Die WSF hat folgende Regel\u00e4nderungen per 1. 1. 2019 beschlossen (englische Originalfassung der WSF-Aussendung):<\/p>\n
THE WARM-UP<\/strong> INTERFERENCE<\/strong> NEUE REGEL<\/strong> Vollst\u00e4ndig: Alle Regeln sind auf der Homepage http:\/\/www.worldsquash.org\/ws\/rules-of-squash-2<\/a> nachzulesen.<\/p>\n Auch die Anti Doping Regeln<\/strong> wurden erg\u00e4nzt\/abge\u00e4ndert:<\/p>\n Beta-2-Agonists are used in inhalers. Some are not prohibited if used in correct prescribed doses and a urine threshold level of the drug is not exceeded. Not all Beta-2-Agonists are accepted, some remain prohibited.
\nTime period allowed for the Warm up in Rule 4 .1:<\/em>
\nchanged to 4 minutes with half time to be called at 2 minutes.
\n<\/em>
\nVollst\u00e4ndiger Absatz nun:
\n4.1 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.
\n4.2 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.<\/p>\n
\nRule 8.11 amended to read:<\/em>
\n\u201cFreedom to strike the ball to any part of the front wall\u201d (leaving out the word entire).
\n<\/em>
\nVollst\u00e4ndig nun:
\n8.11 Freedom to strike the ball to any part of the front wall If the striker refrains from striking the ball because of front-wall interference, and requests a let, then:
\n8.11.1 if there was interference and the ball would have hit the non-striker on a direct path to the front wall, a stroke is awarded to the striker, unless the striker had turned or was making a further
\nattempt , in which case a let is allowed;
\n8.11.2 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; or
\n8.11.3 if the ball would first have hit a side wall and then the non-striker 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.
\nRule 8.1.4 amended to read:
\n\u201cthe freedom to strike the ball to any part of the front wall\u201d (leaving out the word entire)
\nVollst\u00e4ndig nun:
\n8.1 After completing a reasonable follow-through, a player must make every effort to clear, so that when the ball rebounds from the front wall the opponent has:
\n8.1.1 a fair view of the ball on its rebound from the front wall; and
\n8.1.2 unobstructed direct access to the ball; and
\n8.1.3 the space to make a reasonable swing at the ball; and
\n8.1.4 the freedom to strike the ball to any part of the front wall. Interference occurs when the player does not provide the opponent with all of these requirements.<\/p>\n
\nA new rule added 8.9.3:
\n\u201cWhere there has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent, the provisions of 8.6 apply.<\/em><\/p>\n
\n8.9 Racket Swing<\/strong>
\nA reasonable swing comprises a reasonable backswing, a strike at the ball and a reasonable follow-through. The striker\u2019s backswing and follow-through are reasonable as long as they do not extend more than is necessary. If the striker requests a let for interference to the swing, then:
\n8.9.1 if the swing was affected by slight contact with the opponent who was making every effort to avoid the interference a let is allowed, unless the striker would have made a winning return , in which case a stroke is awarded to the striker;
\n8.9.2 if the swing was prevented by contact with the opponent, a stroke is awarded to the striker, even if the opponent was making every effort to avoid the interference;
\n8.9.3 where there has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent, the provisions of 8.6 apply.
\n8.6 General
\nThe following provisions apply to all forms of interference:
\n8.6.1 if there was neither interference nor reasonable fear of injury, no let is allowed;
\n8.6.2 if there was interference but the striker would not have been able to make a good return , no let is allowed;
\n8.6.3 if the striker continued play beyond the interference and then requested a let, no let is allowed;
\n8.6.4 if there was interference, but it did not prevent the striker from seeing and getting to the ball to make a good return , this is minimal interference and no let is allowed;
\n8.6.5 if the striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker;
\n8.6.6 if there was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return , a let is allowed;
\n8.6.7 if there was interference and the striker would have made a winning return , a stroke is awarded to the striker.<\/p>\n
\nTretoquinol (trimetoquinol) is added as an example to those Beta-2-Agonists that are prohibited. This is an ingredient in oral cold and flu medications, particularly in some countries in Asia.
\nThe message for athletes who use Beta-2-Agonists, for asthma, is to make sure to check the one being used is acceptable. Otherwise, a drug test will be positive. If a prohibited one is necessary for medical reasons, then a TUE is required.<\/p>\n