|
DON'T BLAME LOUIE!
That's the title of this week's spin and it has to
do with the recent discussions I am hearing regarding
the departure of our current U.S. Latin champion Louie
VanAmstel to his homeland, which is Holland. So, last
September the judges crown a new champion and shortly
thereafter, he is gone, by bye, hit the road!
Damn the judges who marked him first!
Damn Louie VanAmstel for using the U.S. as his own
personal pawn and tossing us aside like we were worthless!!!
After all, what about our competitors who have been
loyal to us? What about Sparks and Mitchell? What
about McDonalds, Kunitz, and all the other finalists
who had to watch VanAmstel and Smirnoff claim the
right to a US title?
But, is it really VanAmstel's fault?
We may not like what he did, but did he really break
any rules? Doesn't he have the right to live where
he wants to live, compete for whatever country he
wants to compete for? And how can anybody really blame
the judges? Isn't it their job to not have a biased
opinion on what they are about to judge? They have
to put all political and patriotic feelings aside
and, whether they like it or not, they have to mark
it as they see it for that night. That's what we all
want right? You bet!
Don't get me wrong. I do agree that
what happened should not have happened. I just don't
think it is fair to blame the judges, who are there
to mark what they see, not how they feel. I don't
think it's fair to blame or be angry with VanAmstel.
Under the current rule, he and future competitors
from other countries have the right to represent the
U.S. if they meet the requirements, and he did. The
problem is with the NDCA rule that allowed this to
happen.
Under registration requirements
of the NDCA rule book, section 3, it states: "United
States National Ballroom Championships";... Properly
registered professional competitors are eligible to
dance in any closed championship of the United States
Ballroom Championships (USBC) if they fulfill one
of the following criteria: (I will not list the 7
requirements to you, but I will share with you the
one rule that I personally think needs to be changed),
which is rule "C": " Both members of
the partnership are non-United States citizens, but
both members of the partnership have resided in the
USA for the previous 12 months, and neither member
of the partnership has represented another country
or competed in the closed national championship of
another country in the previous 12 months".
This is the rule that I think the
NDCA needs to examine. I think it should be required
that only one partner be allowed to be a non- US citizen,
as long as their partner is. That's it! That's as
far as we should be willing to go. England would never
allow the above stated rule. Can you imagine an American
couple going to live in England with only a green
card, and then representing England and winning Blackpool?
It will never happen. After all, this is England!
The ballroom capital of the world and they have too
much pride to ever let any non-resident couple win
Blackpool. At least one of the partners must be from
England (born and raised) to compete for their country.
To me, England is the other extreme.
There is nothing wrong with people coming to start
a new life in America, that is what our country has
been founded on. My friends in this industry who have
done so are hard working people who have made great
contributions to the world of Dancesport. They still
have great pride in their homeland but, they show
appreciation for where they live now. There is no
reason that US citizenship should not be required
of our US Champion, especially when one is capable
of having a dual citizenship, which was not offered
years ago. I see nothing wrong with staying connected
to your homeland but, if your not willing to show
commitment to the country you're living in then, we
all have to accept what happened and.... A US Champion
is living in Holland.
Dan Messenger
02-05-2001
|
