All-Star S/o Release Discussion Re: Worlds Athletes

[nlow]

The gym owner doesn't have absolute power, the parents do. Never go to a gym and that gym won't exist.

parents have no power after nov 1. don't get me wrong i think it is a good rule and nov should be enough time to make a decision but everyone should be held accountable. if athlete has to suck it up and stay then a gym owner should have to suck it up and not be able to replace them with someone they decide is "better" after nov 1 either.

 

[debbie]

Bluecat beat me to it. Its that an appeal process isn't practical or cost effective. I skipped the step of saying that on a strictly an ideological level, you are right. An appeal process would be great! But I keep answering from a pragmatic standpoint... one that takes and tells you how likely or possible the idea is. It's just not possible right now.

If an appeal process is not possible the rule should go

 

[juscheerthatisall]

So what if they were moved to level 4 or restricted 5 would u still feel the same?

 

[BlueCat]

So far, what would be your guess as to how many athletes are/were unable to compete at Worlds for a season specifically because of this rule?

 

[BlueCat]

parents have no power after nov 1. don't get me wrong i think it is a good rule and nov should be enough time to make a decision but everyone should be held accountable. if athlete has to suck it up and stay then a gym owner should have to suck it up and not be able to replace them with someone they decide is "better" after nov 1 either.

Parents and athletes simply walking away from a program gives them immense power over coaches. Parents who have a valid gripe about the way a particular gym handles something like this can easily cause enough PR damage to a gym to make it unwise for gym owners to deny releases. I would say that is tremendous power.

Also, if you don't like athletes getting replaced late in the season, then this rule helps limit that.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

So it's been pointed out that this rule only affects a SMALL, minute population of people. But it's also been pointed out that the cost and waste of time associated with an appeals process (which NUMEROUS people have offered to form a committee to do for FREE for the USASF) would be just too astronomical to be practical. Which is it? There is such a tiny number of athletes affected that it's silly to even discuss the rule...or there would be too many appeals to deal with/

 

[kristenthegreat]

So it's been pointed out that this rule only affects a SMALL, minute population of people. But it's also been pointed out that the cost and waste of time associated with an appeals process (which NUMEROUS people have offered to form a committee to do for FREE for the USASF) would be just too astronomical to be practical. Which is it? There is such a tiny number of athletes affected that it's silly to even discuss the rule...or there would be too many appeals to deal with/

I think it might be that the rule as of right now affects very few people BUT, with the concept of an 'appeals' process, it could grow to astronomical proportions. To start, the time/effort/money/resources to set up the actual process, get the details straightened out (how it will be run, up to what point can you appeal, what will actually be considered in an appeal, creating paperwork that is legally sound)..etc. Then comes the amount of people who can now be more lax about their decision-making process, knowing there's a chance they might be able to score an appeal down the road.

Let me give you an example: My old college used to charge only $100 for the dorm deposit. What they started to find was that initially they thought they would need all these extra rooms for students, so they would procure extra dorms. What was ACTUALLY happening, was that students would put down the $100 deposit, then look for an apt. If they found one, they'd walk away from the $100 (because for some people, $100 non-refunded isn't that big of a deal)..and my college was left to foot the bill for all these extra dorms. Instead, what they did the next year was charge $400, the amount of refund you could receive decreased in proportion to how close it was to start of term (From May to July, after which you wouldn't get ANYTHING back). The $400 was subtracted from what you would be charged to dorm per semester..this way, it forced people to make a housing decision faster. Did it suck for those students whose housing fell through and had to be on the wait-list? Or who were stuck not knowing where they would be living or with whom? Sure. But it began to force people to make smarter, more educated decisions with their money because of it. Like the students who just put down the $100 and didn't care when they walked away, so too might we have a bigger issue if people get lax about making decisions because they feel they can just appeal later on.

 

[ztaprincess]

So far, what would be your guess as to how many athletes are/were unable to compete at Worlds for a season specifically because of this rule?

I think that there were 3 or 4 last season that couldn't compete at worlds because of this rule, but those are just the cases that got a good amount of attention on facebook, twitter, and on here.

I think it might be that the rule as of right now affects very few people BUT, with the concept of an 'appeals' process, it could grow to astronomical proportions.

If there were only 3 or 4 that this hurt last year then how would adding an appeals process be too much? If the rule is for only a small percentage and an even smaller percentage of that is being negatively affected by the rule then I don't see how it would cost any more time or money to add an appeals process. If you have to think that it would take up too much more time then that means the rule is being abused more then is being reported.

 

[ACEDAD]

Let's get serious about this "appeal" process and what it would involve. Let's say there are 5 people on the appeals committee

1. Athlete appeals. Gym owner says "owes me $300". What is going to happen then? How is the committee going to "meet"? via phone? via GoToMeeting? what are they going to review as "evidence"? Cancelled checks, invoices? What is "proof" that the person really owed the money? How much time is going to be involved here? Someone earlier said 10 minutes. Right.

2. Athlete appeals because they say a coach abused them. What is going to happen then? What's proof? What's evidence? And let's take it even further: A. assume coach is guilty as sin = do you think the coach is going to let some committee with the USASF review anything and make a decision? B. assume coach is completely innocent = do you think the coach is going to let some committee with the USASF review anything and make a decision?

And everyone wants to make the appeals results completely public... Let's say the coach in 2.B. above DOES allow the committee to review the "evidence" and the committe rules against the coach. If that gets made public, the coach's next call is for his atty to sue anyone and everyone.

Seriously people, this needs to be thought about.

I don't like that an athlete might be denied a shot at Worlds in an unfortunate set of circumstances. But there are lots of issues in play here.

 

[kristenthegreat]

I think that there were 3 or 4 last season that couldn't compete at worlds because of this rule, but those are just the cases that got a good amount of attention on facebook, twitter, and on here.


If there were only 3 or 4 that this hurt last year then how would adding an appeals process be too much? If the rule is for only a small percentage and an even smaller percentage of that is being negatively affected by the rule then I don't see how it would cost any more time or money to add an appeals process. If you have to think that it would take up too much more time then that means the rule is being abused more then is being reported.

Read the second bit of my extremely long winded essay..or the short version: If you knew there that you could always appeal later, how eager would you be to make a decision? How long would you put it off knowing you could do it later? How long might someone stick around thinking 'Oh, well maybe it will get better?' There is the chance that more people would go for the appeal simply because it's there. Instead of making the decision NOW, since they don't want to get stuck, they drag their feet thinking 'Oh, well it's ok. I can totally just appeal the decision..' I go into an example in my post above..again, the second paragraph..

 

[King]

I have an idea, if you don't get a release form there is just a 6 month waiting period and then you can go where ever you want. Shouldn't that satisfy everyones want for a way out?

 

[Just-a-Mom]

Let's get serious about this "appeal" process and what it would involve. Let's say there are 5 people on the appeals committee

1. Athlete appeals. Gym owner says "owes me $300". What is going to happen then? How is the committee going to "meet"? via phone? via GoToMeeting? what are they going to review as "evidence"? Cancelled checks, invoices? What is "proof" that the person really owed the money? How much time is going to be involved here? Someone earlier said 10 minutes. Right.

2. Athlete appeals because they say a coach abused them. What is going to happen then? What's proof? What's evidence? And let's take it even further: A. assume coach is guilty as sin = do you think the coach is going to let some committee with the USASF review anything and make a decision? B. assume coach is completely innocent = do you think the coach is going to let some committee with the USASF review anything and make a decision?

And everyone wants to make the appeals results completely public... Let's say the coach in 2.B. above DOES allow the committee to review the "evidence" and the committe rules against the coach. If that gets made public, the coach's next call is for his atty to sue anyone and everyone.

Seriously people, this needs to be thought about.

I don't like that an athlete might be denied a shot at Worlds in an unfortunate set of circumstances. But there are lots of issues in play here.

Just looking at number 2 - if an athlete says a coach abused them and goes to the USASF instead of the police they have WAY bigger issues than not going to Worlds. When I said this earlier I meant illegal activity that was reported to the police. In that case the coach has no say whatsoever in who gets to see it. It's public record. Submit the papers with your appeals paper (just print out what you find online - it's very easy to google police charges).

As for the committee, meet over the phone. Meet in a chatroom. Email each other.

And yes, I would expect if you were going to try to argue that you had paid a bill your gym was saying you didn't that you would have some sort of documentation - cancelled check, bank statement, credit card bill..if you paid cash I would hope you'd get a receipt.

I know everyone keeps saying we're making this a bigger deal than it is, but I feel like you guys are too. Just get 3 people to review the appeal and accompanying documentation. Then those 3 people get on the phone and vote. Done.

And YES YES YES it needs to be thought out. That's why we keep saying "Let's discuss this and come up with a better way"!!! That's what we're doing right here, right now. "Thinking it out"

 

[Just-a-Mom]

Just looking at number 2 - if an athlete says a coach abused them and goes to the USASF instead of the police they have WAY bigger issues than not going to Worlds. When I said this earlier I meant illegal activity that was reported to the police. In that case the coach has no say whatsoever in who gets to see it. It's public record. Submit the papers with your appeals paper (just print out what you find online - it's very easy to google police charges).

As for the committee, meet over the phone. Meet in a chatroom. Email each other.

And yes, I would expect if you were going to try to argue that you had paid a bill your gym was saying you didn't that you would have some sort of documentation - cancelled check, bank statement, credit card bill..if you paid cash I would hope you'd get a receipt.

I know everyone keeps saying we're making this a bigger deal than it is, but I feel like you guys are too. Just get 3 people to review the appeal and accompanying documentation. Then those 3 people get on the phone and vote. Done.

And YES YES YES it needs to be thought out. That's why we keep saying "Let's discuss this and come up with a better way"!!! That's what we're doing right here, right now. "Thinking it out"

^^^^^ Yuck. Way snarkier than I intended that to sound.

 

[kristenthegreat]

Also- everyone seems to keep saying that tons of other youth sports have something similar in place already and it works great...what is it?

 

[ztaprincess]

Read the second bit of my extremely long winded essay..or the short version: If you knew there that you could always appeal later, how eager would you be to make a decision? How long would you put it off knowing you could do it later? How long might someone stick around thinking 'Oh, well maybe it will get better?' There is the chance that more people would go for the appeal simply because it's there. Instead of making the decision NOW, since they don't want to get stuck, they drag their feet thinking 'Oh, well it's ok. I can totally just appeal the decision..' I go into an example in my post above..again, the second paragraph..

But if you make it so that the loser of the appeal has to pay then less people will be filing an appeal that has no chance of going through. A phone call once a month between people to go over any appeals that have came in should not take that long. If someone has to go through and make sure these release waivers are signed, which I question how they know for sure they are not forged, then why not go through appeals papers. You could even have two steps in the process. Step 1 someone would skim over them and see which ones are serious claims and those appeals would go on to the step of being voted on and the rest are thrown out.

As I questioned above how does whoever verify these releases? Do they just believe the paper they receive or do they check them out?