All-Star Gym Owners Refusing To Sign Release... Appeal Process?..

[Deleted member 15]

the gears are turning, probably not for long, but I think anything any of us come up with will only touch the tip of the iceberg which is why this has not been done yet. Very daunting task for anyone.

I think the bottom line for just about everyone though is preventing both the athlete and gym owner from abusing the other.

Thanks for your input.

Start anyway. The first step is the hardest and the one most won't take.

 

[kristenthegreat]

A few people have messaged me about the gym closing appeal I'm working on. Again, I'd like to know how gyms who close mid-season typically tell you. Facebook? Email? What if there are competitions coming up, do they inform the comp companies? Could that be a second layer of verification?

When a gym registers with the USASF (which they have to do for Worlds, don't they?), are they required to list an email? Would an email received from that account be a step? Would you need a set number of evidence? (Like when you get a job, you ideally need 2 or 3 separate documents but if you have one major one, you're usually ok) Official statement from gym on letterhead being the Grail, but having an official email and facebook posting be worth the same?

 

[likemotherlikedaughter]

Unfortunately it would take parents following through with law suits to the gym and the USASF to bring about concern for the rules to be rewritten so they are actually fair to all but who actually has the time and $ to follow through on something that won't even help your child this year :(
I find it comical that any one would say missing worlds isn't a big deal. Maybe not to you. And I also know that teams that maybe don't belong competing at worlds can easily get a passed down at large bid and fund raise..so the whole argument about the less talented lvl 5 team doesn't belong there or wouldn't make it there is not true. Yes maybe they wouldn't make it past prelims but to some the experience of going is what counts.

The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

 

[newcheerdad]

I think the concept of an "appeal process" is thinking about the subject backwards.

Andre asked for a proposal - I'll present in writing my proposal for how the whole Worlds' release process could work.

If an athlete decides they want to request a release from their current gym to compete for another program's Worlds' team, they must do the following:

• The athlete must submit, either electronically or in writing, a request to be released from their current program to the USASF.
• Upon receipt of the release request, the USASF will then notify the athlete's current gym, either electronically or in writing, that a release request has been made. At this point, the gym has three options:
  1. Accept the release request. At this point, the athlete is immediately free to compete for any other gym of their choice, without restriction.
  2. Do nothing. If the athlete's current gym chooses not to respond to the release request, the athlete is automatically released from their commitment to their current gym 90 days from the date the release request was received by the USASF. During this time, the athlete is NOT allowed to compete with any other program other than the one they are currently affiliated with.
  3. Deny the release request. The athlete will not be allowed to compete with any other program other than the one they are currently affiliated with.
• If a gym wishes to deny the release request, they must provide, in writing, the reason why they are denying the request. The only valid reasons for denying a release request are:

1. 1. Financial obligation. If the athlete currently has an unpaid financial obligation to their current gym, the gym has the right to deny the athlete's transfer request. Evidence of financial obligations must be provided, and these can include contracts, invoices, or other instruments that illustrate the athlete's unmet obligations.
   2. Violation of recruiting guidelines. If the current gym has evidence that the athlete in question was recruited by another USASF member program, the gym has the right to deny the athlete's transfer request. The gym must provide physical evidence (email, first-hand social media, etc.) that recruiting has taken place. Note that hearsay, rumors or second-hand information will not be considered "evidence" for the purposes of this denial.

• In the event an athlete's release request is denied, they will be notified electronically or in writing within 7 days of the request being denied.
  • If the athlete's request was denied due to unpaid financial obligations, the athlete must be given the opportunity to pay the gym any monies owed. If the athlete provides evidence (voided checks, invoices, etc.) that said obligations are paid in full, then the gym can no longer deny the release request on these grounds.
  • If the athlete's request was denied due to a violation of recruiting guidelines, then the athlete can appeal the denial to the USASF Board of Directors. The athlete must be provided copies of the evidence used by the gym in the initial denial of the transfer request and be given an opportunity to rebut said evidence in writing.
• No athlete can request more than one release per competition season.
• No athlete can request transfers in consecutive competition seasons.
• No athlete can request a release within 90 days of Worlds.
• Athletes can appeal release denials to the USASF Board of Directors. All appeals will be heard within 30 days and the decision of the USASF Board of Directors is final.

RATIONALE

The purpose of changing the USASF Worlds release process is to put the onus on the gym to have a valid rationale for denying a release. Right now, the current method allows gyms to deny a release for any number of reasons, or for no reason at all. In a sport that's "pay to play", that is simply too much power to put in the hands of the gym owner.

The model proposed has many advantages:

• It has safety-valves in case gyms do not respond to release requests, thus handling the oft-cited case of "what happens if the gym closes".
• It encourages transparency. Gym owners cannot simply refuse to allow a transfer - they must have a valid reason that fits within the specific criteria listed above.
• The limits on transfers discourage gym hopping and serve to protect higher-level teams at major competitions, like Cheersport, NCA, etc.

 

[Deleted member 382]

I think the concept of an "appeal process" is thinking about the subject backwards.

Andre asked for a proposal - I'll present in writing my proposal for how the whole Worlds' release process could work.

If an athlete decides they want to request a release from their current gym to compete for another program's Worlds' team, they must do the following:

• The athlete must submit, either electronically or in writing, a request to be released from their current program to the USASF.
• Upon receipt of the release request, the USASF will then notify the athlete's current gym, either electronically or in writing, that a release request has been made. At this point, the gym has three options:
  1. Accept the release request. At this point, the athlete is immediately free to compete for any other gym of their choice, without restriction.
  2. Do nothing. If the athlete's current gym chooses not to respond to the release request, the athlete is automatically released from their commitment to their current gym 90 days from the date the release request was received by the USASF. During this time, the athlete is NOT allowed to compete with any other program other than the one they are currently affiliated with.
  3. Deny the release request. The athlete will not be allowed to compete with any other program other than the one they are currently affiliated with.
• If a gym wishes to deny the release request, they must provide, in writing, the reason why they are denying the request. The only valid reasons for denying a release request are:

1. 1. Financial obligation. If the athlete currently has an unpaid financial obligation to their current gym, the gym has the right to deny the athlete's transfer request. Evidence of financial obligations must be provided, and these can include contracts, invoices, or other instruments that illustrate the athlete's unmet obligations.
   2. Violation of recruiting guidelines. If the current gym has evidence that the athlete in question was recruited by another USASF member program, the gym has the right to deny the athlete's transfer request. The gym must provide physical evidence (email, first-hand social media, etc.) that recruiting has taken place. Note that hearsay, rumors or second-hand information will not be considered "evidence" for the purposes of this denial.

• In the event an athlete's release request is denied, they will be notified electronically or in writing within 7 days of the request being denied.
  • If the athlete's request was denied due to unpaid financial obligations, the athlete must be given the opportunity to pay the gym any monies owed. If the athlete provides evidence (voided checks, invoices, etc.) that said obligations are paid in full, then the gym can no longer deny the release request on these grounds.
  • If the athlete's request was denied due to a violation of recruiting guidelines, then the athlete can appeal the denial to the USASF Board of Directors. The athlete must be provided copies of the evidence used by the gym in the initial denial of the transfer request and be given an opportunity to rebut said evidence in writing.
• No athlete can request more than one release per competition season.
• No athlete can request transfers in consecutive competition seasons.
• No athlete can request a release within 90 days of Worlds.
• Athletes can appeal release denials to the USASF Board of Directors. All appeals will be heard within 30 days and the decision of the USASF Board of Directors is final.

RATIONALE


The purpose of changing the USASF Worlds release process is to put the onus on the gym to have a valid rationale for denying a release. Right now, the current method allows gyms to deny a release for any number of reasons, or for no reason at all. In a sport that's "pay to play", that is simply too much power to put in the hands of the gym owner.

The model proposed has many advantages:

• It has safety-valves in case gyms do not respond to release requests, thus handling the oft-cited case of "what happens if the gym closes".
• It encourages transparency. Gym owners cannot simply refuse to allow a transfer - they must have a valid reason that fits within the specific criteria listed above.
• The limits on transfers discourage gym hopping and serve to protect higher-level teams at major competitions, like Cheersport, NCA, etc.

I think this is a really great start. I was trying to think of potentential questions with it. Here is all I could come up with:

• Would an athlete be able to be listed as an alternate on a Worlds team at Gym B during this process?
• Would the "within 90 days from Worlds" be 90 days from the earliest day of prelims? (I just think this date needs to be stated as early as possible otherwise someone will argue that Susie filled her paperwork 91 days before finals and therefore is a viable alternate for the last day.)
• Would it cost anything for the athlete to file the release form? Would it cost anything to appeal the gym's decision to deny the appeal?

 

[newcheerdad]

I think this is a really great start. I was trying to think of potentential questions with it. Here is all I could come up with:

• Would an athlete be able to be listed as an alternate on a Worlds team at Gym B during this process?
• Would the "within 90 days from Worlds" be 90 days from the earliest day of prelims? (I just think this date needs to be stated as early as possible otherwise someone will argue that Susie filled her paperwork 91 days before finals and therefore is a viable alternate for the last day.)
• Would it cost anything for the athlete to file the release form? Would it cost anything to appeal the gym's decision to deny the appeal?

To answer your questions (and we can expand on this as well):

1. No. The 90-day clock is the 90-day clock. If you don't have a release from your old gym, you can't be on the roster in any way, shape or form for another gym. IMO, there is no purpose to being an alternate on another gym's roster is you are not released to compete for them.

2. Fair point - I think you could say "90 days from the start of the first Worlds' competition day".

3. I don't think there should be a charge for this. The amount of release requests that should occur during the year would be small enough that they should be absorbed into the cost of doing business, in my opinion. If there is a fee, it should be paid by the athlete initiating the request and it should be nominal. (i.e., less than $50) That fee would cover the expenses incurred as part of the program as well as any appeals that might occur as a result.

 

[wiscogirl]

The biggest concern that I have with the above proposal is that any reason is a good enough reason for leaving the gym during the season. I think that will gain absolutely no traction with the USASF. The fact that Susie found a better gym and team should not be a valid reason for abandoning her original team.

 

[CharlotteASMom]

The biggest concern that I have with the above proposal is that any reason is a good enough reason for leaving the gym during the season. I think that will gain absolutely no traction with the USASF. The fact that Susie found a better gym and team should not be a valid reason for abandoning her original team.

I agree 100%.

I think any proposal that allows an athlete to just up and change their mind after November 1st won't go far. This is why the rule was created.

 

[newcheerdad]

I forgot to add a part in my proposal about enforcement:

Eligibility of athletes with regards to gym affiliation should ideally be determined at bid-giving competitions. Competitions should be checking registration of all athletes to ensure that they are rostered to the gym they are competing with. However, the primary responsibility for eligibility lies with USASF member gyms. If a gym is unsure of an athlete's eligibility or release status, they can use (insert website here) to determine the athlete's eligibility as per USASF guidelines.

Before the bid-giving competition - if an improperly registered athlete is identified, the athlete will not be allowed to compete and will be stricken from the roster. That athlete will not be allowed to be added as an alternate to that team's roster until they have been properly released from their current gym.

During/after the bid-giving competition - if an improperly registered athlete is identified and the team has already competed, any bids received will be considered "declined" and handed down as per the guidelines of the event producers and/or USASF. If the gym has received any compensation (in the case of a paid bid) those monies must be refunded. In addition, the gym in question will receive a fine of no less than $1,000 to be paid to the USASF.

During/after worlds - if an improperly registered athlete is determined to have competed at Worlds, the team in question will be disqualified (receive a score of zero) and standing will be adjusted accordingly. The gym in question will receive a fine of no less than $1,000 to be paid to the USASF.

Multiple offenses - if a gym commits multiple eligibility offenses within a three-year period, the gym will be banned from competing from Worlds for the next calendar year.

Appeals - USASF member gyms can appeal any ruling on the eligibility of athletes to the USASF Board of Directors. The USASF BOD must rule on the matter within 30 days and all rulings by the BOD are final.

 

[Cheer Dad]

I think the concept of an "appeal process" is thinking about the subject backwards.

Andre asked for a proposal - I'll present in writing my proposal for how the whole Worlds' release process could work.

If an athlete decides they want to request a release from their current gym to compete for another program's Worlds' team, they must do the following:

• The athlete must submit, either electronically or in writing, a request to be released from their current program to the USASF.
• Upon receipt of the release request, the USASF will then notify the athlete's current gym, either electronically or in writing, that a release request has been made. At this point, the gym has three options:
  1. Accept the release request. At this point, the athlete is immediately free to compete for any other gym of their choice, without restriction.
  2. Do nothing. If the athlete's current gym chooses not to respond to the release request, the athlete is automatically released from their commitment to their current gym 90 days from the date the release request was received by the USASF. During this time, the athlete is NOT allowed to compete with any other program other than the one they are currently affiliated with.
  3. Deny the release request. The athlete will not be allowed to compete with any other program other than the one they are currently affiliated with.
• If a gym wishes to deny the release request, they must provide, in writing, the reason why they are denying the request. The only valid reasons for denying a release request are:

1. 1. Financial obligation. If the athlete currently has an unpaid financial obligation to their current gym, the gym has the right to deny the athlete's transfer request. Evidence of financial obligations must be provided, and these can include contracts, invoices, or other instruments that illustrate the athlete's unmet obligations.
   2. Violation of recruiting guidelines. If the current gym has evidence that the athlete in question was recruited by another USASF member program, the gym has the right to deny the athlete's transfer request. The gym must provide physical evidence (email, first-hand social media, etc.) that recruiting has taken place. Note that hearsay, rumors or second-hand information will not be considered "evidence" for the purposes of this denial.

• In the event an athlete's release request is denied, they will be notified electronically or in writing within 7 days of the request being denied.
  • If the athlete's request was denied due to unpaid financial obligations, the athlete must be given the opportunity to pay the gym any monies owed. If the athlete provides evidence (voided checks, invoices, etc.) that said obligations are paid in full, then the gym can no longer deny the release request on these grounds.
  • If the athlete's request was denied due to a violation of recruiting guidelines, then the athlete can appeal the denial to the USASF Board of Directors. The athlete must be provided copies of the evidence used by the gym in the initial denial of the transfer request and be given an opportunity to rebut said evidence in writing.
• No athlete can request more than one release per competition season.
• No athlete can request transfers in consecutive competition seasons.
• No athlete can request a release within 90 days of Worlds.
• Athletes can appeal release denials to the USASF Board of Directors. All appeals will be heard within 30 days and the decision of the USASF Board of Directors is final.

RATIONALE

The purpose of changing the USASF Worlds release process is to put the onus on the gym to have a valid rationale for denying a release. Right now, the current method allows gyms to deny a release for any number of reasons, or for no reason at all. In a sport that's "pay to play", that is simply too much power to put in the hands of the gym owner.

The model proposed has many advantages:

• It has safety-valves in case gyms do not respond to release requests, thus handling the oft-cited case of "what happens if the gym closes".
• It encourages transparency. Gym owners cannot simply refuse to allow a transfer - they must have a valid reason that fits within the specific criteria listed above.
• The limits on transfers discourage gym hopping and serve to protect higher-level teams at major competitions, like Cheersport, NCA, etc.

Same thought on the appeal being backwards. Guidelines for the release process must be established first.


Do you know if there is a set release form?

 

[CharlotteASMom]

From the NC Youth Soccer Association...

Rule 2 - Part 1 - Player Transfer, Release and Roster Limit (Sections A, B, and D apply to Challenge Teams)
Any player signing a player pass with a competitive team is bound to that team for the seasonal year, except as modified by the following exceptions:

A. A Transfer to another competitive team between

different associations during the seasonal year will be permitted only if both teams agree to the transfer. If one team objects to the transfer, the transfer will be granted only in the following hardship cases:

1. If the player has moved his/her primary residence a distance of fifty miles or more during the seasonal year.

2. The player’s original team has officially folded and all player passes have been received in the NCYSA State Office.
There is also some great language about recruiting starting at the bottom of page 1 if anyone is interested.
http://www.ncsoccer.org/Files/documents/ncysarulescurrentproof.pdf

 

[newcheerdad]

The biggest concern that I have with the above proposal is that any reason is a good enough reason for leaving the gym during the season. I think that will gain absolutely no traction with the USASF. The fact that Susie found a better gym and team should not be a valid reason for abandoning her original team.

I think that's ok.

Look, right now the process is completely in the hands of gym owners, who can (and have) used it less than honorable ways. There's no transparency - a gym owner can just scuttle a release for no reason at all.

If this was a situation where the athletes were being compensated, or even competing for free (i.e., scholarship), that would be one thing. I don't necessarily hate transfer rules that the NCAA has, for example, although I think those are a bit harsh. But in a "pay to play" model, there has to be some recourse for people to be able to leave a gym, and I honestly don't think the reasons have to be "valid".

It shouldn't be easy, and there should be a penalty involved. A gym can basically ignore a transfer request for 90 days, which in many cases will make it difficult for an athlete to move - especially later in the season. Depending on your contract with the gym, you might have financial obligations that you have to pay before you leave. Those will all be mitigating factors in whether an athlete can get a release or not.

So the idea of my proposal is not to make a release simple. It's to not make it impossible.

 

[CharlotteASMom]

I thought the purpose of this thread and the offer by Andre was to establish an appeals process?

The heart of this rule is to stop athletes from leaving after November 1st. We went from a system that gave no control to the gym to one that gave them a little control. We need to focus on the appeal side not re-writing the rule. Like ACEDAD said, this works for most the people out there. The few that it doesn't should have an appeals option.

 

[wiscogirl]

I think that's ok.

Look, right now the process is completely in the hands of gym owners, who can (and have) used it less than honorable ways. There's no transparency - a gym owner can just scuttle a release for no reason at all.

If this was a situation where the athletes were being compensated, or even competing for free (i.e., scholarship), that would be one thing. I don't necessarily hate transfer rules that the NCAA has, for example, although I think those are a bit harsh. But in a "pay to play" model, there has to be some recourse for people to be able to leave a gym, and I honestly don't think the reasons have to be "valid".

It shouldn't be easy, and there should be a penalty involved. A gym can basically ignore a transfer request for 90 days, which in many cases will make it difficult for an athlete to move - especially later in the season. Depending on your contract with the gym, you might have financial obligations that you have to pay before you leave. Those will all be mitigating factors in whether an athlete can get a release or not.

So the idea of my proposal is not to make a release simple. It's to not make it impossible.

The reason people keep bringing other sports up in this conversation is because travel soccer, basketball, baseball, etc. have something in common with all-star cheer. It is selective. You try-out for a team. Not everyone makes the team for which they try-out. The team rejects others in order to offer you a spot. They are making a commitment to you and the rest of the team that they have selected. In exchange for that commitment from them, you are asked to commit to the team/gym for that season. Most sports allow an appeal for moving and team/organization dissolving or closing and nothing else. I don't see any reason why we should think Cheer should be different. Otherwise, you are simply back to Susie thought she saw a better team/gym and decided to leave and that is simply insufficient reason imo. The wording of the current rule makes me suspect it would be insufficient for USASF too.

 

[Cheer Dad]

I thought the purpose of this thread and the offer by Andre was to establish an appeals process?

The heart of this rule is to stop athletes from leaving after November 1st. We went from a system that gave no control to the gym to one that gave them a little control. We need to focus on the appeal side not re-writing the rule. Like ACEDAD said, this works for most the people out there. The few that it doesn't should have an appeals option.

But without set guidelines on a release there is nothing to appeal.