Jody Melton wrote:

---

The rules state that a team may only be disqualified if proof of inelibility is presented PRIOR to awards by an opposing team from their division.

---

I didn't think we should discuss this any further on the message board, but since Jody added another comment, here we go.....

Jody, please, no, no. I (and many others) have SO much respect for you. But when you say things like this, it just chips away at that respect.

"It's only cheating if.....
.....a RIVAL team is the one that challenges you
.....it's discovered BEFORE awards
.....the coaches KNEW the kid was too old
.....the current rules SPECIFICALLY state it is
.....someone finds out"

Jody. No, no. This hurts to hear you say things like this.

No, no, no. Having an "age-ineligible" competitor is far FAR different than a video review showing someone stepped out of bounds.

Here's why: If you would've accepted the bid and taken that same team to Worlds, they'd have been disqualified there, and Cheer Athletics would most likely have had some type of "sanctions" imposed on them. "Stepping out of bounds" is not even close to being the same.

It's like that 16yr old the Cuban Little League team had a few years back. They made it all the way to the Little League World Series with him on the team before getting "outed" about his age. So the team was disqualified and another team got to go. They weren't offered to still go to the World Series, as long as they replaced that ineligible boy.

Whether or not the Coach knew his true age, it didn't matter. And it didn't matter that they found out his age AFTER they had already made it to the World Series. The team was disqualified. This is FAR, FAR different than if they would've video reviewed a game and seen that a home run didn’t count because the runner had missed touching home plate.

Having "ineligible players" trumps ANY other rule. It's just not right.

If Cheer Athletics had been the 2nd place team, and Spirit of Texas had won..........and info had come out that they had an ineligible person........I'm guessing you'd feel a little differently. I don't think all the "it's only cheating if......" statements would be on your mind.

Jody, please help us all retain our high level of respect for you, by not making comments like this. It really does you, nor Cheer Athletics any benefit.

Yes, I think the cheer industry can learn a lot from ASA regarding age. And having an organization like USASF to help improve this is just what we need. I personally will send a message to USASF and use this example from ASA. Now, that is how you effect change, not complaining on some message board. Take action if you want change. I am. And I believe in USASF. In the short 3 years they've been around I've seen positive improvements in the cheer industry. Is everything perfect? No, but at least there is a better venue to influence improvements and change.

Now if we can only get the high schools to adopt USASF guidelines for coaching. That's where I think the cheer industry is really lacking.

One more point and a bit of a correction I guess -- I have faith that the issues addressed on this message board will indeed be heard by the USASF board because a few members have been contributing to the conversations. So you see, it isn't simply complaining on a message board -- I believe we will see results (I have faith). At the very least we should see more explanations as to why things are the way they are. I think the board is a great way to get feedback, open eyes, encourage action, etc... Thank you Morton and whoever else is responsible for giving all of us this great outlet.

I think one of my posts got lost, so I will repost a version of it again.


Math Confused - did you actually read my post? You took part of my post WAY out of context and left off the first part of the sentence while you were at it.

You make it sound like I was trying to say that what happened was not a big deal or that nothing should have happened to our team. That could not be further from the truth. We realize that we didn't deserve the $25000 bid, so we declined it. I think our actions speak for themselves on that matter. Trust me, I wouldn't have turned it down because of a missed out-of-bounds so I am clear on the difference between the two.


My whole point of the previous post was that ACA didn't have any set procedures for what happened. They DO have a procedure if a coach protests prior to the awards. In both cases a rule was clearly violated, what changes (potentially) is the actions ACA takes afterwards.

You argued that, in effect, procedures should have been set aside in this case because the eligibility rule "trumps" all of the others. That may be the case, but it is a slippery slope to go down for competition companies to change results every time they think something isn't "fair."

Where do you draw the line? Would it be OK to have changed the judges' results if there had been an illegal stunt that wasn't caught? What if another team had been incorrectly called for an out-of-bounds that didn't happen? What about jewelry that had been missed? What about a scoring error? What if it was discovered a judge had been paid off? What if a parent had "drugged" an opposing athlete?

All of those examples would lead to some difficult decisions and some grey area. When is it OK to set aside the normal procedures and override the results? I'm not sure of the answer to that, but I do know that it is not as clearly black and white as you have made it out to be. I'm certain that many companies will now look at improving their guidelines about all of this.

You attacked Lance's integrity and honestly - that offended me. He is one of the most respected and admired leaders in our industry and I don't think for a second that he, or ACA, made any decision because of who we were.

central cali cheer fan wrote:

---

Cheertator wrote:
The American Championships has been "requiring" proof of age since 1999 and they have NEVER checked for those ID's or birth certificates. It may be a rule, but is never asked for at registration. Just like the rule "no formal entrances", but almost every team does them anyways. There are MANY teams both good and bad that break many rules but they don't get caught. Seriously I can't think of other sports where you show your ID card. Do youth soccer tournmanets require the kids to show there ID's at the door LOL... Seriously our society is getting crazier by the year. We will go to ID bracelets with our Social Security # and birth place for cheer events. haha


There may not be many sports, but in ASA softball (post-league tournament play), all players are required to have an ASA id card at any sanctioned tournament and birth certificates are carried by all coaches. I believe youth club baseball is similar. At metro, regionals, and nationals, cards are checked on a regular basis (not every game but at least the first game) by umpires prior to beginning games. In addition, the ASA tracks players during each season and there are cut-off dates for changing teams. After a certain date, a player may not play for another team without being released by the original team. The ASA has the power to ban a player for the following year if they break any of their rules. With three primary softball organizations (ASA, NSA, Little League) all following very similar rules, very few players risk enforcement because there is follow through.

Just food for thought ...this may sound like a huge task but it is possible; there are hundreds (maybe thousands) of ASA registered teams throughout the US and thousands of participants.

---

I've done cheerleading more years than I can count, baseball, softball, tennis, track, and other sports and have yet to have my coach carry around birth certificates. Even in college cheerleading we didn't have that. I am not saying its wrong, but usually when you fill out the application it asks you the year of birth. Seriously our society is so untrusting, but I guess there are reasons why. Alot of things are just becoming so regulated and so un-fun.

I'm getting the feeling that Math Confused and Another Gym Owner are the same person and can't seem to let go.

Stop beating this to death. You've made your point, we've read it. DONE! Until you have been in this situation don't be so quick to criticize (over and over and over again). Once is enough. Move on!

So Math Confused, back to your questions:

SO HERE'S THE QUESTIONS TO RESPOND TO IF YOU WANT TO REBUKE ME:
1) How can USA offer 3 paid bids this year when they didn't have the required 300 teams?
2) How did ACA offer 2 paid bids when they only had 61 teams at their Nationals?
3) Did any of the 13 USASF Board Members use their power to get "their" companies preferential treatment?

Answers (I believe)

1) I don't have access to the prior year numbers, but as long as USA had between 201-300 teams, it gets 3 paid bids.
2) ACA had between 101 and 200 teams at its prior year and gets 2 paid bids. Next year they can give 1 since they had 61 teams this year.
3) I will speculate "no."

I just checked the site and it is www.guidestar.org

I would just like to add that my daughter was on a northern california team last year that went to worlds and we were asked to provide birth certificates at the beginning of the season. So you may not always hear about it but it is being done.