Sign in to follow this  
George Dixon

WGI & FloMarching

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said:

you also overlook at the corps was given documents that were forged, and let them in. When they found out they had been presented with falsified documents, they self reported. Thats the key. in 75, the corps knew it had overage members ( as did those disqualified in 76 and 77) and still went ahead with it.

 

but why let some important facts get in the way of a good story

 I clearly mentioned  that the '89 Corps self reported, and that the '75 Corps did not above.. I also stated above that all  youth sports, including the NCAA, do not care if a School's team self reported the use of illegal participants in their competitions. They don't care if the player(s) duped the school either. The unknowing basis by the school would be deemed irrelevant, despite perhaps acknowledged sympathy for their plight by most on lookers. Nevertheless, such teams would undeniably have been DQ'ed from participation in any further competitions that season anyway, once the revelation of the illegal participation that season became known. Thus, the self reporting would not have been deemed relevant at all into the DQ'ed sanctions imposed. But... why let any of this get in the way of your good story of your defense of DCI 's actions here ?..., that no other youth sports likely would have permitted. Not a chance in the world a team that utilized illegal players that season would be allowed to further compete in a tournament,.. even absent those overage, illegal players, no matter how the revelation came to light. You skipped over that observation I made above.... to apparently advance your defense of an unprecedented level of the set aside of the DCI  rules for participant competition by DCI in '89 for a Corps. This decision was at odds  with the complete DQ of an entire Corps in '75 by DCI's HQ for the similar violation for the Corps apparent known use of an overage marcher that season.  One Corps self reported the violation ( '89 ). The Other Corps ( '75 ) had the reporting to DCI come from a rival Corps at Prelims that was fighting for a Finals spot, and held back that info from DCI apparently until Prelims. DCI HQ was not made aware of the suspicion of the use of overage marcher(s ) by one of their Corps until it was brought to their attention by a Corps that was unclear if they had a Finals spot totally locked down or not coming into DCI Championships in Philly in '75. So this additional layer of info adds perhaps  a counterpoint to your defense here of DCI HQ's decision that the later '89 Corps they set aside the rules for were " duped by 2 of their marchers with forged documents", ( apparently true ) and thus the reason for the set aside of the rules and established penalties by DCI HQ for utilizing illegal participants in DCI's competitions all season long by any of its membership Corps.

Edited by BRASSO
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said:

the issue with during a show isn't the T&P person, it's the actual judges. 

Yeah... I hear that.  T&P is, or should be, pretty straightforward, especially during championship week.  The old "warning early in the season... penalty at championships" thing.

And I agree with those who feel if there's an electronics issue (one that is not caused by the venue itself, beyond a corps' control) that messes up a key part of a show (vocalist's microphone going dead, etc.), it should reflect on the scoresheets. In what caption, by how much, I have no idea... but it should reflect. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2019 at 7:04 AM, CHRISP said:

I understand he will be marching in SCV this summer.

I believe his sister aged out with vanguard last year .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fran Haring said:

 

And I agree with those who feel if there's an electronics issue (one that is not caused by the venue itself, beyond a corps' control) that messes up a key part of a show (vocalist's microphone going dead, etc.), it should reflect on the scoresheets. In what caption, by how much, I have no idea... but it should reflect. 

 

 It just seems like common sense too. A solo that is undeliverable to the judges ears as intended by design, is well.... messed up and in performance must logically be considered sub par.

 Judges since the beginning of time in Drum Corps, have been instructed to judge " what is "... not.... " what was supposed to be. "

 If judges are suddenly now giving forgiveness for completely botched solos, even for sympathetic reasons beyond the control of the performer soloist, then we really are headed into unfamiliar terrain where build up points can be given equally to well delivered  featured solos and completely botched featured solos by Corps . In the case of the Corps that had the completely botched solo at Finals ( due to Mic'ed system being completely wacked ), their Music side GE scores had no effect at all, and their Music Analysis score actually went up at Finals from the Semi's where the featured solo was delivered well by the performer and as designed. Their overall score on Finals Night was actually not adversely impacted at all by the featured solo... actually 2 solos ... being completely and utterly botched on Finals Night in performance however.

Edited by BRASSO
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BRASSO said:

 I clearly mentioned  that the '89 Corps self reported, and that the '75 Corps did not above.. I also stated above that all  youth sports, including the NCAA, do not care if a School's team self reported the use of illegal participants in their competitions. They don't care if the player(s) duped the school either. The unknowing basis by the school would be deemed irrelevant, despite perhaps acknowledged sympathy for their plight by most on lookers. Nevertheless, such teams would undeniably have been DQ'ed from participation in any further competitions that season anyway, once the revelation of the illegal participation that season became known. Thus, the self reporting would not have been deemed relevant at all into the DQ'ed sanctions imposed. But... why let any of this get in the way of your good story of your defense of DCI 's actions here ?..., that no other youth sports likely would have permitted. Not a chance in the world a team that utilized illegal players that season would be allowed to further compete in a tournament,.. even absent those overage, illegal players, no matter how the revelation came to light. You skipped over that observation I made above.... to apparently advance your defense of an unprecedented level of the set aside of the DCI  rules for participant competition by DCI in '89 for a Corps. This decision was at odds  with the complete DQ of an entire Corps in '75 by DCI's HQ for the similar violation for the Corps apparent known use of an overage marcher that season.  One Corps self reported the violation ( '89 ). The Other Corps ( '75 ) had the reporting to DCI come from a rival Corps at Prelims that was fighting for a Finals spot, and held back that info from DCI apparently until Prelims. DCI HQ was not made aware of the suspicion of the use of overage marcher(s ) by one of their Corps until it was brought to their attention by a Corps that was unclear if they had a Finals spot totally locked down or not coming into DCI Championships in Philly in '75. So this additional layer of info adds perhaps  a counterpoint to your defense here of DCI HQ's decision that the later '89 Corps they set aside the rules for were " duped by 2 of their marchers with forged documents", ( apparently true ) and thus the reason for the set aside of the rules and established penalties by DCI HQ for utilizing illegal participants in DCI's competitions all season long by any of its membership Corps.

I recently read something by an individual (he claimed) from the 75 Muchacho's stating they knew there were corps trying to get them DQ'd for having over age members. If true, why would you march over age members? In reality, I believe over age membership went well into the 90's (and maybe beyond). I had a guard instructor take a few students to try out for a top 12 corps in 1991. She was asked to join the corps, even though she was 23. She was told they could make it happen. She decided against it. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BRASSO said:

 I clearly mentioned  that the '89 Corps self reported, and that the '75 Corps did not above.. I also stated above that all  youth sports, including the NCAA, do not care if a School's team self reported the use of illegal participants in their competitions. They don't care if the player(s) duped the school either. The unknowing basis by the school would be deemed irrelevant, despite perhaps acknowledged sympathy for their plight by most on lookers. Nevertheless, such teams would undeniably have been DQ'ed from participation in any further competitions that season anyway, once the revelation of the illegal participation that season became known. Thus, the self reporting would not have been deemed relevant at all into the DQ'ed sanctions imposed. But... why let any of this get in the way of your good story of your defense of DCI 's actions here ?..., that no other youth sports likely would have permitted. Not a chance in the world a team that utilized illegal players that season would be allowed to further compete in a tournament,.. even absent those overage, illegal players, no matter how the revelation came to light. You skipped over that observation I made above.... to apparently advance your defense of an unprecedented level of the set aside of the DCI  rules for participant competition by DCI in '89 for a Corps. This decision was at odds  with the complete DQ of an entire Corps in '75 by DCI's HQ for the similar violation for the Corps apparent known use of an overage marcher that season.  One Corps self reported the violation ( '89 ). The Other Corps ( '75 ) had the reporting to DCI come from a rival Corps at Prelims that was fighting for a Finals spot, and held back that info from DCI apparently until Prelims. DCI HQ was not made aware of the suspicion of the use of overage marcher(s ) by one of their Corps until it was brought to their attention by a Corps that was unclear if they had a Finals spot totally locked down or not coming into DCI Championships in Philly in '75. So this additional layer of info adds perhaps  a counterpoint to your defense here of DCI HQ's decision that the later '89 Corps they set aside the rules for were " duped by 2 of their marchers with forged documents", ( apparently true ) and thus the reason for the set aside of the rules and established penalties by DCI HQ for utilizing illegal participants in DCI's competitions all season long by any of its membership Corps.

actually if a school self reports to the NCAA, which has no bearing on anything DCI no matter how much some of you try to tie it together (it's scholastic), the NCAA is far less severe to self reporters to those that are not.

 

again, more facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Fran Haring said:

Yeah... I hear that.  T&P is, or should be, pretty straightforward, especially during championship week.  The old "warning early in the season... penalty at championships" thing.

And I agree with those who feel if there's an electronics issue (one that is not caused by the venue itself, beyond a corps' control) that messes up a key part of a show (vocalist's microphone going dead, etc.), it should reflect on the scoresheets. In what caption, by how much, I have no idea... but it should reflect. 

 

I saw a band come in ranked in say the top 12 in their class this fall prior to championships have a total system failure. Not only did the lack of electronics hurt the show from a conceptual standpoint, it also allowed what it hid to be exposed.

 

The band fell at least 10 places.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

I saw a band come in ranked in say the top 12 in their class this fall prior to championships have a total system failure. Not only did the lack of electronics hurt the show from a conceptual standpoint, it also allowed what it hid to be exposed.

 

The band fell at least 10 places.

As you probably know, I am a pretty strong supporter of Bluecoats. They generate a great deal of their GE from pushing the limits of electronics. But if they have an electronics breakdown during one of their shows, I would hope the judges have the cahonies to gig them. I am a big believer of judges judging the performance before them.

It seems they did with Bluecoats Indoor.

Edited by Jurassic Lancer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

I saw a band come in ranked in say the top 12 in their class this fall prior to championships have a total system failure. Not only did the lack of electronics hurt the show from a conceptual standpoint, it also allowed what it hid to be exposed.

 

The band fell at least 10 places.

Live by the plug, die by the plug.   LOL.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DAvery said:

I recently read something by an individual (he claimed) from the 75 Muchacho's stating they knew there were corps trying to get them DQ'd for having over age members. If true, why would you march over age members? In reality, I believe over age membership went well into the 90's (and maybe beyond).

Good question.

Not excusing any corps for this... but back in the Stone Age when I got started with drum corps, it was not uncommon for corps to knowingly have overage members. Including the junior corps where I marched.

I have no idea why corps did this.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.