believe this is the situation within squash also).

And if we want to regulate more tightly what is allowed and not allowed then I feel that we should study in more detail the approach of each of the four sports in order to get consistency. (I have seen Nadal using a towel between every point in tennis for ex...) Specifically I don't like the idea to let the opponent formally decide whether a player can pause or not. (Asking the opponent for a pause is a courtesy thing which does not go particularly well with formal regulation.)

2) Proposed Voting Procedure
1. Simple majority vote between option A and B.
2. Then "Yes" or "No" vote on proposal. (Two thirds majority required for approval - as usual.)

3) Recommendation by Rules Officer
Yes. Let's remove this source of potential confusion. (I have no strong feelings regarding options A or B but A should be enough. It already says that the referee decides what is continuous play or not.)

4) AGM Decision (According to Lennart Eklundh, acting Rules Officer at the AGM)
APPROVAL of Option A "'Continuous play' is enough"

_________________________________