THE HAWTHORNE MUCHACHOS: WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

[BRASSO]

history of drum corps has Everrett too.

I mean, can't be that many people wrong could it?

I believe about 5 pages back, a few days ago now, I ( and others ) commented that we'd accept Michael Boos recollection that it was "Everett" that year and not "Lynn"( I said I'd accept it anyway ) but we're willing to be patient so you can get caught up to speed by now on it re. just what town the show was in.

Edited February 18, 2013 by BRASSO

[BRASSO]

I can't imagine, by 1989, the other directors not raising hell if they thought SCV should be gone for the fact that people from outside the US forged papers.

And since little to no stink, rumor, speculation, Zapruder film etc had been talked about on that one Mr Ethics Police, I'm pretty sure it's all good. After all, David St Angel was not shy about letting people know how he felt...look at the 92 video

Nobody here ( nor in '89 with other Corps Directors ) is suggesting here that SCV " be gone " for marching 2 overage marchers in '89, Jeff. It was beginning of the end of the Muchachos in '75 for allegedly knowingly marching at least one overage marcher in '75, and that is primarily of their own undoing too. But lets not get sidtracked commenting about something that nobody here is suggesting should have occurred, ie SCV should "be gone ". Thats an absurd reply and you're better than launching that false canard, imo.

Edited February 18, 2013 by BRASSO

[Jeff Ream]

I was under the impression that there is no '75 full show video Prelims performance of the Hawthorne Muchachos in Philly anywhere in existence. Are you sure that video in your closet is a video of the '75 Hawthorne Muchachos FULL SHOW Philly PRELIMS performance ? Just asking, mind you.

hey NT...invite Brasso over and let him into your closet. because as you can see, if he's not aware of it, no matter what you say, he'll keep asking

[BRASSO]

Then it's very lucky for Vanguard that they weren't playing little league baseball back in '89.

True.

And just about every other youth competitive sport as well, ( Legion baseball, Youth Soccer, Youth Hockey, Babe Ruth Baseball, NCAA school athletic teams etc ) as none of the others would have allowed a team( Corps) to knowingly or unknowingly utilize ineligible players in competition without them forfeiting the entire season of competition results.

So we actually agree that it " was lucky " ( I might use the term " fortunate " instead ) that DCI permitted the 1989 scores and placements of SCV to stand despite their acknowledged use of ineligible marchers throughout most of the entire 1989 competition season.

Edited February 18, 2013 by BRASSO

[Jeff Ream]

Ok, accepting your premise, lets utilize Little Baseball then as an example.

If a team was determined to be utilizing ineligible players Little League Baseball would make that team forfeit ALL that's seasons games too. They likewise would not care if it was brought to their late season attention that the coaches were apparently unaware of the use of ineligible players. It would only matter in the level of sanctions it might impose, or not impose, on the Coaches. But nevertheless, THE TEAM would be made to forfeit ALL their games, even if the ineligible players sat on the bench in uniform and they never played a single game all season. So in this case, the SCV would have been made to have forfeited the entire 1989 season's scores and placements as they broke the rules by utilizing ineligible players, albeit apparently unknowingly. My sense is that just about every other competitive youth endeavor out there would likewise vacate that team's entire season too, for the use of ineligible players in competition.

ah yes, the classic brasso reach. When in doubt, trot out the NCAA, Little League, MLB, PGA, NFL, AFL-CIO, AFSCME, NASDAQ, etc

[Jeff Ream]

Nobody here ( nor in '89 with other Corps Directors ) is suggesting here that SCV " be gone " for marching 2 overage marchers in '89, Jeff. It was beginning of the end of the Muchachos in '75 for allegedly knowingly marching at least one overage marcher in '75, and that is primarily of their own undoing too. But lets not get sidtracked commenting about something that nobody here is suggesting should have occurred, ie SCV should "be gone ". Thats an absurd reply and you're better than launching that false canard, imo.

you're right, I was mistaken.

you are not the ethics police, no matter how much you try and compare DCI to other groups

[BRASSO]

ah yes, the classic brasso reach. When in doubt, trot out the NCAA, Little League, MLB, PGA, NFL, AFL-CIO, AFSCME, NASDAQ, etc

Or trudge out " the uniqueness " of DCI to defend the actions that are deemed impermissable in all other youth competitive endeavors.

Nobody has quite explained to us here the rationale behind allowing the scores and placements to stand on a competitive event ( in this case, 28 of them ) in which one of the teams ( Corps ) utilized acknowleged ineligible competitors in the 28 competitions. DCI is " unique " it would seem to outsiders that it allows the scores and placements of these competition results to stand despite the use of ineligible players ( marchers ). Ask anyone unconnected to this niche activity if that makes sense to them. They'd ask us " why do you permit this ? ". Maybe others could provide an sensible answer that would make sense to them. But I'd be hard pressed to come up with an acceptable explanation why we allow the results of scores and placements to stand when it was determined later that a team ( Corps )... knowingly or unknowingly... utilized ineligible players in approx 28 competitions with the others.

Edited February 18, 2013 by BRASSO

[Jeff Ream]

Or trudge out " the uniqueness " of DCI to defend the actions that are deemed impermissable in all other youth competitive endeavors.

Nobody has quite explained to us here the rationale behind allowing the scores and placements to stand on a competitive event ( in this case, 28 of them ) in which one of the teams ( Corps ) utilized acknowleged ineligible competitors in the 28 competitions. DCI is " unique " it would seem to outsiders that it allows the scores and placements of these competition results to stand despite the use of ineligible players ( marchers ). Ask anyone unconnected to this niche activity if that makes sense to them. They'd ask us " why do you permit this ? ". Maybe others could provide an sensible answer that would make sense to them. But I'd be hard pressed to come up with an acceptable explanation why we allow the results of scores and placements to stand when it was determined later that a team ( Corps )... knowingly or unknowingly... utilized ineligible players in approx 28 competitions with the others.

Brasso,

I'll spell this out slowly for you, since it's been stated many ways in here already.

Apparently lots of people knew lots of other people that were overaged and marching.

However, only one corps, the Cavaliers, went and found what was need to prove another corps, the Muchachos, were marching over aged members. So, since no other corps went digging, knew a guy who knew a guy that knew some other guy that could point them out, didn't call in the FBI, INS, CIA or DEA, the other corps got away with it.

is it really that hard to grasp? You can know people all you want, if you don't force the issue, as Cavies did in relation to the Muchachos, it is what it is.

Hey, I think Barry Bonds used steroids. But after reading all the stuff in the papers, I'm not really sure...so is he guilty?

Same thing here...it's all hearsay without proof. that whole innocent until proven guilty thing.

The fact that we've had one incident since 1977, where people from outside the US willingly had documents forged, shows that if other corps did do it, they took what happened seriously...if not after 75, by the 78 season for sure

[BRASSO]

Brasso,

I'll spell this out slowly for you, since it's been stated many ways in here already.

Apparently lots of people knew lots of other people that were overaged and marching.

However, only one corps, the Cavaliers, went and found what was need to prove another corps, the Muchachos, were marching over aged members. So, since no other corps went digging, knew a guy who knew a guy that knew some other guy that could point them out, didn't call in the FBI, INS, CIA or DEA, the other corps got away with it.

is it really that hard to grasp? You can know people all you want, if you don't force the issue, as Cavies did in relation to the Muchachos, it is what it is.

Hey, I think Barry Bonds used steroids. But after reading all the stuff in the papers, I'm not really sure...so is he guilty?

Same thing here...it's all hearsay without proof. that whole innocent until proven guilty thing.

The fact that we've had one incident since 1977, where people from outside the US willingly had documents forged, shows that if other corps did do it, they took what happened seriously...if not after 75, by the 78 season for sure

Cavaliers spilled the beans, Muchachos got caught because of it and got DQ'ed. The DQ seemed appropriate as the penalty imposed to me too.

So what is it again that you believe that I'm "failing to grasp "in the Cavaliers- Muchachos situation , Jeff ?

Edited February 18, 2013 by BRASSO

[JimF-LowBari]

Chris Maher of corpsreps.com has always been receptive to hearing about corrections. I often find things to be corrected or added when I do a weekly article on another website, and Chris never fails to send a thank you note when I send in the corrections or additions. I encourage all who find such entries in need of correction to send them in to Chris.

Understood and have sent in corrections to Drum & Bugle Corps of North America when that site existed. Problem is when I see mismatches on corpsreps/fromthepressbox/whereever I don't know which is correct so I keep my mouth shut. Have swapped either posts or emails with Chris and can't remember why anymore and did find him to be very receptive.

Might have been discussing why the DCA Finals on corpsreps have 12 corps when most DCA Finals have 10 corps. IIRC, it's a database limitation where '12' is the number no matter what. Having worked with fixing databases for years I can understand... :shutup:/>/>

PS - Kudos for him including the exhibition corps at shows when he has the info. When I get to the mid 70s shows I can send some of that info in if it's lacking.

Edit: just remembered some 40s/50s smaller corps shows that I have. Will be checking if Chris has them when I get that far back. Starting at the present and working back to ???? or at least 1920 as that's where two of my sources start at....

Edited February 18, 2013 by JimF-LowBari