WAG Attire deduction

[twinmomma]

Here's my question - how do you deduct for something a gymnast has no control over? I understand it not being allowed, and maybe what needs to happen is an "inspection" during warm up where any leos that are not "legal" must be changed into something else or they scratch, no refund. But once you've allowed them on the floor, it doesn't seem right to penalize the kid. Don't get me wrong, I am all for rules on what is and isn't allowed, I just think that there are better ways to go about it.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

Here's my question - how do you deduct for something a gymnast has no control over? I understand it not being allowed, and maybe what needs to happen is an "inspection" during warm up where any leos that are not "legal" must be changed into something else or they scratch, no refund. But once you've allowed them on the floor, it doesn't seem right to penalize the kid. Don't get me wrong, I am all for rules on what is and isn't allowed, I just think that there are better ways to go about it.

Pretty much the same way you deduct if their routine doesn't include all the elements because the coach is not up on the COP.

Coach should know the requirements and make sure the leo is comp ready.

 

[twinmomma]

Pretty much the same way you deduct if their routine doesn't include all the elements because the coach is not up on the COP.

Coach should know the requirements and make sure the leo is comp ready.

Sometimes that's a choice that's made, not necessarily due to the coach not being up on the COP. We have all heard stories here where coaches, together with athletes, put together a routine that doesn't have a full start value for a variety of reasons. I don't believe they are the same thing.

 

[Zivaah]

Every coach should know the rules about a competition beforehand, right? Where is the difference in a poorly choreographed routine, a wrong interpreted compulsory, changing the height of an apparatus against the rules, or a wrong competition outfit? This cases are all out of control of the gymmie and depends on the coaches. Where do you draw the line of not deducting anymore?

In case of the wrong outfit, I am able to warn the gymnast to change the leo (also during competition). I let her and her coach the decision decide if they take the deduction or change. I think changing a routine beforehand is much harder, and this happens already a lot of times, whenever new compulsory routines came out.
And actually I would never think that any club here would ever try to come up in an not FIG approved leotard. We had discussions about shorts, but the FIG rules change their mind about this every quad. Jumping from no, to all, to just long shorts in this quad.

 

[Sk8ermaiden]

Sometimes that's a choice that's made, not necessarily due to the coach not being up on the COP. We have all heard stories here where coaches, together with athletes, put together a routine that doesn't have a full start value for a variety of reasons. I don't believe they are the same thing.

But what she said is, what about the cases when a gymnast doesn't have a 10.0 start because the coach isn't up on the COP. Which happens often enough. It is pretty much the same thing. The gymnast has no control over whether the coach has done their job.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

But what she said is, what about the cases when a gymnast doesn't have a 10.0 start because the coach isn't up on the COP. Which happens often enough. It is pretty much the same thing. The gymnast has no control over whether the coach has done their job.

Yes that is what I said.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

In case of the wrong outfit, I am able to warn the gymnast to change the leo (also during competition). I let her and her coach the decision decide if they take the deduction or change.

Yep, changing is always an option.

 

[stillhoping]

This is the English version. This was issued for FIG judges. As far as I know, USAG has not issued clarification.

I’m not sure why any gym would want to test the rules about being backless, having spaghetti straps, or being super high cut on the hips. There are many beautiful, functional leotards that follow the rules.

My DD would like to be able to compete while wearing briefs and a bra and not have either show, and I don’t think that’s unreasonable. I’m sure many gymnasts feel the same way.

 

[JessSyd]

Here's my question - how do you deduct for something a gymnast has no control over? I understand it not being allowed, and maybe what needs to happen is an "inspection" during warm up where any leos that are not "legal" must be changed into something else or they scratch, no refund. But once you've allowed them on the floor, it doesn't seem right to penalize the kid. Don't get me wrong, I am all for rules on what is and isn't allowed, I just think that there are better ways to go about it.

How would you go about it? There has to be a consequence or you will end up with the current situation where clubs are breaking the rule, and seemingly getting away with it.
Making a child who is all dressed up and ready to compete and who may have travelled for the meet scratch seems a lot crueller than a small deduction.
Having an appropriate competition leotard is an easy rule to follow. Pretty much impossible for clubs to break without making a deliberate decision to take the risk. Clubs that do should have to explain to their gymnasts that the club’s desire for a ‘pretty’ back is leading to lower scores. Sure it is unfair, but so is making your older gymnasts compete without a bra, and clearly the issue needs some sort of actual enforcement. When clubs feel the pressure coming back onto them, the gymnasts will benefit.

 

[MILgymFAM]

I think that rather than a deduction there should be a cash fine to the club. Money speaks louder than scores imo, and it punishes the right party.

 

[CLgym]

Here's my question - how do you deduct for something a gymnast has no control over?

My DD was deducted 0.30 from her bars routine in Xcel Bronze (at age 7) because her coaches were busy chatting and forgot to pull the mat block that she jumped from at the start her routine (glide swing).... Definitely was not her fault. By apparently that's the rule!

 

[JessSyd]

I think that rather than a deduction there should be a cash fine to the club. Money speaks louder than scores imo, and it punishes the right party.

I agree this is a fairer solution. There is more work involved in following it up though - someone would have to do the admin work and then follow up if the club simply refuses to pay (presumably by remembering not to let their girls compete in the next competition), so you worry that it may not be applied as often as it could be. Plus, how much of a cash fine? Too big and it is too much for small strugging clubs. Too small and it could be shrugged off by large elite clubs who think it is a small price to pay for having their girls look different.

Of course, like the deductions for gymnasts, it would be very easy for small struggling clubs to just avoid the fine in the first place. So maybe a huge fine?

 

[MILgymFAM]

I agree this is a fairer solution. There is more work involved in following it up though - someone would have to do the admin work and then follow up if the club simply refuses to pay (presumably by remembering not to let their girls compete in the next competition), so you worry that it may not be applied as often as it could be. Plus, how much of a cash fine? Too big and it is too much for small strugging clubs. Too small and it could be shrugged off by large elite clubs who think it is a small price to pay for having their girls look different.

Of course, like the deductions for gymnasts, it would be very easy for small struggling clubs to just avoid the fine in the first place. So maybe a huge fine?

I’m thinking a fine per gymnast. That should even it out between large and small clubs. Or, simply not being allowed to compete in further meets until the uniform meets requirements. That would require someone to check though.

 

[coachmolly]

I like the idea of a fine.
If a deduction is the best option, I would say take it from the team score rather than individual athlete scores. Something like .1 from the team score for each athlete wearing inappropriate attire. This probably wouldn't mean too much at smaller invitationals, but might be enough to dissuade power gyms that love bragging about team placements from doing it. Especially at meets where there is some type of big award or prize money for winning teams.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

I like the idea of a fine.
If a deduction is the best option, I would say take it from the team score rather than individual athlete scores. Something like .1 from the team score for each athlete wearing inappropriate attire. This probably wouldn't mean too much at smaller invitationals, but might be enough to dissuade power gyms that love bragging about team placements from doing it. Especially at meets where there is some type of big award or prize money for winning teams.

I love this

 

[twinmomma]

I think that rather than a deduction there should be a cash fine to the club. Money speaks louder than scores imo, and it punishes the right party.

Bingo.

 

[stillhoping]

USAG code has a 0.2 once per meet deduction, but I don’t think it’s being taken.

 

[raenndrops]

I like the idea of a fine.
If a deduction is the best option, I would say take it from the team score rather than individual athlete scores. Something like .1 from the team score for each athlete wearing inappropriate attire. This probably wouldn't mean too much at smaller invitationals, but might be enough to dissuade power gyms that love bragging about team placements from doing it. Especially at meets where there is some type of big award or prize money for winning teams.

I love this, but in JO, the gymnast is currently deducted 0.2 for inappropriate attire. So, the TEAM should be deducted 0.2 for each gymnast instead of 0.1 (it could be 0.1 per gymnast for Xcel teams in inappropriate attire since that is the Xcel deduction). This TEAM penalty would be for inappropriate leotard designs.
And I think that sports bras should be allowed to show IF they are either the same color as the neck banding OR the top of the leotard OR the same color as the majority of the leotard. One year, we had a meet where the upper levels competed first at the first meet of the season and they ALL had on identical looking black sports bras. It wasn't until the compulsories were competing later in the day that the judges realized that the racerback straps weren't part of the actual leotard ... because only some of the older girls were wearing sports bras, lol. As long as it looks like it could be part of the leotard, it should be acceptable. Either that, or if you are taking the deduction anyways for the sports bra, you might as well wear shorts and get your "money's worth" out of the deduction

 

[MILgymFAM]

@raenndrops, I completely agree. If the sports bra matches, leave it alone. Also, for the meet upcoming with the matching comp leos for everyone, the material is SO thin that everyone will be wearing panties (not the norm). Is the rule that the panties have to be nude, or can they match the leo? Nude doesn’t match my DD’s skin so she wants to wear black ones (leo is black) because the material will be less bumpy- this leo will show every lump and line.

 

[mommyof1]

I think that rather than a deduction there should be a cash fine to the club. Money speaks louder than scores imo, and it punishes the right party.

I agree with this--exactly the same way that cell phones on the floor are currently handled. Punish the responsible party.