All-Star New Rules Released Today?

[pailum520]

One of my best friends (not cheer related. he's listed as my son on my facebook for those who know me) makes maple bacon ice cream. It tastes like heaven.

 

[tumbleyoda]

I think the emphasis on Worlds needs to be taken away. You do realize it is a USASF sponsored event? So we can't scream at the USASF on one hand and then rave on the other about Worlds bids and how much Worlds means to us and our kids. If a new federation pops up from IEP everyone better be prepared to walk away from Worlds, because I can guarantee some kind of letter will go out saying if you compete at an IEP event you cant earn a bid to Worlds.
So that is my question to all of the parents of level 5 Worlds athletes...if the USASF doesn't fix this and leaves things as they are...are you ready to walk away from Worlds?

A little history I was recounting today. When Jamfest bought out (or partnered :rolleyes:) with Final Destination and made it US Finals, originally all Senior Level 5 teams could attend. Based on what I learned at that time it was to give another option to Level 5 teams that may not truly of been as many of the athletes say on the board "not World's ready." So if you did not get a bid to Worlds, you were in the process of builidng a Level 5 program - which we all know takes time - or you just felt as a coach your team was simply not ready to go into the Worlds Bids shark tank, there was another large viable Nationally competitive end of year option.

IIRC it was after their first few qualifying events in 2008 an edict was handed down from USASF/Varsity to Jamfest and to any thinking of attending the US Finals as their Worlds for their level 5 teams that if you attended US Finals you could not attend The Cheerleading Worlds by USASF/Varsity. At that time we had two level 5 teams that had earned bids to US Finals - this is why I am aware of what happened. IMO USASF/Varsity did not want Jamfest encroaching on its lucrative Worlds market and the dream they sell to teams to attend even if it is only for one day. While athletes may scream foul and waste of time at so many teams going to The Cheerleading Worlds that don't have a chance at making finals, when all is said and done these very same teams make much extra $$$ for the USASF/Varsity conglomerate empire. They are not giving up those $$$ for nothing if they can help it.

After some what were termed "negotiations" were had a compromise was made. No Senior Level 5 teams that were competing Worlds Divisions could attend US Finals. Level 5's were dropped from the initial US Finals program. It was only Levels 1-4. The very next year or two IIRC Junior Division Level 5 teams were dropped from Worlds yet could go to US Finals, or be placed on a Senior team, which is what many gyms did.

Coincidence? Could be, but highly doubtful. I have no doubt they would fire off another tone deaf edict in a nanosecond if they thought they could make it stick. So be prepared for that letter to arrive in your e-mail box soon, if ASGA continues to move forward, or the IEPS continue to stick it out together - which I hope both do. It is time to offer another viable option. Don't let fear cause you to miss this moment.

 

[xtremeteal4life]

And while they are working on that program, do you allow whatever coaches feel they are qualified to teach these skills? NO. you limit it so they aren't being taught until you can certify they will be taught correctly.

Again, I will present a question I don't believe you have answered (and if you have somewhere I apologize)...do you really think that small percentage of elite athletes learning these skills are the ones who are being injured w/such severity and quantity, or do you think it's the lower level tumblers? I'm willing to bet there are more "catastrophic" injuries in learning basic tumbling, bhs, tucks, fulls..etc. So by your logic, should we eliminate all tumbling until we can prove the instructors are qualified to teach these as well? That is what you're saying...you just happen to be using tumbling skills only a small, select, elite level, etc. (by your own accordance) of athletes are attempting and/or will be effected by the ruling. So may I ask, exactly who do you think this is really helping if you're acknowledging only a small amount of people can even do and/or attempt these skills? Why are THEY so much MORE pertinent than the overwhelming MAJORITY of the rest of allstar? And do you blindly accept people at their word or do you actually require proof before making such rash decisions? And why allow the athletes to throw these skills NOW if they're SO dangerous (especially ones from particular gyms who feel so strongly about this, but are allowing their athletes to throw them and have been all year) I haven't really seen you answer those questions either.

 

[xtremeteal4life]

I'm not smart enough to know what the whole paragraph is a straw man means but.......the rest I agree with.

Did anyone hear people asking that ALL restrictions be lifted......as in no rules? I didn't.

Basket tosses from shoulder stands......is that even possible?

Logical Fallacies» Straw Man Fallacy

Straw Man Fallacy

Explanation

A straw man argument is one that misrepresents a position in order to make it appear weaker than it actually is, refutes this misrepresentation of the position, and then concludes that the real position has been refuted. This, of course, is a fallacy, because the position that has been claimed to be refuted is different to that which has actually been refuted; the real target of the argument is untouched by it.

;)

 

[hopskipandjump]

I'm not smart enough to know what the whole paragraph is a straw man means but.......the rest I agree with.
Lol...

Did anyone hear people asking that ALL restrictions be lifted......as in no rules? I didn't.

Basket tosses from shoulder stands......is that even possible?

don't those Japanese teams do those?

 

[hopskipandjump]

Again, I will present a question I don't believe you have answered (and if you have somewhere I apologize)...do you really think that small percentage of elite athletes learning these skills are the ones who are being injured w/such severity and quantity, or do you think it's the lower level tumblers? I'm willing to bet there are more "catastrophic" injuries in learning basic tumbling, bhs, tucks, fulls..etc. So by your logic, should we eliminate all tumbling until we can prove the instructors are qualified to teach these as well? That is what you're saying...you just happen to be using tumbling skills only a small, select, elite level, etc. (by your own accordance) of athletes are attempting and/or will be effected by the ruling. So may I ask, exactly who do you think this is really helping if you're acknowledging only a small amount of people can even do and/or attempt these skills? Why are THEY so much MORE pertinent than the overwhelming MAJORITY of the rest of allstar? And do you blindly accept people at their word or do you actually require proof before making such rash decisions? And why allow the athletes to throw these skills NOW if they're SO dangerous (especially ones from particular gyms who feel so strongly about this, but are allowing their athletes to throw them and have been all year) I haven't really seen you answer those questions either.

After re-reading the letter from the BOD, I don't think that the elite skills are really the issue as pertains to safety at all. If you read the letter clearly, they mention the abundance of divisions yet maintaining a high level of competitiveness. I think safety was never an issue. I think they mean to water down and homogenize the athletes in order to have smaller divisions. It sure would cost a lot less to host an event if you did not have to purchase awards for all those divisions.

 

[xtremeteal4life]

don't those Japanese teams do those?

Oh but see...the USASF is so concerned over our safety they allowed Bangkok to break the rules last year w/o apparent repercussions...and didn't one of those same international teams have a death or paralysis within the past year practicing their awesome, yet highly dangerous stunts? Granted it wasn't here, but they were allowed to perform w/quite a few illegal elements at worlds last year (that to my knowledge were never adequately addressed).

 

[xtremeteal4life]

After re-reading the letter from the BOD, I don't think that the elite skills are really the issue as pertains to safety at all. If you read the letter clearly, they mention the abundance of divisions yet maintaining a high level of competitiveness. I think safety was never an issue. I think they mean to water down and homogenize the athletes in order to have smaller divisions. It sure would cost a lot less to host an event if you did not have to purchase awards for all those divisions.

I don't either bc
a). The representatives from those gyms have athletes who throw those skills now (and I'm willing to bet will let them do it at worlds..so they can't be THAT concerned over the entire world of allstars' safety if they aren't for their own athletes, nor are they leading by example).
b). No proof..still no viable studies/stats offered to show us that this is "serious" enough that it warrants their new "rules".
c). If there were studies/facts/proof of these specific issues, then the USASF backed down and said, "well, ok..we'll still let them do SOME of the extremely dangerous skills that we feel are an imminent threat to safety", then they really don't have athletes best interests at heart.

I have my own opinions and suspicious as well, I was just curious as to why imrichhowboutu never really addresses those questions.

 

[hopskipandjump]

I am also interested in imrichhowboutu comments. I enjoy his posts very much but was befuddled about his response to the the rules update. I completely understand the pressure he must feel as a representative of a large gym and perhaps that was why he responded in this manner. He has a lot more to lose than I do at my gym in expressing how I really feel. And actually as time has passed, I am more and more angry. I cannot get past the "theatrical movements" statement. I can't. What a homophobic statement. And if they put that out blatantly, what ELSE are they talking about?

 

[xtremeteal4life]

I am also interested in imrichhowboutu comments. I enjoy his posts very much but was befuddled about his response to the the rules update. I completely understand the pressure he must feel as a representative of a large gym and perhaps that was why he responded in this manner. He has a lot more to lose than I do at my gym in expressing how I really feel. And actually as time has passed, I am more and more angry. I cannot get past the "theatrical movements" statement. I can't. What a homophobic statement. And if they put that out blatantly, what ELSE are they talking about?

Same here...again, if he feels like he can't bc of the pressure you mentioned, then just don't respond at all. Usually he's able to maintain a decent amount of levelheadedness in most situations.

 

[lucyemma]

Yay for in a few years when the only international athletes allowed to compete at worlds will be 17 i.e. open teams..I see how well this develops cheerleading internationally...NOT.

 

[coachrah]

A little history I was recounting today. When Jamfest bought out (or partnered :rolleyes:) with Final Destination and made it US Finals, originally all Senior Level 5 teams could attend. Based on what I learned at that time it was to give another option to Level 5 teams that may not truly of been as many of the athletes say on the board "not World's ready." So if you did not get a bid to Worlds, you were in the process of builidng a Level 5 program - which we all know takes time - or you just felt as a coach your team was simply not ready to go into the Worlds Bids shark tank, there was another large viable Nationally competitive end of year option.

IIRC it was after their first few qualifying events in 2008 an edict was handed down from USASF/Varsity to Jamfest and to any thinking of attending the US Finals as their Worlds for their level 5 teams that if you attended US Finals you could not attend The Cheerleading Worlds by USASF/Varsity. At that time we had two level 5 teams that had earned bids to US Finals - this is why I am aware of what happened. IMO USASF/Varsity did not want Jamfest encroaching on its lucrative Worlds market and the dream they sell to teams to attend even if it is only for one day. While athletes may scream foul and waste of time at so many teams going to The Cheerleading Worlds that don't have a chance at making finals, when all is said and done these very same teams make much extra $$$ for the USASF/Varsity conglomerate empire. They are not giving up those $$$ for nothing if they can help it.

After some what were termed "negotiations" were had a compromise was made. No Senior Level 5 teams that were competing Worlds Divisions could attend US Finals. Level 5's were dropped from the initial US Finals program. It was only Levels 1-4. The very next year or two IIRC Junior Division Level 5 teams were dropped from Worlds yet could go to US Finals, or be placed on a Senior team, which is what many gyms did.

Coincidence? Could be, but highly doubtful. I have no doubt they would fire off another tone deaf edict in a nanosecond if they thought they could make it stick. So be prepared for that letter to arrive in your e-mail box soon, if ASGA continues to move forward, or the IEPS continue to stick it out together - which I hope both do. It is time to offer another viable option. Don't let fear cause you to miss this moment.

A little history I was recounting today. When Jamfest bought out (or partnered :rolleyes:) with Final Destination and made it US Finals, originally all Senior Level 5 teams could attend. Based on what I learned at that time it was to give another option to Level 5 teams that may not truly of been as many of the athletes say on the board "not World's ready." So if you did not get a bid to Worlds, you were in the process of builidng a Level 5 program - which we all know takes time - or you just felt as a coach your team was simply not ready to go into the Worlds Bids shark tank, there was another large viable Nationally competitive end of year option.

IIRC it was after their first few qualifying events in 2008 an edict was handed down from USASF/Varsity to Jamfest and to any thinking of attending the US Finals as their Worlds for their level 5 teams that if you attended US Finals you could not attend The Cheerleading Worlds by USASF/Varsity. At that time we had two level 5 teams that had earned bids to US Finals - this is why I am aware of what happened. IMO USASF/Varsity did not want Jamfest encroaching on its lucrative Worlds market and the dream they sell to teams to attend even if it is only for one day. While athletes may scream foul and waste of time at so many teams going to The Cheerleading Worlds that don't have a chance at making finals, when all is said and done these very same teams make much extra $$$ for the USASF/Varsity conglomerate empire. They are not giving up those $$$ for nothing if they can help it.

After some what were termed "negotiations" were had a compromise was made. No Senior Level 5 teams that were competing Worlds Divisions could attend US Finals. Level 5's were dropped from the initial US Finals program. It was only Levels 1-4. The very next year or two IIRC Junior Division Level 5 teams were dropped from Worlds yet could go to US Finals, or be placed on a Senior team, which is what many gyms did.

Coincidence? Could be, but highly doubtful. I have no doubt they would fire off another tone deaf edict in a nanosecond if they thought they could make it stick. So be prepared for that letter to arrive in your e-mail box soon, if ASGA continues to move forward, or the IEPS continue to stick it out together - which I hope both do. It is time to offer another viable option. Don't let fear cause you to miss this moment.

In 2008 NCA/Varsity also sent an e-mail to college coaches. The e-mail stated that if you went to another competition deemed a College National and were announced as a National Champion you would risk participation in Daytona. I think the only other College Nationals at the time were a Jambrands and Cheersport. Looking at this now, especially since there is not a true path to either a UCA or NCA National this seems like an illogical back door attempt to shut down competition .

 

[hopskipandjump]

Again, I will present a question I don't believe you have answered (and if you have somewhere I apologize)...do you really think that small percentage of elite athletes learning these skills are the ones who are being injured w/such severity and quantity, or do you think it's the lower level tumblers? I'm willing to bet there are more "catastrophic" injuries in learning basic tumbling, bhs, tucks, fulls..etc. So by your logic, should we eliminate all tumbling until we can prove the instructors are qualified to teach these as well? That is what you're saying...you just happen to be using tumbling skills only a small, select, elite level, etc. (by your own accordance) of athletes are attempting and/or will be effected by the ruling. So may I ask, exactly who do you think this is really helping if you're acknowledging only a small amount of people can even do and/or attempt these skills? Why are THEY so much MORE pertinent than the overwhelming MAJORITY of the rest of allstar? And do you blindly accept people at their word or do you actually require proof before making such rash decisions? And why allow the athletes to throw these skills NOW if they're SO dangerous (especially ones from particular gyms who feel so strongly about this, but are allowing their athletes to throw them and have been all year) I haven't really seen you answer those questions either.

love this post!

 

[INeverStopCheering]

I'm not smart enough to know what the whole paragraph is a straw man means but.......the rest I agree with.

Did anyone hear people asking that ALL restrictions be lifted......as in no rules? I didn't.

Basket tosses from shoulder stands......is that even possible?

A straw man is a type of logical fallacy. "The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores another person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" "

So the actual position which was: It should be left up to coaches and athletes if and when said athlete is ready to compete level 5 skills, got turned into: There should just be no rules.

This makes it easy for people to agree with the USASF by making the alternative look ridiculous. "Well of course we can't just have no rules, so the USASF must be right"

 

[mstealtoyou]

A straw man is a type of logical fallacy. "The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores another person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" "

So the actual position which was: It should be left up to coaches and athletes if and when said athlete is ready to compete level 5 skills, got turned into: There should just be no rules.

This makes it easy for people to agree with the USASF by making the alternative look ridiculous. "Well of course we can't just have no rules, so the USASF must be right"

You're so smart.......thank you. I understand perfectly now!!!

;)