All-Star Very Important!! New Tumbling Rules Questions. We Need Your Help.

[King]

I have been asked by a few people who will be in the meetings in the next couple days to discuss the new tumbling rules to pose questions to the general public. This is very important though you follow the two guidelines I set.

The USASF posed the new tumbling rules because they are concerned about the rising number of injuries in tumbling. Besides decreasing injury (meaning do not mention that reason) are there other reasons the tumbling rules should be stricter?

On the reverse everyone keeps arguing that taking away these skills is a blow to the kids who have worked so hard. Out side of that (aka don't mention that) are there other reasons the tumbling skills should not be removed?

It is very important you do not rehash those two or reasons OR just say 'because'. You want your voice heard answer these questions well. I shall ban anyone for a day who says the two reasons to not be mentioned. Thanks for your help.

 

[12stepCheermom]

I don't have much to offer on point number one because I'm not I favor of limiting tumbling in an unrestricted division. Outside of what you already mentioned I can't think of a good reason to limit it.

On the second point, I think tumbling should not be restricted because 1) is already is restricted....in the restricted division. That's what those restrictions are for. And 2) the focus Is in the wrong place.

They're trying to address their concern (injuries as you mentioned) by focusing on what the athletes are doing when they should be focusing their concern on what the coaches are doing. They're addressing the wrong side of the problem. Even if they were to restrict tumbling, it wouldn't suddenly produce better tumbling coaches. The problem would still exist just with less flashy and dynamic skills. Hence, it wouldn't solve anything, it just "dumbs down" the industry. In educational terms they're lowing their standards and focusing on the lowest common denominator rather than putting structures in place to raise the industry as a whole.

 

[2cheer1here]

To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure who said it (you maybe) but I'm with the person who's for deducting for janky tumbling..that's where the injuries are coming in. Maybe we should honestly go with making sure that we are making sure our coaches have stricter and more experience spotting tumbling. I personally moved from a gym with a coach who was an awful tumbling spotter to one who could TEACH my child and TEACH her correctly. Thanks for doing this for us and listening.

 

[JusTellingItHowItIs]

I don't think it's the tumbling skills that need to be more strict, or even addressed...

I feel that the "coaches qualification" (or certification rather) needs to be the issue that's addressed. If you're going to certify a coach to teach these skills, then obviously the one's who are doing the certifications for these gyms and coaches need to be addressed. Instructors who have no place teaching or allowing their kids to do these skills are the concerns that need to be addressed. Simply changing the rules is no "answer" to the problem. Unqualified coaches will simply find other ways to teach skills that they are not qualified for...

 

[ztaprincess]

The reason that I don't think that the tumbling should be restricted isn't just because of the athletes that already have those skills, but it is that there are injuries at every level. There are torn ACLs on level 2 and 3 just like there are on level 5 teams. There are plenty of coaches out there teaching horrible technique on backhandsprings and tucks but they aren't being restricted.

 

[SuzyB]

I hope I understand your questions correctly, so please don't ban me for a day if I don't answer within guidelines!

The case other than injury for restricting skills:
-Technique is not addressed fully in the scoring. By eliminating some tumbling skills, athletes will be able to focus more on technique, thus competitive cheerleading will become "cleaner" -- more like the sport of gymnastics.
-Allows the smaller gyms to be slightly more competitive with larger gyms (I personally don't think this is right, but this is an argument that this is positive could be made).
-The sport could possibly attract more tweens/teens, as the "toughest" skills may be obtainable even at a later age.

The case for keeping tumbling other than punishing kids who work hard for skills:
-There is no evidence (that is published) that shows the skills being eliminated are indeed the most dangerous skills. As shown in published research, collisions on the mat are the number one reason for injury. Eliminating certain skills will not reduce collisions. It may be that synchronized tumbling needs to be eliminated to reduce injury. Until there is evidence (using standard research methodology--not a poll on fierceboard!) citing in what skill and how an all star cheerleader was injured, eliminating certain tumbling skills/sequences may do nothing to reduce injuries.
-If the evidence shows that there is a much higher percentage of athletes who have injuries in back handsprings, would those be eliminated? I think one travels down a slippery slope if the goal is to reduce injuries as intuitively it makes sense the skills that are tried most (like BHS) would have the highest percent of injuries.
-Non-catastrophic injuries can be caused by repeated use. If there are tumbling restrictions, would it make sense that injuries would be reduced? That is, wouldn't athletes practice as hard (just different skill elements)?

Bottom line, I think the public, gym owners, coaches and athletes need to understand the specific goal of the regulations--is it to reduce catastrophic injury? non-catastrophic injuries? Both? Once the specific goal has been identified, providing concrete evidence to demonstrate that the proposed limitations of some tumbling skills would help to reduce injuries should be provided. Unless that happens, it's all here-say.

 

[Num1Stunta]

I think the rules should echo gymnastics progressions a bit better, personally. That would be logical.

 

[0riginal]

I agree with JusTellingItHowItIs and 2cheer1here , but I also need to be devils advocate and say that these coaches know right from wrong in most cases. They are well aware of the rules if they're certified, but I just get the vibe, and I'm fairly sure others do, that coaches are wanting to win no matter the cost. I think they know that their athletes will listen to them and will do almost anything to please them, so they sometimes take advantage of that. I'm definitely not saying this about all coaches. I believe some need a reality check and I think that taking away first place for tumbling busts will help achieve that. It may not be the ultimate answer to the problem, but I think it would help a lot.

Sorry that that part was just restating what they said already, but here's an idea (and this may be a crazy), but could they put coaches/gyms on some kind of probation? Not sure how it would work or how USASF would keep track of it, but it just popped in my head and I thought I might as well throw it out there.

 

[flcheermom]

I thought that was the reason the restricted 5 division was created - to limit/restrict level 5 tumbling and give gyms with those athletes on the bubble of level 5 skills in tumbling a chance to "practice" or refine those skills in a routine before moving onto a Level 5 team. So if tumbling is restricted now for true level 5 teams then there would be no need for restricted 5 - the stepping stone to level 5 - which I feel was actually a needed division. There could be instances now where there will be many more "unsafe" ( stunting wise) level 5 teams formed and level 4 small teams may die out/suffer in the process if a gym has a few fulls - they will want to form a level 5 team instead of level 4 if they think they can now compete. Teams are basically formed around tumbling abilities.

I kind of answered the questions in an indirect way

 

[QueenofHearts]

It doesn't give much competition between teams. All Senior 5 teams have Fulls and Doubles by eliminating some of the harder skills they will no longer separate the more advanced teams from the other teams. There won't be as much determination to get skills when athletes know every other team has the same skills as them. Teams will just do crazier stunts and more injuries will come from there... either way there will ALWAYS be injuries. I hope i answered you correctly.

 

[mecheermom]

On the reverse everyone keeps arguing that taking away these skills is a blow to the kids who have worked so hard. Out side of that (aka don't mention that) are there other reasons the tumbling skills should not be removed?

The skills should not be taken away because they are part of the progression of this sport. Girls and boys start young learning their backwalkovers and move on to back handsprings for level 2. These athletes strive to improve every year. The next logical step in progression from a full is a bounding through to full sequence, then on to doubles...I think if athletes are trained and can progress, there is no reason why that level 2 athlete cannot one day learn her whip-double, cartwheel-double, double-double in a safe manner to avoid injuries.

Taking skills that have already been legal stifles the growth of the future of cheer. I expect in the next few years we will see new skills, even more amazing than a double-double-double...but only if they are allowed to progress.

There is a restricted division for restricted tumbling.

Thank you for asking for feedback.

 

[King]

In defense of coaches and to shed light on a problem the better you get at something the better you are able to tell how good OR bad you are at it.

I am a way better coach now than I was when I started. I am very lucky, however, that my support and training system was as good as it was (my first coaching job was at Rays though I'd been teaching elite level 6 skills for years). However I had no idea how much I didn't know. If I knew what u didn't know I would have worked on it. But how do you know what you don't know? How do you know when you are making a bad choice if the environment you are in encourages you to make a wrong choice?

So, to sum this up, bad coaches, in general, do not know they are bad. I truly believe no one tries to be bad at something. It isn't fun to struggle. So I propose all suggestions take into account how we can better those coaches by setting up a system that encourages correct instruction.

 

[viralscorp]

This is mainly to address your last post - encouraging correct instruction. I posted this in another thread...

If your athlete is mature enough to have mastered level 5 tumbling skills, then they should also be mature enough to learn about their own limits. For the vast majority of tumblers, it takes hours upon hours of instruction and practice to develop those skills - they show maturity, persistence and dedication in getting there.

So why not put a little effort into athlete education as well? And since parents can also exert a little pressure, educate them too. Teach Suzie WHY she should care about her body position through her layout and her full, and teach her that good technique now will make her double easier.

OK, there are clearly going to be exceptions. Not every elite athlete will understand that. Not every parent will get it either. But adding on a little more education introduces two more fail-safes into preventing unqualified coaches teaching skills.

If we are going to credential athletes and have that kind of information, then a huge mail-out isn't that far out of reach.

IMHO even crappy coaches still want good technique, they just sometimes don't want to wait for it or don't want to put in the effort or don't know how to teach it (or don't know that they are teaching bad technique).

If you give the same information to parents and coaches and athletes about good technique, then won't it make it easier for parents to spot coaches and gyms who have progression on their mind before perfection?

 

[L5cheermom]

I am strictly playing devil's advocate here as I struggle with coming up with anything more that the most contrived justification for these changes, but here goes:

Point 1: there has bee an evolution to far too much emphasis on the tumbling aspect of the sport and athletes are dedicating too much effort into the development of these few skills. We have lost some creativity in the sport with the double full being the epitome of tumbling, and eliminating those skills could force some creativity into the routines. Competitions have become tumbling contests with a little stunting and dance thrown in. Not all gyms can afford the equipment necessary to properly teach those skills.

Point 2: Removing the skills creates an environment of distrust among the athletes. If the rule making body can without due process eliminate top level skills, what is to prevent them from doing so at any time. As the athletes work to master these skills they could at anytime be eliminated. This could encourage gyms with elite athletes to keep their routines "safe" and dumbed down thus making it harder for gyms without those levels of athlete to be competitive on lower levels.

 

[as1angelino]

you can injure yourself on things such as just fulls and straight doubles