All-Star A Night With The Popes.

[CoachTamara]

This will be last post on the subject, because they would have won the jackets regardless of what they did, they could have done back tuck baskets and rewinds and still won because they weren't competing against anyone. And the girl being on the floor 4 times doesn't put any of her teams at a competitive advantage, if anything it's a disadvantage

But, it does. If this girl is a true level 5 athlete, then I'm assuming she is throwing fulls and doubles, which is an advantage, especially against other youth and junior 5 teams. She is helping them stack the team with more tumbling, not to mention other ways she may have contributed to the routine. Maybe she is an awesome dancer, and helped them get a higher dance score... There are numerous things.

At the end of the day, it comes down to personal opinion. If you love CEA, it will be blame Cheersport, and if you don't like them it's CEA's fault. I respect CEA, but I think both them and Cheersport were in the wrong. CSP should have got someone else to fill in instead of someone already on three teams, and Cheersport should never have given the ok. We can debate it all day long, but it doesn't change the results.

I also have a hard time thinking this is a gray area. Stunt rules I understand, but this is not what I consider gray. Kids are allowed on three teams-that's the rule. The problem is finding who to place the blame on-CEA for using her on 4 teams, or Cheersport for allowing it. But, three teams is still the rule and will still be the rule today, tomorrow, and the next day.

 

[allstarLoVEcheer]

The rules said no. They both did it anyway.

And this is why people are making this a big deal... because it should be. I could care less about the jackets and banner, it's the fact that they both knew it was breaking the rules.

 

[Bystander]

And this is why people are making this a big deal... because it should be. I could care less about the jackets and banner, it's the fact that they both knew it was breaking the rules.

AND THEY DID IT TWICE! same thing at spirit sports!

 

[King]

Ok, different gym and different EP do the exact same thing this upcoming year. If the exact same thing were to happen what should the punishments be? Would it be the EPs fault or the Gyms fault?

 

[Just-a-Mom]

But the point is that she was on the floor 4 times. If they could of done anything and still won then why did they need her on that "exhibition" team so badly?

You'll never get an answer to this. I've asked at least a dozen times.

Rudags we do know enough facts. CEA has even admitted the girl competed 4 times. They've been punished for it. Those are facts. The rule was broken. Plain and simple - 3 teams. She competed 4. Just because the one team had no competition doesn't make it ok. Everyone keeps saying how they would have won no matter what because they were the only team, they were actually at a disadvantage by using her, etc. OK...well then why no answer to such a simple question?

*Why put her on the floor if it wasn't necessary? Why even ask Cheersport the question in the first place?*

That's the issue. Why didn't they just pull the girl and run the routine legally? That's why people have the perception that perhaps there might be a little of "Because we're CEA, that's why." Because no one will answer why they even went to Cheersport and asked, instead of using a different athlete in the first place.

But I will say that I stand by what I said earlier. If the punishment is the $1000 and they paid it then it's past CEA's hands. I don't expect them to do anything else (I just wish they'd done something else before hand). I think someone may want to revisit what a lame punishment that is and work on making the punishments a little more of a deterrent...

 

[CoachTamara]

Ok, different gym and different EP do the exact same thing this upcoming year. If the exact same thing were to happen what should the punishments be? Would it be the EPs fault or the Gyms fault?

Both. Personally, I think all teams should be disqualified in all divisions that crossover participated in and the gym should be fined.
EP, if they knew and still allowed it, should also be punished. However, I think the thing about this is involving the EP... Most of the time a gym would simply do it without telling the EP and using the same girl under a different name and comparing rosters would not show this. It's that knowing that makes this a unique situation.

 

[SheCheers]

And this is why people are making this a big deal... because it should be. I could care less about the jackets and banner, it's the fact that they both knew it was breaking the rules.

I also think it makes people question how many other times this gym or others have gotten special treatment, If its going to set a precedent, etc. rules are rules. They can't just decide "well...this one time we don't really need to follow them.". So yes, it IS a big deal. We've already established that this mega gym that crosses over every athlete doesn't pay crossover fees. They're already getting special treatment that gives them a financial advantage and on top of it makes them that much stronger than the average gym that uses crossovers sparingly and has to also pay for it. I guess the whole thing just disgusts me out of principle.

 

[Mclovin]

I agree with CoachTamara If the EP did know, then they should also be fined and made to give a public apology on their website. If it happens again, ban them from the USASF for a year.

 

[NoOneSpecial]

Ok, different gym and different EP do the exact same thing this upcoming year. If the exact same thing were to happen what should the punishments be? Would it be the EPs fault or the Gyms fault?

Both should be punished. The rule is there for the ATHLETES protection. Neglect on both parties for over use of the athlete for their own respective agendas.

 

[CheerBank]

If a choreographer comes in and gives me a stunt and tells me it is legal and I compete said stunt and get deducted, it is ultimately my fault because I as a coach should know the rules. Yes the choreographer told me it was legal but I still need to check the rules.

And as a parent, if a stunt is found to be illegal in competition I'm not blaming the choreographer but the coach for not knowing the rules.

 

[MyGirlCheers]

Ok, different gym and different EP do the exact same thing this upcoming year. If the exact same thing were to happen what should the punishments be? Would it be the EPs fault or the Gyms fault?

I think the gym and the EP are both at fault, but I think the EP should shoulder more of the responsibility if the EP okayed it as appears to be the case here. In this case, the crossover rule wasn't the only rule broken, but it's really the only one the gym had control over.

Here are the problems I see:
1. The crossover - both the gym and the EP are equally responsible. The gym should have never attempted it and the EP should never have okayed it. If one is sanctionable, they both should be.

2. The team competed in the Youth R5 division however, they chose to put an illegal (non-restricted) routine on the mat. The EP is responsible for the judging. In this case, it appears the EP chose to ignore the R5 rules and judge the team as if they were in a non-restricted division. By doing so, they effectively handed out two Y5 national champion placements, but only one of the teams had to actually compete against anyone and in the proper division. IMO, this is a much bigger issue and definitely the responsibility for this lies with the EP. They should have let the team compete with non-restricted skills as an exhibition team or they should have held them (through deductions) to the R5 rules or they should have put them into the Y5 division. Any of those three would have been a solution falling within the rules (not considering the crossover issue).

3. The possibility of her being in violation of "An individual will not be permitted to crossover from one program to another within the same event..." Since USASF seems to no longer have a definition of "program", I don't think anyone should be held accountable.

 

[StarshipTrooper]

I posted while you were typing this. But I'll ask you what I said earlier. There was no one else in the division. They were gonna win the division no matter what. As was said they could have laid on the floor for 2:30 and won. So WHY was it soooooo important to put this girl on the floor? Why not just say "OK. Well let's stick like glue to the rules and not take any chances. Let's run the routine without Susie.

Since I want you to get an answer, I'll try this one from memory so disclaimer. The exhibition team was from K-ville, it was going to NCA the next week to compete on the biggest stage they have, she is the type of coach that believes a team should have the experience of hitting as a team on a major stage the week before for confidence if possible and since they were by themselves wanted the child who is a key member to be part of that experience so the team would feel ready. You may not agree or understand that explanation, but I understand it watching these young children compete at high level in big competitions and I feel certain that the experience was key in their further success. Now, that said, she made a mistake, the EP made a mistake and you're going to love what Paul Harvey has to say if y'all are getting this much out of this part.

 

[CheerBank]

I was trying to think from a parent's perspective how I would feel if my cp was on one of the 4 teams that this athlete competed on. On the one hand I'd like to think I had enough faith in my coaches and program to believe that they did not intentionally do something illegal and that the fine was given and the situation was resolved. On the other hand, I would be pissed to hell at the coaches and owners for putting my cp's team in a position where everyone is calling for their banners, jackets and trophies to be returned to cheer world on a silver platter.

 

[King]

I think the gym and the EP are both at fault, but I think the EP should shoulder more of the responsibility if the EP okayed it as appears to be the case here. In this case, the crossover rule wasn't the only rule broken, but it's really the only one the gym had control over.

Here are the problems I see:
1. The crossover - both the gym and the EP are equally responsible. The gym should have never attempted it and the EP should never have okayed it. If one is sanctionable, they both should be.

2. The team competed in the Youth R5 division however, they chose to put an illegal (non-restricted) routine on the mat. The EP is responsible for the judging. In this case, it appears the EP chose to ignore the R5 rules and judge the team as if they were in a non-restricted division. By doing so, they effectively handed out two Y5 national champion placements, but only one of the teams had to actually compete against anyone and in the proper division. IMO, this is a much bigger issue and definitely the responsibility for this lies with the EP. They should have let the team compete with non-restricted skills as an exhibition team or they should have held them (through deductions) to the R5 rules or they should have put them into the Y5 division. Any of those three would have been a solution falling within the rules (not considering the crossover issue).

3. The possibility of her being in violation of "An individual will not be permitted to crossover from one program to another within the same event..." Since USASF seems to no longer have a definition of "program", I don't think anyone should be held accountable.

The only part about #2 is if that was the team that was alone in the division and they competed illegal skills then doesn't that just mean a lower score? I do not think illegal skills disqualifies you.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

Since I want you to get an answer, I'll try this one from memory so disclaimer. The exhibition team was from K-ville, it was going to NCA the next week to compete on the biggest stage they have, she is the type of coach that believes a team should have the experience of hitting as a team on a major stage the week before for confidence if possible and since they were by themselves wanted the child who is a key member to be part of that experience so the team would feel ready. You may not agree or understand that explanation, but I understand it watching these young children compete at high level in big competitions and I feel certain that the experience was key in their further success. Now, that said, she made a mistake, the EP made a mistake and you're going to love what Paul Harvey has to say if y'all are getting this much out of this part.

LOL at that last part. Can't wait.

You're right I don't agree but I do appreciate your rational and direct answer. At least it makes sense (not from a "Oh that makes it ok" sense but from a "Oh I see why they may have done that" sense).