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

[MissCongeniality]

So the whole discussion about releases got me thinking... (and no, we are not thinking of leaving the program we are with)
1) What are, in your opinion, VALID reasons for a release from one Level 5 World's program to another?
2) What if an athlete is kicked off a team? And does it matter WHY the athlete was kicked off the team... say for illegal drug use or disrespect or?? How about if the athlete is replaced on the team because of skill set? Or if the team itself is dropped to a non-World's level?
3) If this rule were also to be applied to other (non-World's) athletes, would the reasons for a release be the same or different?

 

[King]

Because this only applies to athletes wishing to attend Worlds ( does this apply to bid attainment or just use?) I'm fine with any gym not releasing a kid for any reason they choose. If the reason for not releasing is a bad one then it is a bad business decision and will hurt them in the end. If they kick an athlete off for illegal activities and they lose their ability to go to worlds that year why is that bad? They can still compete everywhere except Worlds. It is only one competition that is an issue.

I guess no matter how awful a situation it is only one competition for one year.

 

[ztaprincess]

1. A few valid reasons in my opinion would be finances (say a parent lost a job and a gym with a lower cost is an option), parents feeling that their child has been put in danger (drinking with athletes ect.), or moving (the way it is written if the gym wants they can refuse to release you even if you have to move). There are of course other reasons but these are 3 of the ones that stick out the most that would be in my opinion a valid reason to release an athlete.
2. If a gym is removing an athlete because of illegal activities (drinking or drugs) then they better be able to prove this. If they can prove it then I feel a release should not be signed because the athlete will just take that drama to another gym and another team. If they cannot prove that these things happened then I would say the athlete is going to probably let others know that they were kicked off for no reason and it would be a smarter business move to release the athlete. If the team drops to a non-worlds team then I believe it is completely fair to release the athletes that want to go somewhere with a worlds team. If some of those athletes have the skill they should be able to find a place to showcase those skills. As for releasing an athlete beacuse of a skill set I don't know why a gym wouldn't release the athlete if they are no longer part of the team.
3. If this goes across the board for all levels then I think the rules should be the same.

 

[yojaehs]

Because this only applies to athletes wishing to attend Worlds ( does this apply to bid attainment or just use?) I'm fine with any gym not releasing a kid for any reason they choose. If the reason for not releasing is a bad one then it is a bad business decision and will hurt them in the end. If they kick an athlete off for illegal activities and they lose their ability to go to worlds that year why is that bad? They can still compete everywhere except Worlds. It is only one competition that is an issue.

I guess no matter how awful a situation it is only one competition for one year.

Ok, I'm gonna play devils advocate here, however I agree with MUCH of what you are saying. Let's say a girl is a Senior, 18 (can't super senior) with Standing full, trick to double, 90 lb amazing flier is moving from Texas to Georgia bc her dad got reassigned. Her gym in Texas is just a bitter mean ole gym/gym owner (not that I know of any, everyone I've met from TX has always been awesome, just saying for sake of argument) and is scared her on another team will hurt their chances. This is her senior year and last shot and we all know how "World's" is the end-all be-all and she is gonna go insane if she can't compete. Yes, it is poor-sportsmanship for that gym not to release her but there just isn't ANYTHING she can do about it. THIS is an extreme case, yes I know, however it does exist, and that is what I don't like.

 

[Mamarazzi]

1. Valid reasons: Geographical move, financial reasons (be it family or gym-related, doesn't matter to me,) psychological/emotional reasons, skill-reasons (an athlete feels they can accel faster at another gym.)
2. If an athlkete is kicked off a team, regardless of the reason, no waiver should need to be signed. By removing an athlete from a team, Gym A, in effect, told the athlete "We don't want you on this team." They give up their right to care a thing about the athlete after that.
3. All the same rules should be applicable, across the board.

 

[King]

Ok, I'm gonna play devils advocate here, however I agree with MUCH of what you are saying. Let's say a girl is a Senior, 18 (can't super senior) with Standing full, trick to double, 90 lb amazing flier is moving from Texas to Georgia bc her dad got reassigned. Her gym in Texas is just a bitter mean ole gym/gym owner (not that I know of any, everyone I've met from TX has always been awesome, just saying for sake of argument) and is scared her on another team will hurt their chances. This is her senior year and last shot and we all know how "World's" is the end-all be-all and she is gonna go insane if she can't compete. Yes, it is poor-sportsmanship for that gym not to release her but there just isn't ANYTHING she can do about it. THIS is an extreme case, yes I know, however it does exist, and that is what I don't like.

My answer is even in that case she shouldn't be allowed. By allowing at least one out in an extreme circumstance you basically open the door for any circumstance to be argued out of. If the USASF is that concerned with that one girl they should probably not have made the rule at all.

 

[King]

1. Valid reasons: Geographical move, financial reasons (be it family or gym-related, doesn't matter to me,) psychological/emotional reasons, skill-reasons (an athlete feels they can accel faster at another gym.)
2. If an athlkete is kicked off a team, regardless of the reason, no waiver should need to be signed. By removing an athlete from a team, Gym A, in effect, told the athlete "We don't want you on this team." They give up their right to care a thing about the athlete after that.
3. All the same rules should be applicable, across the board.

1. Girl moved but the family left their former gym with a $10,000 bill. Does that matter?
2. How do you prove an athlete was kicked off and didn't quit?
3. Not sure what you mean by this one.

 

[Mamarazzi]

1. Girl moved but the family left their former gym with a $10,000 bill. Does that matter?
2. How do you prove an athlete was kicked off and didn't quit?
3. Not sure what you mean by this one.

1. Yes, it matters, it's probably the only valid reason for NOT being released (but that wasn't the original question.) And IMO, if her bill was $10K , the gym probably should have taken steps to not allow that high of a balance.
2. You might not be able to know, for a fact, but that's also not what the waiver is for, as it states right now, as far as I understand.
3. The orginial question was if the rule was applied to non-Worlds athletes, would the same rules apply. My answer is, yes, the rules should be equally applicable.

 

[debbie]

My answer is even in that case she shouldn't be allowed. By allowing at least one out in an extreme circumstance you basically open the door for any circumstance to be argued out of. If the USASF is that concerned with that one girl they should probably not have made the rule at all.

correct they should not have made the rule at all

 

[King]

1. Yes, it matters, it's probably the only valid reason for NOT being released (but that wasn't the original question.) And IMO, if her bill was $10K , the gym probably should have taken steps to not allow that high of a balance.
2. You might not be able to know, for a fact, but that's also not what the waiver is for, as it states right now, as far as I understand.
3. The orginial question was if the rule was applied to non-Worlds athletes, would the same rules apply. My answer is, yes, the rules should be equally applicable.

1. So if there is a valid reason to not release someone because of geographical move, how do you track it and enforce it?
2. Yes but as you are suggesting that there should be times when a waiver should not be needed I was curious how you determine this.
3. As most gym hopping happens at the top I think this is, for the moment, the best system and should not be applied to the lower levels.

 

[King]

correct they should not have made the rule at all

Let's say I am a gym owner. Why should I want this rule repealed?

 

[ztaprincess]

1. Girl moved but the family left their former gym with a $10,000 bill. Does that matter?
2. How do you prove an athlete was kicked off and didn't quit?
3. Not sure what you mean by this one.

I would say that if the athlete owes money that it should be paid before a waiver is signed. If they cannot payit in full then something either needs to be worked out or the waiver shouldn't be signed. However if they are in good standing financially with Gym A but the parent lost their job so money is tighter and they can cheer for cheaper somewhere else and Gym A isn't willing to work with the parents (I know that many gyms would work with the parent) then I don't see why a release wouldn't be signed unless Gym A is just being difficult.

 

[debbie]

Let's say I am a gym owner. Why should I want this rule repealed?

great question! lets see if you are a lousy gym owner that can't keep their level 5 kids happy you don't want the rule repealed. However, if you are a good gym owner that keeps your level 5 happy kids then you want the rule to go.

 

[ztaprincess]

I wouldn't go as far as saying that it needs to be completely done away with but it needs some work. The rule is an important one to have and it will take some work to perfect it like rules in other sports do. This is a rule that can help cheer go in the right direction in showing people that we are making strides in making it a legit sport. Many other sports have rules just like this, the difference is they have appeal processes.

 

[ICEDAD]

great question! lets see if you are a lousy gym owner that can't keep their level 5 kids happy you don't want the rule repealed. However, if you are a good gym owner that keeps your level 5 happy kids then you want the rule to go.

You should be able to tell if you are with a "lousy gym owner" way before November 1st....