When there's no referee, how exactly should rule 17 be applied.

Someone I play at the local league (we're both distinct underdogs amongst much of the competition) has a few quirks that result in me getting hit with the ball regularly.

Situation 1 is turning. He wasn't aware of any turning rules and just spins and hits the ball with little regard for where I am. He has hit me occasionally as a result.

Situation 2 is when I've played a bad shot, pinned to the wall and he will often play it at me (mostly accidentally) as it's the easiest shot for him. Besides we're not the most accurate players out there!

Neither are malicious, more a matter of habit.

According to the rules, if he hits me with situation 1 then I get the point, otherwise he's fine and play goes on as normal. Situation 2 means that if the ball was going to hit the side wall first then it'd be a let, which is how it would work out.

However, as this comes up regularly, does it fall foul of rule 17? How COULD That be applied in a non-referee'd game ?

If I were getting hit regularly by someone, I don't think I would bother playing them! I would tend towards the view that anything other than a very occasional hit with the ball (and by this I mean much less than once per match!) is dangerous play and should be penalised by losing the point if not the game and the match. I am sure a referee would call off a match if one player was regularly getting hit - I don't see why it should be different with no ref. In the end of course it's up to you. If you and your fellow players continue to play someone who keeps hitting you with the ball, I guess you will just have to live with it. Sorry if this isn't the technically correct answer you wanted, but this level of squash is mostly meant to be for enjoyment isn't it?

If you stop his shot from hitting the front wall whether he turned or not, he is awarded a stroke. If you stop his shot from hitting the side wall first then it is a let. It may not seem fair because you are the one getting hit with the ball but that is the correct call. Turning on the ball only matters when the player elects not to strike the ball and that can be called either way depending on the situation of the ball and the players. I hope you wear eye protection.

If your opponet turns and hits you it is a stroke. They changed the rule to that to make the game safer not to long ago.

How does this make the game safer?

If I call for a let when turning on the ball, I'm only going to get a let, if I strike the opponent after turning I get a stroke, I know which option I prefer.

My theory is don't turn, it eliminates all possible confusion, opens up the court more and, therefore, should allow you to win the point.

You've got it wrong. If you turn and hit your opponent HE gets the stroke, not you. That is why it is safer.

The problem is that there's no benefit to not "going for" the shot after a turn.. If he DOESN'T hit you, in many situations he's probably in a pretty strong position.

My main query was whether I could claim the point if he was obviously using turning and careless hitting as a tactic. It makes it uncomfortable to play when you're risking a ball in the face occasionally, is that what's classed as intimidation, or is that threats, swearing etc..? Without a referee, do you just ignore rule 17, and refuse to play?

If the rule really is as follows, with no regard to motivation or tactical play then it makes it rather difficult to play non-refereed matches at my level.

(Going towards front wall)
(Turned)
(Hits opponent): Opponent point
(Not turned)
(Hits opponent): Stroke
(Going towards side wall)
(Turned)
(Hits opponent): Opponent point
(Not turned)
(Hits opponent): Let

I would definitely consider repeated hitting with the ball to be intimidation. In a friendly league with no referee, should your opponent not get the message when you point out to him that he is playing dangerously, I would stop playing and claim the match. Tell the person running the league what you have done and why and he should be able to act as the "referee" to award you the match. I guess he could also suggest to your opponent that he change his ways and leave the league if he doesn't.

we've had a survey the majority wants the new forum wat r u waiting for just take this one down

In this case I would just stop playing. I do not believe rule 17 can be applied in this sense, however if there was a referre it would be considred unsafe play. It would probably not be any of the other things you mentioned unless he was make some sort of gesture or saying something to you afterwards. Hopefully this helps.

That survey was on the new forum, so was a self-selecting poll, therefore invalid.

this forum is dying and boring while the other one is heaps big y not just get rid of this one once and for all. We can hav a survey now everyone on the last link hated this one except for like one or two ppl.

and here's one of the problems with this forum ... someone impersonating me !