All-Star Cali Ghost Recon Lost Their Paid Bid?

[Ashley]

You'd be surprised at how the USASF "helps" teams in situations like this. And it's not just big name gyms either. A few seasons a local team "lost" their AL bid because they weren't truly even eligible for it, having been dq'd at Worlds the season before for having an underage athlete on the mat. Les Stella advised them not only on what they should do - go medium at another comp to try to get the bid in that division - but also how to get around only bringing that team to a comp that required 50% gym attendance in order to be eligible for a bid.

Wait. Les, can you come tell my team how to get around the rule? I'd really like to compete in Ocean City this weekend?

 

[Official OWECheer]

You'd be surprised at how the USASF "helps" teams in situations like this. And it's not just big name gyms either. A few seasons a local team "lost" their AL bid because they weren't truly even eligible for it, having been dq'd at Worlds the season before for having an underage athlete on the mat. Les Stella advised them not only on what they should do - go medium at another comp to try to get the bid in that division - but also how to get around only bringing that team to a comp that required 50% gym attendance in order to be eligible for a bid.

I just... I can't. THIS is why we are where we are.

 

[cheer25mom]

While I understand that a rule is a rule, in the first year of a big change I can see there will be some expectation that the rule will need further explanation, I'm not opposed to this. If they had allowed Cali to keep both bids, I might be singing a different tune. All in all it comes down to whether you think rules are there to be preventative or punitive. Sounds like some people think that there should be a punishment , which is not what I personally think that rule was established to do.

A good rule has to be both. If there is no penalty for doing what the rule is designed to prevent, what is the point in even having the rule?? In this case Cali was penalized by losing the bid. My only argument is that if this was the only intended punishment the rule should more clearly state that.

 

[cheer25mom]

I just... I can't. THIS is why we are where we are.

ITA. If this did indeed happen, then it illustrates the problem. If rules aren't enforced consistently, they lose validity.

 

[icame2WERQ]

Wait. Les, can you come tell my team how to get around the rule? I'd really like to compete in Ocean City this weekend?

Don't you just have to travel to a competition 300-400 miles from where your program resides?

 

[CheerBank]

Don't you just have to travel to a competition 300-400 miles from where your program resides?

I think it's 400 miles. Which sadly is not the case for @Ashley's team.

 

[CheerBank]

A good rule has to be both. If there is no penalty for doing what the rule is designed to prevent, what is the point in even having the rule?? In this case Cali was penalized by losing the bid. My only argument is that if this was the only intended punishment the rule should more clearly state that.

How could they lose the bid if they never really accepted it ;) ? The intended punishment was that athletes who did this would now be bound to the second FP bid team. Unfortunately the supposed ambiguity of wording what with "awarded" and "accepted" have resulted in the only punishment being for Ghost Recon who wasted time and money on trying to secure that FP bid.

 

[Ashley]

Don't you just have to travel to a competition 300-400 miles from where your program resides?

It's all up to the EP and their bid declaration rules. And this EP apparently doesn't have that exemption.

I think it's 400 miles. Which sadly is not the case for @Ashley's team.

Actually Ocean City is 450 miles from our gym :(

 

[Ashley]

A good rule has to be both. If there is no penalty for doing what the rule is designed to prevent, what is the point in even having the rule?? In this case Cali was penalized by losing the bid. My only argument is that if this was the only intended punishment the rule should more clearly state that.

The rule is designed to prevent using crossovers to stack teams to win (and compete at worlds with) multiple paid bids. It was an option that was generally only available to mega gyms with multiple worlds teams.

This rule clearly prevented that from happening in this case - so it did EXACTLY what it was designed to do.

 

[cheer25mom]

The rule is designed to prevent using crossovers to stack teams to win (and compete at worlds with) multiple paid bids. It was an option that was generally only available to mega gyms with multiple worlds teams.

This rule clearly prevented that from happening in this case - so it did EXACTLY what it was designed to do.

It did, by penalizing the team with the loss of a paid bid they won. If they had gotten to keep the bid, thereby avoiding penalty, the rule would be pointless. I am SURE they see the loss of that money as a penalty for breaking the rule.

 

[Ashley]

It did, by penalizing the team with the loss of a paid bid they won. If they had gotten to keep the bid, thereby avoiding penalty, the rule would be pointless. I am SURE they see the loss of that money as a penalty for breaking the rule.

Why would they have gotten to keep the bid? The only way they could have kept it is if those crossovers from blops competed with Ghost Recon at worlds like the rule says.

Cali didn't break any rules by the way. The were well within the crossover limit according to rule. They would have only broken a rule had they competed at worlds without those crossovers on Ghost Recon. There's no punishment to be given in this case.

 

[cheer25mom]

How could they lose the bid if they never really accepted it ;) ? The intended punishment was that athletes who did this would now be bound to the second FP bid team. Unfortunately the supposed ambiguity of wording what with "awarded" and "accepted" have resulted in the only punishment being for Ghost Recon who wasted time and money on trying to secure that FP bid.

It was awarded to them by the EP. They spent time and money traveling to try for it, I would definitely say they paid a penalty. They were allowed to choose which one (loss of the bid or loss of eligibility of the athletes), but they lost something either way.

 

[MomMomMamaMom]

The rule is designed to prevent using crossovers to stack teams to win (and compete at worlds with) multiple paid bids. It was an option that was generally only available to mega gyms with multiple worlds teams.

This rule clearly prevented that from happening in this case - so it did EXACTLY what it was designed to do.

Agreed. Since it served its preventative purpose, there is no need for punishment.

 

[cheer25mom]

Why would they have gotten to keep the bid? The only way they could have kept it is if those crossovers from blops competed with Ghost Recon at worlds like the rule says.

Upthread we were discussing rules as punitive vs preventative. I said there had to be some punitive component or a rule was pointless. of there was no cost to them for breaking the rule, why would it exist at all? I was further elaborating on that as well as agreeing with you that the rule did what was intended, ambiguity notwithstanding.

 

[CheerBank]

The rule is designed to prevent using crossovers to stack teams to win (and compete at worlds with) multiple paid bids. It was an option that was generally only available to mega gyms with multiple worlds teams.

This rule clearly prevented that from happening in this case - so it did EXACTLY what it was designed to do.

While it prevented what it was designed to do, it did not in my opinion carry through on the consequence.

Had the USASF not said to Cali "hey you can't do this, this will bind these 2 athletes to Ghost Recon and remove them from Blops for Worlds" and instead gone ahead and processed their acceptance - which I'm guessing they submitted since the UDASF already had the roster - then the rule would have been applied in its full capacity.

I have no dog in this fight. I just don't like that time after time we see rules created, put into the Worlds packet or USASF rules in general, and then not followed.