The Facts:
Sorry to all for not being on here earlier. After Worlds, I spent Monday and Tuesday in Orlando in meetings. I traveled home today in time to pick my sons up from school and my wife up from work only to get home and pass out for three hours on the couch. (And that's why I am up at 2:15am writing on these boards)
As most of you know, I am the Executive Director for rules for the USASF as well as the competition official for Worlds.
I will try to explain as much as possible about this situation without going as far as breaking confidentiality agreements for my job. Like most professional competitions (especially for Worlds) no judge or official is allowed to discuss specific details about ANY team.
I will also try to address some of the inaccuracies from earlier posts. However, I WILL NOT be dragged into conversations and conspiracy theories on message boards.
Yes, Thailand and a couple of other teams competed with more than 12 males. However, before I get into the story, you need some previous details.
-For the past few years, this division has been allowed to qualify for a bid with more than 12 males but were expected to cut to 12 for Worlds.
-The USASF Age Grid says 1 or more males but the Worlds packet says 1-12 males.
-Also, the ICU which is on the Thursday and Friday before Worlds (in the same location) allows more than 12 males on a team
-the final detail, this division did not compete on Saturday but competed twice on Sunday
SUNDAY
Thailand shows up for their warm-ups for prelims and is ready to cut their number of males down to 12 (from 15). As we always do, we had USASF safety judges in the warm up area to help catch legality violations. When my safety judges saw Thailand removing the three males from the routine (or maybe Thailand asked if they needed to-I am not positive on this), the safety judges looked in the rule book (which includes the USASF Age Grid and not the Worlds packet) and told them not to remove the males because the rules say "1 or more males". Is this a mess up on the Safety Judge's part? no - they were reading the materials given to them. Is this a mess up on Thailand's part? no - they were prepared to remove the males but were instructed not to by official USASF Safety Judges. I would have to take the blame on myself for not providing my safety judges with the correct information. That one line is the ONLY line that is different in ALL of the rules, glossary and age grid and I missed it. My apologies to you all.
SUNDAY AFTERNOON
Up to this point I was busy handling a million other situations at Worlds. It was then brought to my attention (over the walkie talkie headsets) that another team filed a complaint about a team competing with too many males. At this point I still had no idea which teams were involved. I went immediately to our paperwork only to find out this has never happened before so there was neither a rule written nor a precedent set.
I then received the details of the teams involved and started researching the situation. My first reaction was to penalize their prelim scores but this was a non issue because no matter what their score was, the top 3 teams from each country advance to Finals. Next, I met with the coaches of Thailand (the ones who understood and spoke broken English). I informed them they had two choices: 1. remove the males from Finals (which they would be warming up for within the next hour or two) or 2. receive a deep penalty for each male over the limit.
AND THAT"S WHEN THINGS GOT INTERESTING
Being the respectful and gracious people they are (if you saw them enter the main stage, you know what I am talking about), they were very apologetic but then informed me they planned on removing the 3 males earlier that morning only to be told to keep them in by my staff. This is when I found out the situation had absolutely nothing to do with Thailand not following the rules.
NOW - imagine my predicament. In the middle of the most elite and intense competition in cheerleading, a team tries to follow the rules only to be inadvertently instructed not to follow the rules by an official of the event with Finals less than two hours away and warm ups about an hour away.
MY DECISION
Keep the option for them to remove the extra males from the team and receive no deduction or leave the males on and receive a lesser deduction than earlier stated since it is our (the USASF's) fault that they were allowed to compete earlier that day and minimal time to adjust the routine. I also informed them that if they kept the males on for Finals, then I would HAVE to give them some sort of penalty to keep it fair to the other teams. From what I understand, for safety reasons, they decided to keep the males on and let the chips fall as they do.
I FINALLY GOT TO WATCH
Out of the 385 teams, most of which performed more than once, I was able to watch only about 7 of the performances this year. Gymtime and Thailand in Finals were two of the seven. I also, for the first time in a LONG time, decided to not watch from a safety judge stand point but from a fan of cheer stand point. All I can say is Gymtime stunts - WOW and Thailand pyramids - WOW - the rest I will leave up to the panel judges.
The most impressive thing I saw all weekend was the class of GT. When Thailand finished the routine and GT walked back on the mat to support Thailand, the standing ovation in the crowd grew even louder. It was a moment I will never forget and I so much appreciate GT for being such a Class Act.
WHAT ABOUT THE FUTURE - WHAT'S BEING DONE
1. The new Age Grid is consistent with the Worlds Packet. (I am NOT going through this again.) It reads 1-12 males.
2. Performing with too many males will have a set penalty, be it DQ or something else.
3. I am trying to work with the ICU to further streamline rules, restrictions and requirements between them and Worlds.
So there you have it. I truly hope this helps everyone and gives you some perspective of the situation. No favors were done, no secrets were kept, it was just me making a mistake and trying to be as fair to every team as possible. Was it the best solution? Who knows. It was the best I could do and would do it again if given the same set of circumstances.
Les
P.S. I apologize if the above post has spelling or grammatical errors. It is now 3:30am and I am too tired to go back and proof read.