Worlds Roster Rules

[ACEDAD]

"active all star at the time the bid was received"

Please remember that I'm just trying to get to something firm here. Not trying to pick.

How do you define "active"?

 

[Level5Mom]

Someone who is on an all star roster for your gym at the event that your team got a bid at. If they are injured at that event and unable to compete that weekend then a previous competition (not latter) roster from a usasf event can be used as proof that they are indeed an all star at your gym (which is why alternates were created anyways from my understanding).

 

[ACEDAD]

Someone who is on an all star roster for your gym at the event that your team got a bid at. If they are injured at that event and unable to compete that weekend then a previous competition (not latter) roster from a usasf event can be used as proof that they are indeed an all star at your gym (which is why alternates were created anyways from my understanding).

Ok. Let's go back to the example I've used before with ACE 2008-2009. My daughter, Elmo, was a Warrior for the five years prior to that year, her first in college. Though still age eligible, she decided to cheer on Mohawks, the international coed 5.

Warriors were able to get a paid bid at Battle Under the Big Top in early December.

Mohawks didn't compete until WCA in late December.

Under your scenario, if I read it correctly, Elmo would not be eligible to be an alternate.

Did I read it correctly and are you okay with that example?

 

[Level5Mom]

Yes Acedad, that is correct. She would be ineligible. But knowing that rule ahead of time would encourage gyms to "think ahead". Many gyms already think agead........ I know of programs that go for early bids every year and have extra people on the mat in the back squatting during the routine just so they have their numbers maxed out in case they get a bid. I do not have a problem with this (although I think it COULD potentially hurt whether or not you get the bid lol). If you are good enough to get a bid with squatters, you are good enough to go to worlds.

Hypothetically, let's say Warriors went to BATBT and knew they were going for a bid, they had to submit a substitution list and alternate list to ASC because they entered the worlds bids division, correct? If they decided at that time they wanted Elmo to sub, they could have made arrangements for her to be there with any ACE senior team, (even as just a squatter) in case Warriors got a bid. Therefore, her name would be on the roster as an active all star and she would be eligible that way.

 

[King]

Yes Acedad, that is correct. She would be ineligible. But knowing that rule ahead of time would encourage gyms to "think ahead". Many gyms already think agead........ I know of programs that go for early bids every year and have extra people on the mat in the back squatting during the routine just so they have their numbers maxed out in case they get a bid. I do not have a problem with this (although I think it COULD potentially hurt whether or not you get the bid lol). If you are good enough to get a bid with squatters, you are good enough to go to worlds.

Hypothetically, let's say Warriors went to BATBT and knew they were going for a bid, they had to submit a substitution list and alternate list to ASC because they entered the worlds bids division, correct? If they decided at that time they wanted Elmo to sub, they could have made arrangements for her to be there with any ACE senior team, (even as just a squatter) in case Warriors got a bid. Therefore, her name would be on the roster as an active all star and she would be eligible that way.

So I see the Worlds rosters as having one main goal: Ensure that the 'team' on the floor that won the bid is the team that competes at Worlds. I think if we decide how much of that team can change between receiving the bid and competing at Worlds and still be the same 'team' I think then we can decide how to handle the alternates. The fact that Small Senior can sub out half the team and still be eligible at Worlds isn't a good thing. The fact that large gyms and multi location gyms have a much larger pool to select from isn't a good thing.

 

[Level5Mom]

Yes King.....and I am suggesting that your subs AND alternates must come from within your own program though. They must be active all stars at the time of receiving the bid, proven by viewing rosters from the bid awarding event, or a previous USASF competition from that season. It's the borrowing from other programs that really bothers me and I want to see it stopped.

I do agree with everyone that the number of subs allowed for a team is redic and needs to be lowered by several people. IF we lower the number of salts (subs/alternates) allowed, I am not opposed to gyms with multiple locations using athletes from their various locations as salts, since gyms with multiple locations field multiple worlds teams. If they are only allowed to shuffle a few kids around, it won't make as big of a difference as it would if you replaced half your worlds team.

Well said though....the team that gets the bid should be the same althletes on the floor at Worlds.

 

[King]

I just dont think there is a practical way to manage who is a member of what gym. All competitions are paper based in registration (as well as a lot of gyms). Paper is too easy to.... get lost... get changed.

Until it is all electronic I dont think there is a good solution that is enforceable EXCEPT to limit the number per team and just worry about age.

 

[Level5Mom]

I just dont think there is a practical way to manage who is a member of what gym. All competitions are paper based in registration (as well as a lot of gyms). Paper is too easy to.... get lost... get changed.

Until it is all electronic I dont think there is a good solution that is enforceable EXCEPT to limit the number per team and just worry about age.

Perhaps, but by changing that simple wording it suddenly makes it illegal to borrow athletes from other gyms all star programs for worlds. It is another hurdle to jump for gyms trying to skirt the system. The more hurdles we make people jump, the less it will occur. It also can be taken to the USASF in complaint, and it would give the USASF something concrete to enforce. The current wording is just to grey, and if gyms say "oh they took a tumbling class here" then USASF cannot stop it. However, if they must show them on a roster from a USASF event, it suddenly gets a little harder, especially if they are on another GYMS roster. No it's not perfect, but it will be a few years before your amazing system gets put into place. So for now, it's a simple fix that will help the situation.

ETA: let's say I found out a worlds team was using athletes from another gym for their worlds team, and I KNOW for a fact those athletes were on another all star team. I file a complaint with USASF, then USASF calls the event producer and sees the athletes were NOT on the roster. As a person filing a complaint I can also inform them which all star team they ACTUALLY cheer for. USASF can also pull the roster from the event producer showing they cheered for the other gym. Now it's enforceable. No more "member" issues and teams saying "oh they tumbled here". It's really easy for a gym to go back and back-date and invoice showing so and so tumbled with you for proof. It's much harded to go back and add an illegal athlete to a roster at a competition when the roster is submitted to USASF by the event producer.

 

[Mclovin]

Why not just say that a GYM Roster must be submitted to the USASF by August 31st of each year. All active all stars would be on this roster. Whatever gym you are affiliated with at that time is the GYM you are a member of for the year. You can only be on ONE gym's roster. In the event your family moved and you had to relocate gyms, well sorry. That's the way it is done in high school sports here in OK. It prevents kids from transferring from school to school to be on School A's phenomenal football team, then transferring to School B for their phenomenal basketball team.

I don't like the idea of "anyone can sub/be an alternate" because I do think that would crush small gyms. There needs to be clear cut rules that you can only cheer for ONE all star team during any given season.

Thoughts??

 

[CheerKatie08]

Why not just say that a GYM Roster must be submitted to the USASF by August 31st of each year. All active all stars would be on this roster. Whatever gym you are affiliated with at that time is the GYM you are a member of for the year. You can only be on ONE gym's roster. In the event your family moved and you had to relocate gyms, well sorry. That's the way it is done in high school sports here in OK. It prevents kids from transferring from school to school to be on School A's phenomenal football team, then transferring to School B for their phenomenal basketball team.

I don't like the idea of "anyone can sub/be an alternate" because I do think that would crush small gyms. There needs to be clear cut rules that you can only cheer for ONE all star team during any given season.

Thoughts??

I REALLY like the basic idea of this! However, I think August 31 is a little early. Some gyms don't even have their try outs until September (remember schools on the East Coast sometimes don't start until late Sept, my school in NY started the 17th).

Also, there could be a way to accommodate those who do move and/or have other circumstances. Signed consent from the previous gym mailed to the USASF accompanied by legal documentation. This way, if a smaller gym senses their athlete being "recruited", they do not have to sign their athlete over. With the documentation, the USASF can also deem whether the move was far enough to actually have to switch gyms. Kind of like an appeals court, it could be taken on a case-by-case situation. Just figuring out who specifically would have that role within the USASF would probably be an issue.

 

[Level5Mom]

I REALLY like the basic idea of this! However, I think August 31 is a little early. Some gyms don't even have their try outs until September (remember schools on the East Coast sometimes don't start until late Sept, my school in NY started the 17th).

Also, there could be a way to accommodate those who do move and/or have other circumstances. Signed consent from the previous gym mailed to the USASF accompanied by legal documentation. This way, if a smaller gym senses their athlete being "recruited", they do not have to sign their athlete over. With the documentation, the USASF can also deem whether the move was far enough to actually have to switch gyms. Kind of like an appeals court, it could be taken on a case-by-case situation. Just figuring out who specifically would have that role within the USASF would probably be an issue.

Oooo I can see that happening more often than not though. Cheer is a very sensitive sport lol! Relocation would probably be the only legit reason any gym would sign one of their own athletes away.

 

[Mclovin]

I REALLY like the basic idea of this! However, I think August 31 is a little early. Some gyms don't even have their try outs until September (remember schools on the East Coast sometimes don't start until late Sept, my school in NY started the 17th).

Also, there could be a way to accommodate those who do move and/or have other circumstances. Signed consent from the previous gym mailed to the USASF accompanied by legal documentation. This way, if a smaller gym senses their athlete being "recruited", they do not have to sign their athlete over. With the documentation, the USASF can also deem whether the move was far enough to actually have to switch gyms. Kind of like an appeals court, it could be taken on a case-by-case situation. Just figuring out who specifically would have that role within the USASF would probably be an issue.

I have debated in my mind how to implement my idea. You have to set a date and stick to it, IMO. If you make the date any later than August 31, some teams are already starting to compete in September. It needs to be a date that is early enough to send in your roster to the USASF prior to any all star competitions. Then have the athlete I.D. cards made with their name, DOB, gym affiliation, etc. and sent back to the gyms prior to their first comp. I have tried to figure out how to make "changing gyms" possible, but they way I see it is, if you give an inch, someone will find a way to make it a mile. If you move during the school year, school sports don't make an exception so I feel like All Star Cheerleading needs to set the same standard and stick to it.

 

[CheerKatie08]

Oooo I can see that happening more often than not though. Cheer is a very sensitive sport lol! Relocation would probably be the only legit reason any gym would sign one of their own athletes away.

Exactly what I'm trying to get at. When two gym owners have to come to a mutual agreement, most of the time it will be for the right reasons. What about the case when an athlete is forced to move from a large gym to a small gym? For example, last year NY Cheer had an athlete enter mid-season from CEA jr. elite who's dad got a promotion in his job, relocating him to the city. Her circumstance would definitely be one where I doubt the gym owners would have an issue signing her over, and I doubt the USASF would have an issue considering it's such a far move. I agree, I can't really think of a reason other than relocation that would be a special case to Mclovin's roster idea which is probably a good thing.

I have debated in my mind how to implement my idea. You have to set a date and stick to it, IMO. If you make the date any later than August 31, some teams are already starting to compete in September. It needs to be a date that is early enough to send in your roster to the USASF prior to any all star competitions. Then have the athlete I.D. cards made with their name, DOB, gym affiliation, etc. and sent back to the gyms prior to their first comp. I have tried to figure out how to make "changing gyms" possible, but they way I see it is, if you give an inch, someone will find a way to make it a mile. If you move during the school year, school sports don't make an exception so I feel like All Star Cheerleading needs to set the same standard and stick to it.

True, I guess it would probably just be easier for the smaller handful of gyms to just bump up a tryout date if necessary.

I added in the part about legal documentation and the USASF deciding whether a move is too far or not & the whole case-by-case situation because of what you said with OK rules. Think of it this way-- If a kid were to move from OK to NJ in the middle of the school year, he/she would be able to play sports there because NJ doesn't have that rule, and I can't see their school coach in OK not wanting to sign them over either. But clearly if they moved to another part of OK they couldn't, and if it's a competitive school, I don't think a coach would want to sign them over. Maybe the USASF could set a minimum of miles to even request one of these forms. Idk, just some ideas I'm throwing out there

 

[Mclovin]

Ya I definitely get what you're saying Katie. And if we could make such a rule with a "100 mile minimum" or something like that, I could see it working. But on a "case by case" situation I can see way too many exceptions being made. Whatever rule was made would need absolutely no gray area.

 

[CheerKatie08]

I agree. Not sure how far 100 miles is but it definitely seems far enough haha