Handling of legality issues at competitions

[KB_Legend]

If things are weighted differently at different competitions then what is the advantage of a universal scoresheet??? Is it just so judges only have to be familiar with one scoring system?? Because from a coaching standpoint that might still create a lot of problems, for example, when the 2010 worlds scoresheet for international divisions came out we had to completely change what we were doing for our open team and even change some people to compensate for the fact that stunts and pyramids are weighted so heavily

 

[tumbleyoda]

While I am currently against standardized scoresheets for every competition I am in favor of them for Worlds Bid divisions. Since Worlds is the only competition run by USASF to me this is doable next season.

Does this mean the same scoresheet would be used at every competition that has a worlds bid qualifying divison? I'm a little slow.....

I think he's saying it would be used in the Worlds divisions at Worlds qualifiers, not every division at Worlds qualifiers.

I think everyone already knows I'm against a Universal Score Sheet, but I'll say it again.

Correct Andre.

I thought of this before USASF came up with Sr Open 5. One of my issues was that programs that were trying to build a level 5 program and perhaps not yet ready to jump into the Worlds waters yet would not be scored against programs that have being doing level 5 Worlds teams for years. Though I have no problem with one season being thrown to the wolves so to speak, 3 -4 years can kinda kill a level 5 program at any gym. Either that or have a tremendous increase in injuries due to pushing athletes to progress too fast in order to keep up with the Joneses so to speak.

It would actually allow teams that are competing for Worlds to compete head to head while begining programs could compete against each other, make observations and perhaps enter into the World's divisions when they were ready. Maybe they stack up better than they think. Competitions would not lose teams pulling out becauase they did not want to go up against teams that they believe they don't stack up against - ex Unlimited Coed Division.

It also allows a periods of time for USASF to get the one event they host tweaked even better and for those who favor an universal score sheet (I don't) it would show that they could get it right and earn more trust.

 

[pccoach]

Something needs to be done. We recently attended a competition that gave us a "warning" about a transitional stunt and asked for clarification from Les Stella. So, of course we sent in the video and waited for the ruling where Les Stella told us it was legal. We then sent the video and ruling to the next company we competed with, including a hard copy of the email in case we ran into problems. At the coaches meeting, we were then told point blank by the company president, "Don't bother to show me an email from Les Stella that says something is legal because we won't even look at it." It was extremely frustrating knowing that we took all of the appropriate steps that USASF tells us to do in order to be creative with our stunting only to be told that those steps weren't acceptable. This was at a World's bid competition. Definitely not something you want to hear before you take the floor. Steps need to be put into place that all gyms can follow and feel confident that they did everything they could do to be creative using the rules and regulations given by USASF.

 

[King]

If all legality issues were handled by the usasf then it would do 2 things:

1. Take the responsibility off the backs of the event producers and let them just run the event.

2. Make legal rulings more consistent.

There are a ton of allstars out there that are members of the usasf (100,000?) Raise the athlete credentialing by 5 bucks and you now have enough money to pay for 2 usasf people to do legalities at every comp.

 

[drewpate]

Legality judges need to have to be certified in legalities by the USASF.... a special certification to be able to be a legalities judge. And they need to be tested on the rules, know the rules front and back, and be able to spot deductions at ALL levels

USASF offers the certification but to my knowledge still only requires USASF certified safety judges at bid events. This means that event producers aren't required to have certified safety folks at all of their other (non-bid-giving) events. It opens up the door for a whole lot of issues when Joe Schmoe calls legalities for ABC Company at all of their one-day events and perhaps misses things that someone who is certified might catch and then those teams go the a larger event with a certified safety judge and find out their skills are illegal. I know there are a lot of companies that refuse to use a legality person who isn't certified but for every one of those there seems to be another company using someone who isn't certified.

I agree with both of you, but especially flcoach on the point of how good these judges need to be. At my gym, my opinion counts very little, I.e. none, but I consider myself very knowledgeable on the rules, and I plan to become certified this summer if funds allow. But the gym has a certified judge (whose name I will not mention publicly) come in to review all the teams for legalities issues, which is a great idea with the coaching staff's lack of interest to really invest themselves in all the details of coaching (I have a very low tolerance for coaches who blame legalities and the scoresheets for not doing well when it is all public information). This guy comes in, spots a thing or two that I had already pointed out, then clears an assisted frontwalkover like Cali does, only w/o a spot. He said quote, it shouldn't be ruled as assisted tumbling, instead an inverted stunt. Which is okay w/o a spot?
I had a discussion with him about and suggested logically, let's just email Les Stella. This guy just acts offended and talks the gym out of it, making himself seem more important than Les.
Long story short, they get away with it after ditching nca regionals for a tiny comp they could win, where a judging panel didn't deduct for a prep double in level 3, and then the first jamfest comes around and they lose due to the legality issue.

My gym still considering him quote "the top legality judge in the country" has him judge deductions at a local comp, and he totally screws up a ruling on an inversion on a friend of mines gyms level 3 stunt, a suspended forward roll with two bases and a spot to the performing syrface, which is clearly legal is it is directly pointed out as an exception. He again is offended when les's name is brought up.

Point if this story for everyone, just because someone is certified means absolutely nothing to me after these experiences. There needs to be a harder test with more training, perhaps a study guide and book with scenarios to be given out and completed before the seminar. This guy overstated his qualifications, made it seem like Les has no real say in rules matters, and that you had to jump through hoops to communicate with him. ( and he made bank doing all this) alas my employer chose to believe him over me....
These kind of people are the poison that we need to get out to keep this sport growing in a positive direction. And as unethical as I think he is, it wouldn't have mattered if he was trained properly and actually had the right answers.

 

[scflips]

Kingston, where do I apply for that job? lol

 

[JessicaL]

The idea is good, but there aren't enough experts right now to pull it off.

I second this opinion. USASF certainly already has a lot on their plate. IMO, they've passed the responsibility off on the member companies. USASF requires a certified safety judge at all bid giving events and strongly encourages it at all other events. It's then up to the member company to do the best by their customers.

 

[JessicaL]

Another thing that needs to be addressed is who is paying for everything. Right now if I wanted to be a safety judge I would have to pay to attend the meeting and take the test. (I don't remember if these costs are separate or not since I did not get certified last season and I don't know if allowing people to attend the meeting without getting certified changed anything). The closest 2 meetings to me are 200 and 375 miles away, so I would likely need to get a hotel room for at least one night. How many people that have the potential to be experts are willing to pay to become one. Is there a structure that can be set up so they don't have to pay that is reasonable to those that pay for them?

How long would the training session need to be in order for it to be sufficient? If it could be done in a weekend there could probably be several session around the country, reducing travel costs. If the training is a work week, I would guess there would only be few options, likely increasing the cost of getting the expert candidates there.

There are many companies that sponsor judges to attend the meeting and cover their expenses. In return, the judge needs to commit to x-amount of events for that company each season. The judge is still paid for events. It's a great way to earn your certification and not have to pay for it. Can't hurt to ask!

 

[Deleted member 15]

There are many companies that sponsor judges to attend the meeting and cover their expenses. In return, the judge needs to commit to x-amount of events for that company each season. The judge is still paid for events. It's a great way to earn your certification and not have to pay for it. Can't hurt to ask!

I would ask if it was required and I'm confident I could get it paid for. Something that needs to be kept in mind is new judges. Will new judges spend $X to get certified? If they won't we'll eventually have no one certified to judge.