All-Star Purpose Of Safety Certification For Coaches

Welcome to our Cheerleading Community

Members see FEWER ads... join today!

“Here’s to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes… the ones who see things differently… You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things… they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.” – Think Different, narrated by Steve Jobs

I don't disagree with many of the posts on this thread. Safety has to be paramount.

But..... Here's to the coaches who push the boundaries of creativity who don't ask and what we can't do but instead ask why can't we. I think it does a GRAVE injustice to our sport and its coaches to limit the abilities of our top level athletes. In such disciplines as diving, gymnastics, acrobatics there is no upper limit of skill, and the bar is continuously raised. It speaks to the masses that we do not have faith in our coaches. I say cheer coaches at this level are every bit as highly trained and capable of creating skills and maneuvers in a safe way that push the limits of creativity and challenge our athletes. To say that acro coaches have this ability and we do not is a mystery to me. I also support the argument for safety as an absolute so I know there is a balance. I do hope with time there will be a select group of teams who are trusted enough to compete what they actually can compete at the highest levels.

As for our showcase and exhibition routines, we know we are pushing the envelope and sometimes there are ways to make skills "legal" that make other parts more dangerous. Such as removing a back spot from an elevator to become the unnecessary third catcher. I had a trusted friend present to review all of the legalities in our routines...we always have several and this year we had far less than usual...he was pleased. This however has been a very intriguing thread and gets to the heart of the matter. I support the USASF and I hope I have helped make it more approachable for the next generation of coaches and athletes. The structure and government are necessary TO AN EXTENT. It all comes down to whether you are democratic or republican in a way..I'm all the way republican.

My final two points:
1) Not sure why there is argument for Jomo and his credentialing at Level 6 when that test doesn't exist yet?
2) @wcdad...if I remember correctly Shooting Stars received a legality penalty AT Worlds in 2010...so I think I miss the entire context of your argument. It is quite possible to be a leader as the awesome coaches from WC no doubt are and just miss interpreting a rule.

I think there is a difference between the teaching of a skill, knowing out right that it is out of level or illegal, and an execution error during a performance. Yes the Stars did receive a penalty and most parents and people in attendance did not see it nor had even a clue that there was one. That is my point and thankfully a safety judge caught it and it was dealt with. The penalty was a result of an execution error on the girl’s part if I recall. It was not taught to the girls to be performed that way and I as a parent would not have known the difference in most cases. Thus the reason why I as a parent look to the USASF as the authority in all matters of rules and safety. Gyms and EP's should not be policing themselves. JMO. I thought and hoped that was what the USASF was for. The original question was what is the "Purpose of Safety Certification for Coaches".

The argument of why the credentialing of a level 6 coach? Simple answer is why not. Why would the USASF not have a test for them? It is a division at worlds and should require Level Certification just as any other level at Worlds has to be. The argument was not for just Jomo but the level in general and the expectations of such leveling as expressed by Sharkdad

Innovation is important as we all agree but do you think the USASF should be more involved in determining the legality of the innovation before it is subjected to the masses? You have used sports that you yourself say, "there is no upper limit of skill, and the bar is continually raised" and I agree 100% with your examples. But I will argue as would a safety judge that this sport is not one of those, there is an upper limit as defined by the USASF and the Level Rules. Those limits are in place for a reason any Gym that is a USASF Gym agrees to them and to uphold them.

Can you expand on your statement, “I do hope with time there will be a select group of teams who are trusted enough to compete what they actually can compete at the highest levels.” Can I take from this you would like a new division that would fall into the category of unlimited or open? Something to the likes of extreme cheerleading... (No pun intended) No rules or limited rules to allow kids and coaches to push the envelope? Could you see this level being level 6 in the future? How would the USASF’s role in it play out? Would it be a format that was not a USASF supported?
 
@Ceacoach... Do you consider a gyms showcase as an exhibition and should not fall under the USASF's guide lines when performing the routines? What about when a gym performs at a EP's event as exhibition?
 
@wcdad - My CP is/will be credentialed at level 3 in tumbling this year per the USASF guidelines. She is just currently mastering her tuck and is working on her standing tuck and playing around with a layout. This summer before she even had her tuck solid enough to say she had it she went to a tumbling clinic and did nothing but work on her twisting with the tumbling coach running the clinic. Both my CP and I had no problem with this as the coach was awesome and totally knew what he was doing.

I would love to get your thoughts on this specific matter since technically at the time of the clinic she was a level 2 tumbler and the coach had working on level 5 skills.
 
From what I can find online, passing the certification/credentialing test....all you need is a 70%. So, does that make anyone feel better that someone may get a C- and is now "qualified" to instruct your kids? I guess its a start, but it doesn't make me feel any better that just because someone just has a certificate or is credentialed means they're better to coach your kids.

I agree w/Andre's statment...
I'd rather him have the knowledge than the certification.
 

Latest posts

Back