- Mar 15, 2011
- 9,645
- 15,849
What makes it not acceptable? The "cutout" is nude mesh so that should be fine.According to the usasf allowed and not allowed these don't qualify as acceptable
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What makes it not acceptable? The "cutout" is nude mesh so that should be fine.According to the usasf allowed and not allowed these don't qualify as acceptable
No matter when it was announced it still guaranteed that all gyms that crops will HAVE to order brand new uniforms. All programs do not get brand new uniforms every 2-3 years. If Varsity's true intent was to cover up the athletes there is no way mesh could be used as a loop pole it about the $$$ . Varsity is a company, before anything else its purpose it to create revenue. I don't see how you are unable to see to how it's a cash cow for the company . . . .
Hmm well I don't think that should be allowed. Lol what's the point of being a rule to not show the stomach when you clearly can. And it's not really nude like ballet tights nude it's like sheer panty hose.
I've read that post .... I don't think it was originally a "mesh conspiracy" I think it was a full top conspiracy that eventually adapted mesh. I don't think for one second that this entire rule not being solely created for capitalistic reasons, if the intent was to literally cover up athletes mesh wouldn't be allowed. Especially since USASF know gym owners are using mesh as a loophole for the rule and they haven't addressed it for the seasons to come.This is a quote from another thread from @ASCheerMan
I've heard a lot of funny conspiracy theories regarding our industry, but this is the first I've heard of a 'mesh conspiracy theory' to make more money off of uniforms by allowing mesh. I was on the committee that agreed that mesh counted as 'covering the midriff'. And the only motivation in making that decision was the fact that it literally met the definition of 'covering the midriff. lol My salary isn't at all tied to uniform sales and I will stand by my original position that we needed to cover up our athletes and the decision wasn't even slightly motivated by uniform sales.
I never said it was a conspiracy theory or anything to make money? Not sure how you got that from my post. I said according to the rules that uniform should be a no. You can clearly see the stomach. It isn't like coloured mesh where you can sort of see it. It's like wearing sheer panty hose! That's not "covered".This is a quote from another thread (Jam Brands Has Merged With Varsity) from @ASCheerMan
I've heard a lot of funny conspiracy theories regarding our industry, but this is the first I've heard of a 'mesh conspiracy theory' to make more money off of uniforms by allowing mesh. I was on the committee that agreed that mesh counted as 'covering the midriff'. And the only motivation in making that decision was the fact that it literally met the definition of 'covering the midriff. lol My salary isn't at all tied to uniform sales and I will stand by my original position that we needed to cover up our athletes and the decision wasn't even slightly motivated by uniform sales.
Hmm well I don't think that should be allowed. Lol what's the point of being a rule to not show the stomach when you clearly can. And it's not really nude like ballet tights nude it's like sheer panty hose.
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Nude sheer mesh is "covered" is pure stupidity. Shake my head...a lotAs long as there is mesh, the rule is met. Ridiculous, but met.
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Nude sheer mesh is "covered" is pure stupidity. Shake my head...a lot
I was trying to be positive. HahaAccording to the usasf allowed and not allowed these don't qualify as acceptable
I've read that post .... I don't think it was originally a "mesh conspiracy" I think it was a full top conspiracy that eventually adapted mesh. I don't think for one second that this entire rule not being solely created for capitalistic reasons, if the intent was to literally cover up athletes mesh wouldn't be allowed. Especially since USASF know gym owners are using mesh as a loophole for the rule and they haven't addressed it for the seasons to come.