All-Star A Night With The Popes.

[Mclovin]

I just had to quote you as a side note because you changed your profile pic and I'm like 'WHO am I talking to??' lol

Then the question becomes- SHOULD that be the case? I don't think I've EVER gone to any type of sporting tournament where we won games by forfeit. And I played various levels of all sorts of sports. If there was not going to be anyone there in our division, we didn't go. But even THAT didn't happen. The only place I've encountered this is in cheerleading. And this is part of the reason why people don't take us seriously..So what do we do about it?

1) My previous avatar was like 2 years old so I decided to change it this morning, lol

2) My son played football when he was younger and there were a couple of games where they won by forfeiture because the other team didn't have enough athletes show up to play the game. For playoff purposes, that win still counted for them and the loss counted towards the team that couldn't play. But they never even stepped foot on the field... As far as cheer is related...having no one to compete against in any particular division is a very sad part of our sport. I'm hoping eventually our age grid will change to eliminate this problem. :-/

 

[Nothanks]

Also, like it was pointed out, the girl was on all 4 rosters which is also another reason why I don't view this as "cheating".


.

[/quote]
My question is, when was it decided this girl would be on the 4th team? It's been mentioned she did it because of an injury...was the injury before the comp? Or at it. Because if she WAS rosters 4 times going into CS, and the injury was there, that's an even bigger problem because she was anticipating needing this fill-in. If she was replaced at the comp in warm ups, then she wouldn't have technically been rostered, would she? and if it happened long before the comp and she was the designated fill in, shouldn't this have been settled before showing up? And if that's the case, they would have had time to find another athlete to learn the key parts (if not the whole thing) in the routine.

 

[Mom Jeans]

You don't pay to Exhibit do you? IDK cuz Ive never been to Cheersport. Were they asked to pay when the decision was made that they didn't have to exhibit and prizes would be given

 

[Deleted member 15]

I can appreciate the spirit of the rule: prevent sandbagging. I don't, however, think this rule is the way to go about it.

The rule was put in place to limit overusing an athlete. It was not put in place to prevent sandbagging.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

I don't know, does it? Depends on if you define your nationals as a 'true' nationals. See my post above about me being on an Open team. ^

Also- I'd like to point out two things (which reference other posts besides yours):
1) There are several conflicting stories about how many teams was she on in the first place. Some say it was only 3, and she helped out for this comp because another girl was injured on YR5, who was going against nobody. Which meant she was legal until this one competition regardless, where she helped out a team that had zero competition.
2) Others also mentioned that it only matters on how many teams you're competing on per competition- you can be on 6 different teams in a gym, but if you're only competing on 3 at one competition, that's all that matters.

I smell a LOOPHOLE.

To answer your points:
1) What does "legal until this competition" matter? We're talking about this competition. If I go out and murder someone today, I've been "legal until this murder". So I don't understand that statement. What we're asking is WHY she was the one that was chosen to "help out"? She was already "hitting the mat" 3 times. That's the limit. Find someone else. How many athletes did CEA have at Cheersport?
2) Agreed that from a rules standpoint you can be on 6 teams at your gym. But as a gym owner (and a parent - I don't hold this girl's parents completely blameless in this, as I highly doubt a level 5 athlete's parents aren't aware of the rules), why would you put someone on 4 teams (or 6, or 8, or however many) when those teams are scheduled to go to a competition all together? All 4 teams were scheduled for Cheersport.

 

[quitthedrama]

Can we all keep in mind that there is a difference between "cheating" and "breaking a rule". Obviously intent is critical. If the intent was to cheat, would the girls name have actually been on all 4 rosters?

Just like self-defense, manslaughter and murder are different in penalties even though the result is the same.

At this point, CEA has been penalized but the pitchfork crew really should be upset with USASF and the penalty if they don't feel there were enough lashes.

I am trying to leave CEA out of this at this point because this situation is worthy of discussion and I don't want the thread to get locked or myself to get banned for voicing my opinion about the gym itself. Lots of murders leave evidence at the scene - does that mean they didn't "intend" to kill someone? We certainly have far different degrees of wrongdoing, but premeditated cheating is worse IMO - it leads me to believe the offender thinks they are above the law, particularly since this it has been confirmed this was not the only competition where the gym broke the rules.
If I remember correctly, in reading the discussion for the rule changes, USASF's "intent" on making the crossover rule no more than three teams was for the safety of the athlete. It had nothing to do with making the competition fair. I remember being a bit outraged at the rule change, as I have a huge issue with crossovers to different levels as did many who gave input in the rules discussion and I was pretty upset that USASF deemed it more important to worry about something the gym owner, coach, parent and athlete should be responsible for and not about the poor level two team with true level skills competing against a team where 14 out of 20 kids come off the competition mat after competing level 2 and running to their level 5 warmup time (sorry for the digression)...so if in fact, the intent of the rule was to minimize injury/mental health or whatever for the athlete, then I think the intent of the rule was broken even MORE so than if it was just worrying about the teams they were competing against.
And as far as the exhibition/competition argument goes, I was at CHEERSPORT and watched the youth R5 division. When CEA was announced, there was no mention of exhibition. Their scores and results are posted with every other team on the website and they got their banners, medals and jackets. They competed and it shouldn't matter if they didn't compete against anyone else, particularly since the other three teams the athlete was on competed against other teams. If CHEERSPORT did know the athlete was on 4 teams, then they broke the rules as well and should be penalized, but it doesn't make the fact that the gym broke the rules any less important. If at Worlds there was an athlete that competed on a Small Senior 5 team that won and also competed on an IAG6 team that had no competition, would you still feel that one was only an exhibition and the rules that were broken shouldn't matter?

 

[Just-a-Mom]

So this is the deal my daughter was on four teams last year ( it was going to be three ) but after the two Youth Elites were so good last year the plan to combine them into one was scratched and therefore they kept them seperate the entire season . Now there were only a couple of competitions that all four teams went to together . A week or so before Cheersport a alternate was put on YE Kville to replace my daughter ( because YE Kville was going to Dallas and also they were going to register at Cheersport as Youth Restricted ) and exibition YE Raleigh had direct competition and this was going to be this teams BIG one for the season . When we arrived at Cheersport we fully expected to only do three teams ( Now my daughter wanted to take the floor with YE Kville since they were going to Dallas the next week) . To our surprise and happiness Courtney presented this to Cheersport who said go ahead since the fourth team is only exibition ( on a side note in the Youth Restricted division the team threw about 19 double fulls ) it was really a tune up for Dallas . Also they were not penalized for throwing all the doubles because again the upfront agreement was exibition anyway . So she was listed on all four rosters not trying to hide anything . This is a long one so I will stop here and answer anything I can in a seperate post.

My question is, when was it decided this girl would be on the 4th team? It's been mentioned she did it because of an injury...was the injury before the comp? Or at it. Because if she WAS rosters 4 times going into CS, and the injury was there, that's an even bigger problem because she was anticipating needing this fill-in. If she was replaced at the comp in warm ups, then she wouldn't have technically been rostered, would she? and if it happened long before the comp and she was the designated fill in, shouldn't this have been settled before showing up? And if that's the case, they would have had time to find another athlete to learn the key parts (if not the whole thing) in the routine.

According to her father's post, all season. He does go on to say she was replaced with an alternate for CS, but I'm not really clear why she was put back on. But it came directly from him that she was on 4 teams last year. From the get go.

 

[FierceandFearless]

My question is, when was it decided this girl would be on the 4th team? It's been mentioned she did it because of an injury...was the injury before the comp? Or at it. Because if she WAS rosters 4 times going into CS, and the injury was there, that's an even bigger problem because she was anticipating needing this fill-in. If she was replaced at the comp in warm ups, then she wouldn't have technically been rostered, would she? and if it happened long before the comp and she was the designated fill in, shouldn't this have been settled before showing up? And if that's the case, they would have had time to find another athlete to learn the key parts (if not the whole thing) in the routine.[/quote]
tuckxandxtwist

(the part in italic I'd like someone to try and answer that question please)
A couple of theories. Maybe she was an alternate just incase this did happen before a comp so she knew the routine already? Or maybe the athlete is one (much like myself) who is at the gym so often that they unintentionally know each teams routines inside and out because they see it happen so often, which could explain why the girl knew key parts of a routine she was not supposed to be on.

Like it's been said CSP went to registration.... is it possible she could have asked them to add the child to the roster there? (Not sure how registration works so please someone clarify if that's a possibility). Could this injury possibly have happened the night before in a last minute practice and CSP called and added the girl to the roster but CS said that they couldn't deal with changing the team to exhib. over the phone, because it had to be dealt with officials in person or something weird, for some odd reason? I can come up with several theories to continue to try to give CSP the benefit of the doubt, but I was not there, so I do not know.

You make VERY good points and questions, I just don't have the answers... like I said, my post was theoretical, not a fact.

 

[SheCheers]

But in that definition- it is defined as having competitive value. IS there a competitive value if you're going against nobody? Even if you're being scored, are you still competing? Some companies score exhibitions, some don't. I was a member of an Open team. I 'won' a jamfest competition, against nobody. Did I still compete? Only in the cheer world would I have competed against myself and won. NO other sport does this- which is why we're having an issue.

Was the a high point and/or grand champ awarded? Did they tabulate all 4 teams scores in this? Just a legit question, I've never attended a cheersport comp.

 

[kristenthegreat]

Was the a high point and/or grand champ awarded? Did they tabulate all 4 teams scores in this? Just a legit question, I've never attended a cheersport comp.

Neither have I lol. ETA- YR5 was scored. But that includes the fact that they also competed doubles.

I'd like to say upfront that I have six different people quoting me at once over 2 threads, so if I skip you, it doesn't mean I don't love you..it might mean I've gone to work tonight or forgot to get back to your response. I'm finding this whole thing very interesting as it brings up a couple issues with how the rules are laid out.

The rule was put in place to limit overusing an athlete. It was not put in place to prevent sandbagging.

Silly me thinking that sandbagging was the issue it addressed. Shows where my priorities are (telling other people what to do with their athletes rather than limiting my own awesomeness)..lol.

 

[MyGirlCheers]

Just thought of something else. This team was registered for the Youth R5. But, since they didn't have any competition, they performed a routine that should have fallen in the non-restricted division, yes? So, since CS judged them and awarded them a win, weren't they again breaking the rules by letting them compete in the restricted division with a non-restricted routine rather than having them actually compete in the skill-appropriate Y5 division? So basically, CS allowed two Y5 teams to win - they just let one do it under the title "restricted" even though it wasn't? Irregardless of an illegal athlete, this is still wrong.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

Neither have I lol. ETA- YR5 was scored. But that includes the fact that they also competed doubles.

I'd like to say upfront that I have six different people quoting me at once over 2 threads, so if I skip you, it doesn't mean I don't love you..it might mean I've gone to work tonight or forgot to get back to your response. I'm finding this whole thing very interesting as it brings up a couple issues with how the rules are laid out.


Silly me thinking that sandbagging was the issue it addressed. Shows where my priorities are (telling other people what to do with their athletes rather than limiting my own awesomeness)..lol.

I'm quoting you a lot, and I KNOW you love me.

s to the bolded part - that's the point. They were scored - and awarded prizes. As I said above (and someone else who was there also verified) there is a video of them being announced as National Champs and being given the banner and jackets.

And for the score with doubles - I quoted it a few pages back. Her own father said they weren't penalized for the doubles. So as I asked before, doesn't that mean that not only is CEA getting rules bent in registration at Cheersport, but also on scoring??? Because to my knowledge, doubles aren't allowed in restricted. Her father said they performed 19 of them. Shouldn't they have lost points for all 19? I know they weren't against anyone in the division, but again this goes back to the whole issue. Right vs. wrong.

 

[CheerMomNTx]

Bottom line Cheesport should be held accountable as well and what is USASF going to do about it? CEA paid their fine and that should be that.

 

[MyGirlCheers]

I think they mention somewhere that they're defining program as PROGRAM (meaning CEA, Fame, Cali, etc). Not as each separate gym as a separate entity- as you may still be required to compete against your own gym even if they're from a different location (I might be mashing things together- double check division splitting).

Yes, I read that in the division splitting section, but I'm positive at some point last season I read the USASF definition of "program". I was curious because our gym does have two locations. What I read was that a program with two locations doesn't count as two separate gyms if the coaching staff is the same for both locations and the majority of teams practice at both locations. If a program has two locations with separate staff and separate teams, then they are considered two distinct programs. Now I just wish I could find where I read that...

 

[CGAcheer]

According to her father's post, all season. He does go on to say she was replaced with an alternate for CS, but I'm not really clear why she was put back on. But it came directly from him that she was on 4 teams last year. From the get go.

from having read the entire thread, here is my summary and also why I don't particularly care that the rule was broken

What Happened-
The girl was on 4 teams to jr 5's and the kville y5 and raleigh y5.
There are only 2 real competitions where all 4 teams would be at.
Their original plan was to have a replacement for her on one of the teams to be legal
NCA Dallas was the next week and the kville y5 was going to it.
Kville y5 went restricted so they wouldn't be competing against raleigh y5 and so that the raleigh y5 could compete against the CA y5
so with Dallas next week and no one in the division, CSP asked if it would be ok if the girl could perform with kville y5 as an exhibition. CS gave the ok but left it as a non exhibition for some reason.

and here is why I don't really care-
is it really competition if you competed against no one?
There was no 2nd place team that was harmed by this
They were using it as a practice for Dallas
Having a y5 comes with the understanding that for most of your season you don't have any competition.
Was a rule broken? yes. Did she intend to break the rule? no. Were other teams harmed by this girl competing on the team that had no competition and were treating it as an exhibition/practice which is evidenced by the 19 doubles? no
Why does it matter if they got jackets and banners? They could have just laid down on the floor for 2.5 mins and got banners and jackets.

so I think its time to just let it rest and move on