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

[King]

I know that there are gym hoppers, but I find the idea of the kid or two that gets trapped by a legitimate appealable situation as "expendable" galling. An acceptable loss, so to speak. Acceptable to the uber busy USASF, but not so to the parent who has spent years dragging said kid around and paying thousands of dollars. You'd hurl if I posted the the descriptions of the pedophile events that I have brushed up against while in cheer. That's events PLURAL. Sure, most of the situations, the kid shoulda quit or made a better choice earlier in the season, but to have no appeal process when we live in the United States of America, and we are used to have a JUDICIAL system. I'd get up and march around with a flag about now.

I know you are asking for suggestions to the USASF. I don't have a lot of sympathy for the too busy, blah, blah, blah. Cheer is big business profiting on children. Make it right.

I don't understand how this rule forces kids to stay and gyms that are reprehensible? You ALWAYS have a choice to walk away.

 

[ufomom]

A prudent parent and athlete would ask themselves early in the season, is this team right for me? That of course is the ideal. And the GOOD of this rule.

And a kid can certainly walk away from a reprehensible situation after 11/1. It is just there is no appeals process for a reprehensible situation. If the kid did not create the reprehensible situation and it is after 11/1, why is the only option walking away and sitting it out for the year.

I have NO sympathy for people who owe money, blah blah blah or are jumping ship for the next greatest (in their mind),

 

[King]

A prudent parent and athlete would ask themselves early in the season, is this team right for me? That of course is the ideal. And the GOOD of this rule.

And a kid can certainly walk away from a reprehensible situation after 11/1. It is just there is no appeals process for a reprehensible situation. If the kid did not create the reprehensible situation and it is after 11/1, why is the only option walking away and sitting it out for the year.

I have NO sympathy for people who owe money, blah blah blah or are jumping ship for the next greatest (in their mind),

And lets clarify, a reprehensible situation ONLY for Worlds athletes. All the rest can walk away. And they DONT sit out for a year. That is the thing. Where does it say they have to sit out for a year? They just sit out for one competition. Nothing is stopping them from cheering.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

I don't understand how this rule forces kids to stay and gyms that are reprehensible? You ALWAYS have a choice to walk away.

I think her post made it quite clear how it forces them. Because we, as parents, have spent THOUSANDS of dollars by the time those kids are ready to go to Worlds. If a kid is 18 and it's their last chance (unless they go on an international team which, as shocking as this may be to some people, isn't always possible) I would guess they do feel "forced" to stay. I think a parent has every right to DEMAND an appeals process for something that they right now have no say in.

I think a lot of times everyone forgets - WE ARE THE ONES FUNDING ALL OF THIS. ALL. OF. IT. My gym may choose the competitions we attend, but I pay the comp fees and the spectator fees. I pay for the uniform. I pay the tuition. I pay coaches fees, music fees, choreography fees, this fee, that fee, whatever fee. I pay for all of it. So while you tell Mamarazzi it's all about power, in my mind you're gosh darned right it is. And I think as parents WE should be the ones with the power. We are the ones with the money, so WHY ON EARTH would you sit here and say we shouldn't have any rights to appeal a decision that could cost us EVERYTHING we've spent over the years???

Hypothetical: If I pay for my child to cheer for 8 years - cheer, privates, comps, uniforms, etc. ...my God you're talking an astronomical amount of money (not to mention time, blood, sweat, tears, etc.) that we've put into it. Then the gym - who I've given the better part of my income and my life to for 8 years - hires a pedophile in November. (And don't even TRY to tell me that coaches aren't hired year round) In December it all blows up and he is arrested - but he is an amazing coach, so he stays (and of course he is pleading innocence and that the cp "made it up"). Say the gym owner NEEDS my cp on their Worlds team - say she's point flyer. Well, as a mom I say no way do I want her around creepy pedophile guy. The gym owner says "I'm not signing any waiver - I need her on my Worlds team. No way are you taking her skills somewhere else."

You're going to sit here with a straight face and tell me that I shouldn't be able to fight that????? That the gym owner should hold all rights to MY CHILD????? No ever-loving way. My money says different. So yes, I think it is about power - I just think the people with the money should be the people with the power. And the way things are right now the people with the money are the PARENTS.

 

[King]

I think her post made it quite clear how it forces them. Because we, as parents, have spent THOUSANDS of dollars by the time those kids are ready to go to Worlds. If a kid is 18 and it's their last chance (unless they go on an international team which, as shocking as this may be to some people, isn't always possible) I would guess they do feel "forced" to stay. I think a parent has every right to DEMAND an appeals process for something that they right now have no say in.

I think a lot of times everyone forgets - WE ARE THE ONES FUNDING ALL OF THIS. ALL. OF. IT. My gym may choose the competitions we attend, but I pay the comp fees and the spectator fees. I pay for the uniform. I pay the tuition. I pay coaches fees, music fees, choreography fees, this fee, that fee, whatever fee. I pay for all of it. So while you tell Mamarazzi it's all about power, in my mind you're gosh darned right it is. And I think as parents WE should be the ones with the power. We are the ones with the money, so WHY ON EARTH would you sit here and say we shouldn't have any rights to appeal a decision that could cost us EVERYTHING we've spent over the years???

Hypothetical: If I pay for my child to cheer for 8 years - cheer, privates, comps, uniforms, etc. ...my God you're talking an astronomical amount of money (not to mention time, blood, sweat, tears, etc.) that we've put into it. Then the gym - who I've given the better part of my income and my life to for 8 years - hires a pedophile in November. (And don't even TRY to tell me that coaches aren't hired year round) In December it all blows up and he is arrested - but he is an amazing coach, so he stays (and of course he is pleading innocence and that the cp "made it up"). Say the gym owner NEEDS my cp on their Worlds team - say she's point flyer. Well, as a mom I say no way do I want her around creepy pedophile guy. The gym owner says "I'm not signing any waiver - I need her on my Worlds team. No way are you taking her skills somewhere else."

You're going to sit here with a straight face and tell me that I shouldn't be able to fight that????? That the gym owner should hold all rights to MY CHILD????? No ever-loving way. My money says different. So yes, I think it is about power - I just think the people with the money should be the people with the power. And the way things are right now the people with the money are the PARENTS.

How does the gym owner have all the rights to your child? They can still compete at NCA, UCA, Cheersport, and yes eventually go to Worlds with an international if possible. Or what about the gyms that are out in the middle of nowhere and have no rival? You live in the middle of Minnesota and there is no gym anywhere close to you and its the same situation. You have no other options. You spent all that money. Would you allow your kid to stay at that gym to justify all the money you spent or would they just be done with cheerleading?

 

[Mamarazzi]

I am glad I asked because all your arguments seem to be ruled by the 'stick it to the man' feeling. It isn't about fixing the situation, it's about power. Yet the rule wasn't created to give gyms ultimate power. It was to help everyone with the gym hopping.

Actually, my arguments have more to do with hoping that the USASF would allow for the athletes and Gym Bs affected by the rule to have a voice to fight a situation that truly MAY be unfair - not in all situations, but in some. If you feel my arguments have no validity and all I want is the masses to rule without limit, that's a shame, and not my verbiage nor intent.
It's ok to want this rule amended, and quickly. Again, this rule isn't bad, just needs a process to allow ugly Gym A's to be held liable for not allowing an athlete to compete at Worlds when they should be able to.

 

[King]

Or what if that rival gym has 20 people on the small senior team already, but said athlete is amazing! Would the girls parents who got kicked off the small senior to make room for the new athlete be for or against the appeal? A lot of this discussion is based off where you sit determines where you stand. While there are reprehensible coaches out there the situation you described is an extreme rarity. I can come up with a 1,000 extreme rarity cases that are reprehensible. What if a coach kicked your daughter off a week before Worlds for someone who is better? Should there be a rule against that? What if the pedophile case when down three weeks before worlds... would you leave? What if someone didn't pay their bill on the team and left three weeks before worlds and there was NO ONE to replace her? is that fair? How possible are these scenarios? How possible is the one you mentioned?

 

[debbie]

I know that there are gym hoppers, but I find the idea of the kid or two that gets trapped by a legitimate appealable situation as "expendable" galling. An acceptable loss, so to speak. Acceptable to the uber busy USASF, but not so to the parent who has spent years dragging said kid around and paying thousands of dollars. You'd hurl if I posted the the descriptions of the pedophile events that I have brushed up against while in cheer. That's events PLURAL. Sure, most of the situations, the kid shoulda quit or made a better choice earlier in the season, but to have no appeal process when we live in the United States of America, and we are used to have a JUDICIAL system. I'd get up and march around with a flag about now.

I know you are asking for suggestions to the USASF. I don't have a lot of sympathy for the too busy, blah, blah, blah. Cheer is big business profiting on children. Make it right.

Thank you. This is said so well

 

[King]

Actually, my arguments have more to do with hoping that the USASF would allow for the athletes and Gym Bs affected by the rule to have a voice to fight a situation that truly MAY be unfair - not in all situations, but in some. If you feel my arguments have no validity and all I want is the masses to rule without limit, that's a shame, and not my verbiage nor intent.
It's ok to want this rule amended, and quickly. Again, this rule isn't bad, just needs a process to allow ugly Gym A's to be held liable for not allowing an athlete to compete at Worlds when they should be able to.

Actually, my arguments have more to do with hoping that the USASF would allow for the athletes and Gym Bs affected by the rule to have a voice to fight a situation that truly MAY be unfair - not in all situations, but in some. If you feel my arguments have no validity and all I want is the masses to rule without limit, that's a shame, and not my verbiage nor intent.
It's ok to want this rule amended, and quickly. Again, this rule isn't bad, just needs a process to allow ugly Gym A's to be held liable for not allowing an athlete to compete at Worlds when they should be able to.

I think where we disagree is that in theory I am fine with an appeals process. In application it will take longer than you think, more resources than you think, more planning than you think, very few people will volunteer for it (as it wouldn't be a paid position from the non USASF paid members), and VERY hard to prove anything. Bluecat's point was that there is only a few athletes this would affect to begin with (because the rule will keep most people at their current gym for the season on Worlds teams) but if there is an appeals process because the opportunity exists that number that try would jump up. There has to be a self limiting factor and I think you make the appeals process cost $1000 to apply. Even then there is probably less than a 1% chance the athlete would get released. Even being a childs senior year and the coach and the athlete had a huge falling out why would the committee be for it?If in the other case a coach got arrested for child molestation but then kept him on as a coach you don't think non-worlds parents would be leaving the gym? How can keeping that coach increase or keep the business the same? For the Worlds team... maybe... but the mini's or the youth teams? Why would they stay? These situations that are cooked up are just so heavily constructed and unbelievable that they have such a slight slim chance of ever being an issue.

 

[BlueCat]

I know that there are gym hoppers, but I find the idea of the kid or two that gets trapped by a legitimate appealable situation as "expendable" galling. An acceptable loss, so to speak. Acceptable to the uber busy USASF, but not so to the parent who has spent years dragging said kid around and paying thousands of dollars. You'd hurl if I posted the the descriptions of the pedophile events that I have brushed up against while in cheer. That's events PLURAL. Sure, most of the situations, the kid shoulda quit or made a better choice earlier in the season, but to have no appeal process when we live in the United States of America, and we are used to have a JUDICIAL system. I'd get up and march around with a flag about now.

I know you are asking for suggestions to the USASF. I don't have a lot of sympathy for the too busy, blah, blah, blah. Cheer is big business profiting on children. Make it right.

I appreciate your passion for the issue, however, you are twisting what I am saying. I am trying to give honest, logical reasons why the rule is in place. (You will also notice at no point have I even suggested that I approve of the rule or voted in favor of it.)

If I were choosing to go the appeal-to-emotion route, I would point out that the USASF spending time on reducing the danger of catastrophic injury by spending time on safety rules, procedures, certification would be more important than whether 1 or 2 Suzys get to compete at one particular event. If I wanted to make an even more unfair debate point, I would ask whether a child being killed or paralyzed is less important that an athlete getting to go to Orlando.

(I am not actually asking anyone to answer those questions.)

 

[debbie]

I full believe the rule solves a problem with gym hopping at the level where most of the gym hopping occurred. I always thought it odd that a very big gym could go to a competition, see a team with an amazing athlete, and basically recruit them for their program without issue. If WCSS, Orange, Top Gun, and Wildcats saw someone who would help their program at a comp there was nothing but their own personal moral value stopping them from going for that kid. While an individual can help ANY team it is not as necessary at all the other levels to scrap and fight for one athlete outside of the Worlds levels. Not that all the other levels are not important, but no one is calling Mini Level 1 athletes or posting on their Facebook trying to get them to change gyms all the time. So we have a specific problem with a specific age group and skill level and only one controllable factor, Worlds. If an athlete wants to leave a program on bad terms (whosever fault they may be) the athlete is not just affecting herself, but also the other 19, 23, 29, or 35 other athletes. And cheerleading isn't a straight up position sport. It is not like a backspot leaves and you JUST find another backspot. You have to find a backspot who tumbles the same (cause worse tumbling you have to take out OR better tumbling you have to make changes for as well) jumps the same, dances the same, and is good enough to hold up the flyer. While there is the chance that 1 or 2 athletes might be gipped out of a competing year, the unmeasurable amount of athletes this rule will help is WELL worth those 2. It is no different than worlds minimum age being raised to 12 and hearing about all the kids that were heart broken they couldn't go to Worlds at age 11! There will always be those that suffer. But I also know those athletes, no matter how much they gripe, are only having to sit out one competition. They aren't banned from cheerleading, practicing, competing. If they were at SOT and left a week before NCA Dallas they could walk over to Cheer Athletics and compete against them in the same division. They just wouldn't be allowed to go to Worlds UNLESS SOT decided it was ok.

I think I can see how many gyms, parents, and athletes this rule helps as well as how possible and doable an appeals process is (its not and it will never happen in the next few years). Parents always have the ultimate power as they can take their kid from any program at anytime they wise. We have had it where kids did not show up on competition days. Being 'sick' or going to another program. It happens. So I just don't buy into this parents are helpless to gym owners. Unless someone is forcing me to go to a gym there are always options. You are never forced and always have a choice. Not competing and cheering is always a choice.

Just what are you accusing wcss, orange,top gun, and wildcats of? That is a very ugly statement. Don't you think its very likely that a kid goes to a comp and sees an amazing club and thinks to him/herself I want to be part of that? I guess you just want to believe that great clubs go into back allies and steal kids.

 

[King]

Just what are you accusing wcss, orange,top gun, and wildcats of? That is a very ugly statement. Don't you think its very likely that a kid goes to a comp and sees an amazing club and thinks to him/herself I want to be part of that? I guess you just want to believe that great clubs go into back allies and steal kids.

I believe you are very confused and uninformed. I work for one of those great clubs. We have not ever done anything to that extent. Nor, to my knowledge, have any of the others. What did happen is a lot of gyms WOULD recruit at events (or right after events) allowing that their individual gym did better than another individual gym. I just always found it iterating that there wasn't a rule before this to protect from larger gyms doing this (because that is a constant fear).

 

[debbie]

L

I believe you are very confused and uninformed. I work for one of those great clubs. We have not ever done anything to that extent. Nor, to my knowledge, have any of the others. What did happen is a lot of gyms WOULD recruit at events (or right after events) allowing that their individual gym did better than another individual gym. I just always found it iterating that there wasn't a rule before this to protect from larger gyms doing this (because that is a constant fear).

Lets gyms keep their kids happy and they won't have "to fear" them going somewhere else.

 

[King]

L

Lets gyms keep their kids happy and they won't have "to fear" them going somewhere else.

How does a smaller gym that has a less competitive team but is excellent in customer service stop the top athlete that they have developed for a few years stop the child from going somewhere else in January because another program offered theme something more promising?

 

[debbie]

How does a smaller gym that has a less competitive team but is excellent in customer service stop the top athlete that they have developed for a few years stop the child from going somewhere else in January because another program offered theme something more promising?

Its called doing good business. Happens everyday in the real world of business. You must do better then your competition if you want to do well.