All-Star Cali Ghost Recon Lost Their Paid Bid?

[Official OWECheer]

You REALLY think they didn't know the rules (not that that would be an excuse)? Let's call it what it is. They got caught and will face no repercussions. They are Cali.

Messed up that in general, big gyms getting lighter punishments is a very real thing.

 

[luv2cheer92]

Unless I'm misunderstanding the rule, what Cali did to get the bid wasn't necessarily illegal so not sure why they would get punished. If they had then used that bid and the Black Ops kids stayed with Black Ops then yes, that would be cheating and warrant a punishment.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[Emily]

Unless I'm misunderstanding the rule, what Cali did to get the bid wasn't necessarily illegal so not sure why they would get punished. If they had then used that bid and the Black Ops kids stayed with Black Ops then yes, that would be cheating and warrant a punishment.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Depending on how many kids they had crossover it could have been illegal. You can only have a certain number of athletes on a team that previously earned a full-paid bid with another team. If they went over that number when ghost recon competed for and was awarded their bid, then they did not follow the rules.

 

[quitthedrama]

Unless I'm misunderstanding the rule, what Cali did to get the bid wasn't necessarily illegal so not sure why they would get punished. If they had then used that bid and the Black Ops kids stayed with Black Ops then yes, that would be cheating and warrant a punishment.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Correct, it may not have been illegal. It is what happened after the fact that I have an issue with. The rule clearly states that if an athlete earns a paid bid and then competes with a second team who earns a paid bid, that athletete(s) must compete for the second team at Worlds and not the first team.
"If the athlete's second team earns a paid or partial-paid bid, they are bound to the second team and may only compete with the second team at Worlds. The athlete is no longer eligible to compete with the first team once the second team is awarded a paid or partial-paid bid."
I don't know how the rule could be written to be more clear. Ghost Recon EARNED and was AWARDED a paid bid. They accepted that paid bid at the competition (which was 3/13 according to the wiki). If the USASF makes a rule and publishes it, then they should also enforce that rule - and this is my biggest issue - not just in this particular situation but with cheer in general. All of these rules are put in place and when they aren't followed 9 times out of 10 nothing happens. There is another thread where a gym competed with ineligible athletes at CheerSport and basically USASF has no involvement and CheerSport can handle it as they see fit. There is zero integrity.
ETA: I would rather the rule was changed to state that a team is not eligible for any bid if they compete with athletes who have already earned a paid bid versus what is is now. My issue is with the integrity of USASF creating rules and then completely ignoring them.

 

[CheerBank]

Unless I'm misunderstanding the rule, what Cali did to get the bid wasn't necessarily illegal so not sure why they would get punished. If they had then used that bid and the Black Ops kids stayed with Black Ops then yes, that would be cheating and warrant a punishment.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

They didn't do anything illegal. But as per the rules, the Black Op athletes who competed on Recon should now be told they can only compete at Worlds on Recon. Total bs that Cali had the option of not taking the FP bid once it was awarded to rectify the situation. And I'm not so sure other big gyms would have been given that same courtesy. There would have been 500 pages on here if this was CEA about how they should all be tarred and feathered and banned from Worlds next year if they had done the same thing - especially since I am pretty sure this rule came from the actions of CEA last year in helping certain teams in their organization earn FP bids for "lesser" teams with athletes from their Elite ones.

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

I agree that publishing rules that aren't going to be followed is absurd. But I kind of see how by not taking the paid bid, Cali can avoid the consequences, because the wording (per usual) is vague enough. It drives me crazy that even when taking a stand, the USASF still leaves all sorts of things open to interpretation. It drives me even more crazy that I truly believe they do this intentionally.

If the intention of the rule is to prevent teams from using their worlds athletes to take multiple paid bids for multiple teams, then it has, in some sense, been followed if Ghost doesn't take the bid. Since the bid can be passed down, It can be rectified, and therefore there is a "way out" for Cali.

That being said, the rule does say " earn" which means that Cali also technically broke the rule. And, it seems pretty clear that they planned on using the bid originally. They didn't hide that at least one athlete was filling in from Black Ops, they announced the bid, the athletes appear to have thought they were going to world's on the bid, AND, the program itself has previously stated that they don't mark themselves as eligible for bids they don't plan on using so that the other teams can have their moment in the sun. ( I think this was something Eddie said about summit bids, but I feel like it applies). So I'm pretty sure that they a.) overlooked this rule, or b.) thought it wouldn't apply, or c.) were intending to have the athlete compete with Ghost and be replaced on Black Ops but then changed their mind.

I find it seriously strange that no one from Cali would be aware of this rule, but I guess it happens. I did think that originally there were quite a few crossovers between Ghost and Black Ops that seemed to have disappeared, but I can't remember for sure. I can't say for certain that this was because they knew there would be issues with earning paid bids, but I kind of feel like it could have been a part of it.

As for CEA, yes, I think there would be a lot more intense public response to this if it were them. However, I do believe the USASF's response would be the same.

 

[cheernerd5678]

I really am not understanding how they're getting around it. The rule states if the second team EARNS a paid bid (not uses), they are BOUND TO THE SECOND TEAM and may ONLY compete with the second team at worlds.
The athletes EARNED a paid bid with a second team. Therefore they are BOUND to the team and may ONLY compete with the second team.
If coaches and gym owners are not reading the rules, that shouldn't be an excuse for breaking them (or getting out of following them). That's their JOB. Coaches don't just get to throw some standing tucks in on a level 1 team and then say "oh I misunderstood the rules". They have to deal with the fact that they're gonna get a deduction. Cali should have to deal with the fact that like it or not, the athletes are now bound to recon. Because that's what the rule states. Regardless of if they give the bid back they earned it and are thus bound to the team they earned it with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

I really am not understanding how they're getting around it. The rule states if the second team EARNS a paid bid (not uses), they are BOUND TO THE SECOND TEAM and may ONLY compete with the second team at worlds.
The athletes EARNED a paid bid with a second team. Therefore they are BOUND to the team and may ONLY compete with the second team.
If coaches and gym owners are not reading the rules, that shouldn't be an excuse for breaking them (or getting out of following them). That's their JOB. Coaches don't just get to throw some standing tucks in on a level 1 team and then say "oh I misunderstood the rules". They have to deal with the fact that they're gonna get a deduction. Cali should have to deal with the fact that like it or not, the athletes are now bound to recon. Because that's what the rule states. Regardless of if they give the bid back they earned it and are thus bound to the team they earned it with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because the rule makes strong statements in one sentence, and then follows it up with things like this....

The athlete is no longer eligible to compete with the first team once the second team is awarded a paid or partial-paid bid.

So that the "clarifying" sentence, actually opens a loophole. Have they been awarded a bid if they don't accept it? An argument could be made either way.

I don't disagree with you, but am instead pointing out that the rules seem to invite debate. This is what drives me crazy...especially since I think it is done a lot!

 

[MissCongeniality]

One thing I keep thinking about is the impact to the other kids/parents on Ghost Recon. First there's the loss of the paid bid. Ok, but also there's the cost that went into attending this competition in hopes (no doubt) of earning that bid. I just looked it up. USA Nationals in LA. So that means a 5+ hour drive or flight from Northern Cal to LA, Friday and Saturday in an expensive hotel (it's the area) and cost of admission to the competition. Plus comp fees of probably about 130$ (is that what 2 day "nationals" still run?) Anyway...so the team already had the at-large bid and mom and dad dropped another 1000$?(minimum!) for this paid bid opportunity. Now they find out...oops...we need to use this athlete (these athletes) on Ops instead. How does that feel?

 

[luv2cheer92]

Because the rule makes strong statements in one sentence, and then follows it up with things like this....

The athlete is no longer eligible to compete with the first team once the second team is awarded a paid or partial-paid bid.

So that the "clarifying" sentence, actually opens a loophole. Have they been awarded a bid if they don't accept it? An argument could be made either way.

I don't disagree with you, but am instead pointing out that the rules seem to invite debate. This is what drives me crazy...especially since I think it is done a lot!

Agreed, I feel like the wording of the rule leaves a possible loophole that this situation could maybe fall into. That is of course if there weren't more than 4 (?, I think we're assuming that international follows medium rules) crossovers to begin with.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

One thing I keep thinking about is the impact to the other kids/parents on Ghost Recon. First there's the loss of the paid bid. Ok, but also there's the cost that went into attending this competition in hopes (no doubt) of earning that bid. I just looked it up. USA Nationals in LA. So that means a 5+ hour drive or flight from Northern Cal to LA, Friday and Saturday in an expensive hotel (it's the area) and cost of admission to the competition. Plus comp fees of probably about 130$ (is that what 2 day "nationals" still run?) Anyway...so the team already had the at-large bid and mom and dad dropped another 1000$?(minimum!) for this paid bid opportunity. Now they find out...oops...we need to use this athlete (these athletes) on Ops instead. How does that feel?

What's even worse is that Ghost is an IOC5, which typically has at least some young adults, who are presumably responsible for their own expenses.

 

[MissCongeniality]

What's even worse is that Ghost is an IOC5, which typically has at least some young adults, who are presumably responsible for their own expenses.

Exactly!

 

[Beans100]

I'm still waiting for some sort of explanation from the gym itself. If they messed up, just admit it. If there was a last minute change in athlete placement and the rule was overlooked, admit it. If they thought it didn't apply, admit it.

I do agree it's tough for the athletes and the families that lost the paid bid though. That's a lot of money to scrape together and there's not much time.

 

[MissCongeniality]

I'm still waiting for some sort of explanation from the gym itself. If they messed up, just admit it. If there was a last minute change in athlete placement and the rule was overlooked, admit it. If they thought it didn't apply, admit it.

I do agree it's tough for the athletes and the families that lost the paid bid though. That's a lot of money to scrape together and there's not much time.

Judging from social media posts of at least one athlete who crossed over...this was not a last minute decision. That said maybe they thought it wasn't technically violating the rules because both teams weren't competing at the competition.

 

[cheer25mom]

I don't think its right that they were given the option of "giving back" the bid and still using those kids on Ops. They should have to follow the same rules as everyone else. The rule clearly says that they must stay with the last team they earn a paid bid with. They earned the bid with Ghost Recon, they should have to compete with them at worlds or not be allowed to compete at all. It this had been No Name Athletics that's what would be happening.