All-Star Usasf 2015-2017 Cheer Safety Rules

Welcome to our Cheerleading Community

Members see FEWER ads... join today!

The first thing I think of is the Panthers girl that competed at Worlds a few years ago with a brace and did the entire stunt sequence with one arm. I guess USASF wasn't amused...
As they shouldn't have been! As amazing as it was watching that I still remember thinking that if I was the parent of the flyer I would not have been happy that was allowed.
 
Don't some of those ACL braces have hard metal components? I wonder if the USASF rule on the boots and things is because they have "hard" components that could be harmful if another athlete came into contact with them. When I saw the posts about the rule that was the reasoning I used.
 
As they shouldn't have been! As amazing as it was watching that I still remember thinking that if I was the parent of the flyer I would not have been happy that was allowed.
I displaced my growth plate in my left wrist before Battle At The Capitol and tried to convince my coach that I should just wrap it for comp and base one-armed then put a cast on it afterwards, he said no (mind you, the bone had shifted from the original position it was supposed to be in)
 
I displaced my growth plate in my left wrist before Battle At The Capitol and tried to convince my coach that I should just wrap it for comp and base one-armed then put a cast on it afterwards, he said no (mind you, the bone had shifted from the original position it was supposed to be in)
I admire anyone who wants to push through but when it's someone else's safety at risk it's just not worth it. Smart coach you had there.
 
As they shouldn't have been! As amazing as it was watching that I still remember thinking that if I was the parent of the flyer I would not have been happy that was allowed.
And everyone was giving all the praise to that base! I was like um, what about props to the other base, backspot, and flyer for having to push harder to pick up the slack?
 
Quick question.... I remember express ups/switch ups to extended one leg being legal in level 4 if you went ground up. But now the rules say "Release moves that land in extended position must originate from waist level or below and may not involve twisting or flipping." so would that mean they can be started in a load/smush? I'm confused by this wording...
Would this mean ball up to extended one leg would be legal if it started at waist level?
 
Quick question.... I remember express ups/switch ups to extended one leg being legal in level 4 if you went ground up. But now the rules say "Release moves that land in extended position must originate from waist level or below and may not involve twisting or flipping." so would that mean they can be started in a load/smush? I'm confused by this wording...
Would this mean ball up to extended one leg would be legal if it started at waist level?
Yes! Now legal! I am super excited for this as it really makes a lot more quick transitions possible. I am a big supporter of this rule change at our regional conference last year. It seemed to have a lot of support there as well. Great new rule.
 
Yes! Now legal! I am super excited for this as it really makes a lot more quick transitions possible. I am a big supporter of this rule change at our regional conference last year. It seemed to have a lot of support there as well. Great new rule.
I always found it weird that they made it illegal in the first place, it was legal a few years ago.
 
Well clearly, considering these are the safety rules, and this thread literally has 'safety' in its title.

What I meant is, do we really need to ban twisting skills with one BHS before them? Is that not, maybe, a bit of overkill? This time a few years ago, youths were allowed to show off any sort of complex tumbling they had. And we trusted coaches to put out only the strong and safe passes. I do believe in making youth 5 as safe as possible, but let's not go too far.
If all coaches made proper choices we wouldn't have the need to limit skills across the industry. Bc many coaches are risking kids safety it is important to place kids safety first. Is one bhs really that big of a deal in the big picture? If one bhs can save one kid from injury IMO it's worth it.
 
If all coaches made proper choices we wouldn't have the need to limit skills across the industry. Bc many coaches are risking kids safety it is important to place kids safety first. Is one bhs really that big of a deal in the big picture? If one bhs can save one kid from injury IMO it's worth it.
I understand all of that. It's very clear that these changes are made in the name of safety.

But my point is, where do we draw the line? Any skill can potentially cause a kid harm. I've seen so many underrotated doubles in the last few years, where I was genuinely concerned that these kids would break their ankles. Does that mean we should ban doubles in level 5? Safety of the athletes is paramount, you don't need to explain that to me, but I disagree that USASF needs to keep making cuts. There are other issues that need to be addressed. Like who are these coaches risking their athletes' safety? Perhaps better coach registration and training could be an answer...
 
Don't some of those ACL braces have hard metal components? I wonder if the USASF rule on the boots and things is because they have "hard" components that could be harmful if another athlete came into contact with them. When I saw the posts about the rule that was the reasoning I used.

I feel like the difference btw the two though is you have full range of motion in an ACL brace, you can still tumble and stunt in those braces just fine. Boots are more limiting. Also most of the people wearing an ACL brace are wearing it after the injury has healed as a preventative and supportive measure, vs. wearing a boot obviously means the injury has not healed yet...
 
Last edited:
I also see it that you have full range of motion in an ACL brace, you can still tumble and stunt in those braces just fine. Boots are more limiting. Also most of the people wearing an ACL brace are wearing it after the injury has healed, vs. wearing a boot means the injury has not healed...

That may be the case as well. I hadn't thought of it that way. Thanks for sharing!
 
I understand all of that. It's very clear that these changes are made in the name of safety.

But my point is, where do we draw the line? Any skill can potentially cause a kid harm. I've seen so many underrotated doubles in the last few years, where I was genuinely concerned that these kids would break their ankles. Does that mean we should ban doubles in level 5? Safety of the athletes is paramount, you don't need to explain that to me, but I disagree that USASF needs to keep making cuts. There are other issues that need to be addressed. Like who are these coaches risking their athletes' safety? Perhaps better coach registration and training could be an answer...
At no point is USASF looking and just pulling skills to just pull them. At some point coaches have to take responsibility. If coaches won't take responsibility then something has to be done. I HATE seeing skills being removed but not as much as I HATE seeing a kid get hurt. Coaches are not educating themselves enough. Yes, some do but MOST do not. Until that changes more skills willie removed. It's unfortunate.
 
That's a regular level 5 dismount out of a lib to a cradle...and was allowed and is still allowed (I see no changes in the rules for dismounts). Maybe you're confusing the basket rule that both feet need to be in/on flyers hands? Because a kick double dismount is not a basket...therefore, they can do it out of a lib.
I believe that is where many of us are confused, between dismounts and cradle? Because we are seeing this as a dismount. Could you explain the difference. Thanks.
 
Back