Include a registered Head Coach in a Large Group
This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.Comments about this discussion:
Started
The Basketball Committee addressed the fact that coaches in team sports are currently not really taken into account in the rulebook, which many basketball coaches find very unsatisfactory. It was therefore discussed in the Main Committee that coaches for basketball, hockey ans freestyle Large Group should become more visible in the rulebook and be perceived as part of a team. To this end, the following definition should be added to the first chapter:
Head Coach: A leader of a team in Basketball, Hockey and Large Group Freestyle. A competitor who may or may not be riding in the event but is able to speak on the team’s behalf with Judges and Directors.
In the basketball part of the rules, this “head coach” should be considered as follows:
15.B.3 Team Composition
A team consists of 5-12 players and may include one registered Head Coach. A team must provide at least 4 players on the court to start a game in a tournament.
I think it would be nice to also include a "Head Coach" somwhere in the Large Group section of the freestyle rules.
I would propose the following:
6B.6.1.2 Large Group
Minimum of nine riders, no maximum number of riders and it may include one registered Head Coach.
Comment
I think it's a good idea to have a direct contact person for questions and to give the trainers the attention they deserve for their work with the riders.
Comment
I think this makes sense. I would add the following sentence.
Unless also riding in the routine, the Head Coach is not considered when calculating the Dismount score.
Also, has there been a discussion within Team Sports about whether or not the Head Coach receives a medal? This is always a debate about alternates and it's important to be consistent here.
Comment
> Unless also riding in the routine, the Head Coach is not considered when calculating the Dismount score.
I think that should be obvious, right? Currently, it is also possible to register more participants than actually ride in the end, the rulebook even explicitly recommends registering replacement riders. Nevertheless, the dismount score is only ever calculated based on the actual number of riders "riding on the floor".
I would therefore emphasize that only the actual riders are relevant for calculating the Dismount Score, regardless of the number of registered members of a group.
> Also, has there been a discussion within Team Sports about whether or not the Head Coach receives a medal? This is always a debate about alternates and it's important to be consistent here.
It was understood that everyone who is registered for a team will also be considered for the award. This already now includes replacement riders if they are officially registered for the competition. The same would then apply to the head coach.
Comment
This already now includes replacement riders if they are officially registered for the competition.
I can't seem to find where in the Rulebook this is talked about. At the previous Unicon alternates were not awarded.
Comment
> I can't seem to find where in the Rulebook this is talked about.
You're right, there's nothing really explicit about this in the rulebook. But it is generally not explicitly mentioned anywhere that if each rider in a group or team receives a separate medal/certificate/whatever, all riders must receive this equally. For reasons of equal treatment, I think it should be self-evident that not only half of a group/team gets something and the other half doesn't (or everyone gets something different).
In other words, for me it has always been a matter of course that everyone who has registered as a group/team is treated equally as part of this group. This equal treatment is also prescribed for different disciplines and classes in section 1C.8, so in my opinion unequal treatment with members of a group/team clearly contradicts the principle of equal treatment - even if you are right and this is not explicitly mentioned.
Comment
Are there any further comments on this proposal? If not, I would put it to the vote.