# Keep TEAM USA American



## amsurf (Mar 8, 2009)

I have started a petition to send to USA Archery to protest a recent ruling related to eligibility for international archers to become members of Team USA. I will be in Vegas this weekend and will have petitions in hand if anyone is interested in signing it, and I have also started an on-line petition. I believe that this is an issue of importance to EVERYONE who supports TEAM USA - but most especially all US Archers who are now, or may in the future wish to shoot for a spot on our National Team. Please join me in supporting this petition. 

Here is what it says, and I've included the link below:


Require US Citizenship for placement on the United States Archery Team (USAT), 
Require US Citizenship to earn a National Ranking,
Require US Citizenship to be eligible for USOC athlete support programs, 
Require US Citizenship to be eligible to shoot for a National Title, and
Require US Citizenship to be eligible to hold National Records.

In January 2017 the Board of Directors at USAA changed the rules, effective immediately, to allow non-citizens to be eligible to compete as representatives of the United States at all National and International Events. This was done with no notice to or input from the membership, and without involvement of the full Athlete Advisory Commission. This rule reversed the October rules changes that excluded international archers from full participation in USAT events, and now allows international archers not only the right to full participation in USAT qualifiers, but gives them access to the National Standings, Titles and Teams. This rule benefits only a small number of international archers to the detriment of all US archers who are now, or in the future will be, working to make the US National Teams. 

The stated purpose of this rule change is to bring our team into compliance with World Archery Eligibility Rules, but those Rules apply only to World Cup and World Championship competitions. There is no express World Archery requirement that National Teams be required to include non-citizens. The Olympic Charter, however, is clear. Rule 41.1 of the Olympic Charter (2016) states: “Any competitor in the Olympic Games must be a national of the country of the NOC which is entering such competitor.” This new USAA rule would allow foreign athletes, who would be ineligible to represent TEAM USA at the Olympics, to take advantage of our National Team benefits and experience. This is in direct conflict with USAA’s stated Mission, to “enable United States athletes to achieve sustained competitive excellence in Olympic, Paralympic, World Championships and international competitions and to promote and grow the sport of Archery in the United States”. 

The time to reverse this rule is now, before the first 2017 USAT Events, in order to prevent American citizens’ potential loss of the privilege of representing our country. 


http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/archery-team-usa


----------



## 10X Archer (Mar 7, 2016)

Good idea, and props to you for making a petition. However you should revise the petition to require at least a pending US citizenship as it can take a VERY long time to get one.


----------



## rkumetz (Jun 20, 2014)

I agree with your premise that a nation's team for any event should be composed of actual citizens of that nation however unless USAA's corporate sugar daddies change direction to make the sport of archery the focus rather than being part of their marketing departments things will not change. 

Send the petition to Easton etc......


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

I have no problem of foreign nationals in competing in any event in the US, and be eligible for any award the event as to offer, with the exception where the award/ranking represents the US titles, i.e. USAT. 

I will sign that petition


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

I would be more supportive if like said above a pending us citizenship was required.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

Has anyone signing up for this looked at the registration for the non WRE Az Cup this year? Whether I agree with you or not, you're fighting a battle that's for practical purposes over. At this point it would be, Az is becoming more like the other USATs, which were always a light sprinkling of foreign archers if any, and are we out to run off the last of them, too.

The people on these teams are by definition Americans, the rules usually require it. The real issue is people wanting to whine that they lost in the quarters at tournament x to an international archer and some other American made the team instead. That's something different and as discussed above that distortion is probably heading down towards tiny now.

Likewise, the rules for the Olympics are what they are and presumably already require citizenship. So you're going beyond that. If someone is in the process of getting citizenship but committed to coming, it would be self-defeating to, for example, say they can't be potential RAs even temporarily. US soccer just had a couple players in camp before recent games in the process of getting citizenship, who play here, live here, and will soon be eligible to represent us. You can grease the wheels to get those players integrating and coached ahead of time or you can be a legal technician and hurt your own team. In a few months sincere immigrants will be Americans anyway and you won't be able to stop them. Lorig and Park will be on the team whether you like it or not. So why bother.


----------



## amsurf (Mar 8, 2009)

Azzurri, you clearly don't understand the current state of the rules, or the purpose of the petition. In January of this year, USA Archery changed the rules to allow non-citizens to compete for US Rankings, expressly making them eligible for US Titles, National Records, and the potential for position on the US Archery Team (USAT). This petition calls for the reinstatement of the long standing rules requiring US Citizenship for National Ranking and membership on TEAM USA. Khatuna Lorig and HyeYoun Park ARE US Citizens. They made the committment to this country and have made sacrifices to become American. I am pround to know both of them and call them friends, and I have nothing but respect for them. This petition does NOT seek to limit International Shooters from participation in any events in the United States, and I welcome the competition and diversity at our tournaments. Those international shooters, however, should never be in a position to take a spot away from an American archer who desires to represent the Red, White & Blue at home or abroad.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

I understand it fine. The Olympics requires a passport no matter. For the rest, we require a passport or your former country basically writing you off. That is WA Rules. I don't understand cutting ourselves short from WA Rules.

More to the point, I think it's a fake nativist argument because I haven't seen any influx of foreign archers into AZ registration, or in previous years, at any level, in any discipline. I occasionally see some Korean student or Duenas registered. You are building a flood culvert to deal with a drain that occasionally drips and without enough participation to probably make the teams. You're like, "I have no problem with them doing the tournaments," but I haven't seen any of them doing that in any number sufficient to affect much of anything, and now can't see it at all post Az WRE.

It is insufficient to show up one week, do well in your regional USAT, and you're on the team. To make the team you have to run the whole gauntlet of required tournaments. How many interloping Johnny Foreigners are actually doing this???? The only people bothering to contest that degree of schedule are going to be either already Americans or people basically living here long term, green card, permanent resident, long term students. The only one I can think of who competed at Nationals barebow lives here and runs an archery shop and routinely posts on here. She's married to an American and has an American kid. She's probably waiting out some period to get citizenship. Should she be out of the running just so you can pat your back about making a stand against foreigners?? 

Many of these people can and do become citizens. So it's like, hmmm, I can be a stickler and leave them off, pro-America but that archer weaker, or I can encourage them along with more open rules and maybe grease the skids for them to become citizens based on their being international level athletes, and then we're both happy. And they likely become the next Lorig or Park, who you claim to be friends with. In US Soccer they will bring in people in the application process for camps, to train with the team. They plan ahead. They actively promote joining team USA when someone might have choices. Cutting off residence camps and/or support for people who want to change nationality to here, is deliberately making that process harder.

To me it's myopic to be like, I welcome the competition, but not if they would get on team USA. To do USAT qualifying series for months they basically have to be here on some sort of status, and we can set up that team

I mean, do you really believe there are a bunch of "sleepers" who are going to come in, shoot whole USAT series, live here, go to school here, work here, compete for us, and then at the last minute sneak back off to Korea or Canada or something? There is a thin abstract basis for your position but in practice I don't see much if any reason to "protect us" from this, and if anyone did ever want to use the looser rules, it would probably work out more as a means to expand our pool and identify people we can help get citizenship, and less as a way to "take out jobs" and then sneak home after. I mean, be real. You can talk smack all you want but we all know the foreign menace you're stirring us up against doesn't really exist. It has only ever existed as, like I said before, an excuse for people to complain how Arizona skewed the rankings. And none of them were coming here to take our national team. They just wanted the level of competition we offer just like you said you do.


----------



## mdrnsamurai (Oct 8, 2016)

Won't happen, Athletics have a bottom line. It's not about integrity, it's about endorsements and celebrity. Corporations hardly care about the who and more about the what they can sell aspects of sports.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

Archer X is from GB, nationally competitive BB, owns a shop here, trains up nationally competitive archers for us, only thing she lacks is the passport, and maybe she wants to compete for us. She is not going back to represent GB and the purpose of the second half of the new rule is to burn that bridge behind her. If she jumps through the hoops of USAT and is of legal status here, and it's not the Olympics that requires a passport, why the heck shouldn't she represent us? Win our national title? etc.

Archer Y is here from Korea, nationally competitive but still raw, going to college. Has found while going to college here that she likes it here. Has a long term visa and wants to stay here on graduation. Does all the USATs, isn't planning on competing for Korea, and gets Korea to sign off as much. We let her on the team, she works with KSL and flourishes, gets a passport like Lorig or Park, represents us at the Olympics. But maybe if she doesn't get KSL's attention she doesn't flourish in the same way, her immigration status ends up tied to a job, she does archery part time, good but not great, one less international archer.

Re integrity, to me the integrity would be evident not just in the passport but in the jumping through of immigration and USAT series hoops. A requirement of legal immigration status and a mutual write-off of alternatives covers our interest. The Olympics rules define who can represent us for that, and if they want that, they have to get the passport, anyone serious would want to, and there is even an immigration category specific to internationally competitive athletes we could circularly use to get them one (being on USAT and showing what they have demonstrates the merit for the athletic passport). There is a nominal risk someone games the system in some non integral way and goes back to their country and shoots for them. But be real, how many people do you think go through USAT and pursue RA, at any age group, get it, deny some American, only to flee? It is logically possible. It is practically highly unlikely. The mutual write off of country 2 plus some immigration status sufficiently covers it.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> In January of this year, USA Archery changed the rules to allow non-citizens to compete for US Rankings, expressly making them eligible for US Titles, National Records, and the potential for position on the US Archery Team (USAT).


I haven't paid that close of attention to this issue, but I was thinking that USArchery did just the opposite...


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> I haven't paid that close of attention to this issue, but I was thinking that USArchery did just the opposite...


They did. And then last month decided to change it back. 


Chris


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> They did. And then last month decided to change it back.
> 
> 
> Chris


What?

Someone cried hard enough?

Honestly, the number of times this USArchery administration has seen fit to make an announcement, and then turn around and walk it back... 

It's exhausting and nearly impossible to keep up with.


----------



## baller (Oct 4, 2006)

So here's a couple questions....

First off, has anyone looked at the USAT ranking events over the past 4-5 years and found anything in total results where the AZ results kept someone of the USAT? Yes AZ Cup has historically had the deepest field of competitors up through 2016, both Americans and non-Americans (worded that way or a reason), but how many times has a top 10 American shooter been eliminated in the first or second round of matchplay by one of the non-Americans to the point where they could not get their position back at the remaining USAT shoots of the season? 

Secondly, are not Americans who shoot outside America also International shooters? I get the argument, just clearing up the terms International. Basic math, even if only Americans competed in USAT selection shoots is still a finite number of available positions....and in some cases you will have a 20+ ranked shooter have a great day and knock out a top 8 contender etc....are those results then skewed as well? Isn't the point of a USAT series of events to find the shooters that perform the best over a LONG period of time and not just a flash in the pan?

Thirdly, in what other countries could Americans participate in national ranking tournaments with the same privileges as the new rules? I can't think of any off the top of my head, so perhaps this is a situation of non-american's have already taste the cool-aid so now when we align ourselves with other WA countries to make our team selection shoots American only shoots they play the "we shot last year" card. Almost hypocritical for USAA to make this change when in most cases that I've been in, even out-of-State competitors shooting in State level NAA events are considered "guests" and are not eligible for state records, and even further some states prohibit guests from acquiring state titles as well.

My last comment then I'll get out my popcorn....

Maybe if there is such an outcry from international archers not getting to shoot the AZ cup as a WA ranking event, USAA should look into creating just that...a WA ranking event held on US soil but as an INDEPENDENT event that has no bearing what soever on the USAT ranking series. Keep the USAT series including AZ cup as was originally change in December as a closed Americans Only event series but give the WA shooters what they want, a chance to compete in the US for WA ranking points. Would this not in the end make both sides happy? Americans get their pure American only ranking series for team selection, WA shooters get a chance to shoot for rank in the US, and the big corps get another event to set banners up at....win win win right?


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> What?
> 
> Someone cried hard enough?
> 
> ...


They said after review by a committee they put together, that the committee recommended going back to the old way. Of course i never saw a notice that they were forming a committee, nor did they ever say who was on the committee and how they decided it their wisdom to remove the policy and go back. All very mysterious. 

I only saw Brady publically opposed to removing foreign archers from USAT ranking tournaments/ nationals. 

They even split nationals again. Now the nationals is back to the quals, and the Easton open is back for eliminations. 

And yes, there have been archers who did not make the USA team because they lost a match to a foreign archer. How often? I dont know. But i think one is too many. 


Chris


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

chrstphr said:


> They said after review by a committee they put together, that the committee recommended going back to the old way. Of course i never saw a notice that they were forming a committee, nor did they ever say who was on the committee and how they decided it their wisdom to remove the policy and go back. All very mysterious.


This is what confuses me..I never saw any committee forming talk or "Hey we're thinking about what we changed, opinions?". For such a large and impactful subject I would've expected some public back and forth.

Is it possible to request who was on said committee.. or is it public somewhere?..


----------



## amsurf (Mar 8, 2009)

Chris is correct Rylando, that that there never was any notice regarding the "task force" mentioned in the January article about the most recent change. There was never any public disclosure or discourse, and they have not, to date, released any information on who was on the "task force" that they relyed upon for reversing the October Rule change regarding elibibility. The meeting minutes from the October Board meeting are on USA Archery. In that meeting the board passed, "with all in favor" the recommendations made by the Athletes Advisory Council as well as the JOAD Committee on recommendations (referenced in section VII) that essentially excluded international archers from USAT events. That measure was the once described in the October Rule change article published by USA Archery. 
No meeting minutes from any later Board activity have been published yet...


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

Can someone confirm that we are talking about the same articles?

First
http://www.teamusa.org/USA-Archery/...rchery-Shares-Updates-to-Event-Rules-for-2017

Second
http://www.teamusa.org/USA-Archery/...ent-Eligibility-for-International-Competitors

This was the timeline I had.

The first article says that non US athletes will not shoot elims. They will shoot guest but will not be able to participate in elims. Also it says the US Open will now be used for USAT ranking purposes.

The second article reverses that ruling and goes back to how it was before.

Nowhere in these articles do I see that foreign athletes will gain USAT points unless they jump through some hoops to shoot for team USA. And that is how it has always been if I am not mistaken.

Are we talking about different things?


----------



## amsurf (Mar 8, 2009)

Hi Arsi -

These are the articles that we are talking about - BUT your conclusion that this is how it's always been is not correct. Since at least 2013 all of the USAT Qualification Procedure documents have included the language: 

*"USAT, Junior USAT, Cadet USAT, and Para USAT designations are awarded only to U.S. Citizens who are current US Archery Members." *

No jumping through hoops. You are eligible for US Teams  only if you are a U.S. Citizen. 

That is why this is a MAJOR policy change.


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

amsurf said:


> Hi Arsi -
> 
> These are the articles that we are talking about - BUT your conclusion that this is how it's always been is not correct. Since at least 2013 all of the USAT Qualification Procedure documents have included the language:
> 
> ...


OK well I am still confused.

http://www.teamusa.org/~/media/USA_Archery/January-2017/USAT-Qualification-Procedures-12517.pdf

_*Membership and Eligibility Guidelines*

USAT Ranking and being named to USAT is only provided for USA Archery (USAA) members in good standing who have a *valid U.S. passport*. *If an athlete does not have a valid U.S. passport they must have the written permission of the Member Association, if any, of the country from which he/she has a valid passport.*_

So you still have to be a U.S. Citizen for the most part.

But regarding the part I highlighted in red above, for a majority of the other archers out there who could even have a chance at beating our top U.S. Citizen archers, why wouldn't they simply shoot for their own country? I don't see why a top 8 contender anywhere would want to throw their hat into the U.S. ring to have a chance at something that the could have an easier time at achieving in their home country. If I remember correctly there are a lot of ramifications to shooting for another country and wait periods applied by WA. Though I could be wrong. And even so, they would have to "denounce" their home country essentially and they are part of Team USA if they did that.

I am still not seeing why this is cause for alarm and I am not convinced this is a major issue.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I am still not seeing why this is cause for alarm and I am not convinced this is a major issue.


Agreed.

I hate to quote Tiger Woods, but like he always said... "winning takes care of everything." 

If you are at risk of being beaten out for a USAT spot by someone who may or may not be a U.S. citizen, then just shoot better.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Agreed.
> 
> I hate to quote Tiger Woods, but like he always said... "winning takes care of everything."
> 
> If you are at risk of being beaten out for a USAT spot by someone who may or may not be a U.S. citizen, then just shoot better.


Remarks like this are why " We need to make America great Again". Please, does anyone not understand the concept of National Championship. Leave the politics and corporate whims out of this process.


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

itbeso said:


> "We need to make America great Again" Leave the politics...out of this process.


A political slogan followed by the other statement. I'm not trying to start something; I just found the irony a bit humorous.


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

So maybe it's just my thinking, but if you're going to get beat out by a international archer trying to make a team.. say you did make the team, wouldn't said international archer just kick your butt once you go to a tournament like they would've done in tryouts?.. Is the point not to have the strongest national team? If they're residents and have passports then they're pretty much american citizens in my opinion.


----------



## GimpyPaw (Aug 10, 2008)

Arsi said:


> OK well I am still confused.
> 
> But regarding the part I highlighted in red above, for a majority of the other archers out there who could even have a chance at beating our top U.S. Citizen archers, why wouldn't they simply shoot for their own country? I don't see why a top 8 contender anywhere would want to throw their hat into the U.S. ring to have a chance at something that the could have an easier time at achieving in their home country. If I remember correctly there are a lot of ramifications to shooting for another country and wait periods applied by WA. Though I could be wrong. And even so, they would have to "denounce" their home country essentially and they are part of Team USA if they did that.


They wouldn't have to renounce their own country's citizenship, just get permission. Think about the depth of the Korean team. They have huge numbers of shooters good enough to compete in the Olympics, but are limited to sending only 6. From what I gather the internal competion to get on the Korean team is rough. Why wouldn't somebody who was "almost" take a shot at getting on the American team? This would give them a chance to send their "A- team" out and let them get some international competition experience.


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

GimpyPaw said:


> They wouldn't have to renounce their own country's citizenship, just get permission. Think about the depth of the Korean team. They have huge numbers of shooters good enough to compete in the Olympics, but are limited to sending only 6. From what I gather the internal competion to get on the Korean team is rough. Why wouldn't somebody who was "almost" take a shot at getting on the American team? This would give them a chance to send their "A- team" out and let them get some international competition experience.


There would have to be a lot of money on the line for that to be worth it.

Archery is not the only sport to have this issue. The difference though is the other sports that have this issue usually have huge pots of money waiting for "world travelers". There is no such thing in Archery. And by this I mean where is the money in a Korean archer coming to Gator Cup and winning it? The money is just not there on either side of the pond.


----------



## iArch (Apr 17, 2015)

The Korean "almosts" make enough money over there. No reason for them to come to Team USA LOL


----------



## iArch (Apr 17, 2015)

This doesn't seem like a big issue IMO. It would make sense to have US Citizens on a US Team, but I'll play by whatever rules USA Archery has. No big deal.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

GimpyPaw:
The idea of Korean "sleepers" sent here to get developed around their team limits does not reflect reality. Go over to something like Bangkok and see the multiple sponsored Korean teams that exist and do tournaments like that. And beyond a basic system with more money in it for even the archers we've barely heard of -- I mean look at who made the recurve finals for Vegas -- if you are one of the lucky few who do make the national team it's like playing for Brazil in soccer. And they have coaching such that at their FITAs and 70m's you'll see dozens shooting scores that maybe 20 or so men and 10 women can do here.

The more likely scenarios that this rule catches are, say, a long term green card holder who "retires" here and subsequently decides to take up the sport seriously again and wants to be on our team (Park with or without a passport, so to speak), a college student here on a student visa, or the children of people here working on a visa. The last two are probably the most possible but also the least likely to impact the senior team. I can't believe people from better funded countries really come here to "slum" and make our team, or that people from weaker archery countries would deliberately make it harder for themselves to make a team. Maybe if there was money in archery like basketball or track or some other sports, but not at this stage. At this stage it's more likely to be someone already here for some other reason.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Arcus said:


> A political slogan followed by the other statement. I'm not trying to start something; I just found the irony a bit humorous.


Political slogan? How about an idealogical concept. Oh no, that is too foreign to digest.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

I have brought this up before about nationalal archery titles like the one jesse broadwater did not get someone from another country got it instead " stepan hansen" . plus there is another problem this new doping rule thing >really ? heck I can not pass it because of the medical legal drugs I need to take and shots I get some of us do have medical problems.any lawyers have something to post on this doping issue ?


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

Pete53 said:


> any lawyers have something to post on this doping issue ?


What is the problem with it concerning lawyers? It's something you agree to. It's like how when you compete at nationals you agree that your photo can be used by USA archery, at least on their social media.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Pete53 said:


> I have brought this up before about nationalal archery titles like the one jesse broadwater did not get someone from another country got it instead " stepan hansen" . plus there is another problem this new doping rule thing >really ? heck I can not pass it because of the medical legal drugs I need to take and shots I get some of us do have medical problems.any lawyers have something to post on this doping issue ?


There are medical exemptions if you care to look for them.


----------



## amsurf (Mar 8, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> Agreed.
> 
> I hate to quote Tiger Woods, but like he always said... "winning takes care of everything."
> 
> If you are at risk of being beaten out for a USAT spot by someone who may or may not be a U.S. citizen, then just shoot better.


So, John, to follow your logic you were perfectly okay with corporate America exporting manufacturing jobs overseas decimating the “middle class” to better their bottom line because “winning takes care of everything”? You’re okay with corporations exploiting our visa system, to import foreign nationals in taking skilled jobs in this country, to reduce their labor expenses and improve their bottom line because “winning takes care of everything”? You’re okay with allowing foreign national athletes to be on our national teams, to win more medals because “winning takes care of everything”? I guess, if the Olympic Charter allowed it, we could have sent a more capable team comprised of foreign nationals to the 2004 Olympics to attain medals in archery because “winning takes care of everything”!

It is a privilege and an honor to represent your country at national and international events. It’s just incredulous to me that people, especially Americans, think that citizenship doesn’t matter. Many in this country’s history have sacrificed and even died to have the privilege to just call themselves Americans. How shallow and meaningless it will be to watch a foreign national stand on the podium at a World Event representing the US while the national anthem is played and have it mean nothing to that person who made no sacrifice or commitment to this country to attain that privilege. Wow – they had to lay off international competition for a year! Big sacrifice. 

How is it a US National Title, if you don’t have to be a US national to hold it?? How is it a National Record if it’s held by a non-American? How is it TEAM USA if it is not made up of US Citizens?? All you need to be ranked and named to a USAT Team to simply pay the fee to USA Archery for the membership and a US Passport – but if you don’t have a US Passport, you just need a letter from your country’s Archery governing board, assuming there is one (Page 3 of the 2018 USAT Qualification Procedures). USA Archery membership is more important than your US Citizenship??? 

Even if winning was the primary goal, have we really gotten to the point where we need allow foreign nationals onto our national teams to be successful in winning international events? Are we no longer capable of developing citizen athletes in our country to be internationally competitive? If you think that, then we should damn well be addressing the organizations responsible for developing this capability and hold them accountable for not doing their jobs, and not take the easy way out by opening the door to foreign nationals on our US Teams!

This isn’t about any individual athlete. World Archery does not hold individual events. You can only shoot World Cup/World Championships as a team member of one of the WA’s Member Countries, even if their rules let archers “shop around” for a team. These tournaments are designed for countries to send the best of THEIR best. It’s not about the money, because, as you so often point out, it takes a LOT of time, money and dedication for any athlete to excel in their sport which is well beyond any financial benefit you will receive at the competitions. And it’s not just about winning medals. It’s about a principled and proud American Team. Our athletes don’t just represent America on the field of play when they attend world events. I am proud of TEAM USA and how they represent me because, as Americans, they represent the best of us. 

It’s a damn shame that you – an American Olympian - no longer think being American is an important requirement to represent this country. I think it’s the whole point of USAT, and that the citizenship requirement should be reinstated.

Mark M.


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

amsurf said:


> It is a privilege and an honor to represent your country at national and international events. It’s just incredulous to me that people, especially Americans, think that citizenship doesn’t matter. Many in this country’s history have sacrificed and even died to have the privilege to just call themselves Americans. How shallow and meaningless it will be to watch a foreign national stand on the podium at a World Event representing the US while the national anthem is played and have it mean nothing to that person who made no sacrifice or commitment to this country to attain that privilege. Wow – they had to lay off international competition for a year! Big sacrifice.


I'm no fancy smancy _Olympian_ But uhm, I made no sacrifice to make the three U.S teams I have except the same sacrifices any international archer does to compete. I sacrificed time to get good, and money.. same sacrifices international archers I personally know and call friends do to get to the international stage as well.
I committed nothing but the same time and money everyone else does. I was simply fortunate enough to be born on one plot of dirt as opposed to the other, of which I had no control over.

Out of curiosity have you looked at what you have to go through to get a U.S Passport? It's quite a bit of commitment to obtain it.

You might try to lay off of the kool-aid a little bit and look at it a little more objectively.


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

I should also add; Am I proud to represent my country? Yes, extremely. Do I think just the label of being an "American" makes me better than anyone else? No.


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

amsurf said:


> It is a privilege and an honor to represent your country at national and international events.


ALSO I'd like to add, you say this as though the country picks us. The U.S.A doesn't pick the archers who go to represent it, make the teams etc. You _EARN_ your spot on a team by being the _BEST_ who showed up to try out for it.

Our country doesn't put in the sweat, determination and hard work for us to become better, in this case, archers. We as athletes and competitors do, no matter what country you were born in.


----------



## amsurf (Mar 8, 2009)

That's the whole point, Rolando. Being American doesn't make us better than anyone else - but it we are American. And this should be an American team, win-lose-or draw. No Kool-aid.


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

amsurf said:


> That's the whole point, Rolando. Being American doesn't make us better than anyone else - but it we are American. And this should be an American team, win-lose-or draw. No Kool-aid.


If you were born in germany and go get a U.S passport (Green card required, etc.) then come to america and compete and are the BEST who showed up, you earned that spot as much as the guy born in Ohio or Oklahoma.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

Rylando said:


> What is the problem with it concerning lawyers? It's something you agree to. It's like how when you compete at nationals you agree that your photo can be used by USA archery, at least on their social media.


I might be wrong ? but the way it was explained on the internet no exceptions at Vegas ? I thought that was very strange ? back to the non-americans shooting as American`s if they have a green card,some get coached and live in America in other sports too but go use their country at the Olympics ? what`s with some can and some won`t , my 2cents says: none should at any of our national event unless you a citizen of America and it would be out of respect for our country and all American soldiers ! but what do I know I live ,work, pay taxes ,friends and family were soldiers in America,many were in world war 2,korean war,viet nam all the sand countries. one marine even raised the flag in world war 2 the first time when it was a war,another was with hathcock in viet nam they fought for our nation no green cards. if you are not a citizen and don`t pay taxes in America you have no business on our American national anything ever ! Amerca wants to be great again ! we need to quit baby sit`n these aliens of other countries and quit this snowflake crap !


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Rylando said:


> If you were born in germany and go get a U.S passport (Green card required, etc.) then come to america and compete and are the BEST who showed up, you earned that spot as much as the guy born in Ohio or Oklahoma.


Following that logic to the end, what's the point of having countries represented by teams then?


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

limbwalker said:


> Following that logic to the end, what's the point of having countries represented by teams then?


I should've added (I meant to) that you move to america and take permanent residence.

If you move to america, and go through the process to get a U.S passport then you're pretty well on your way to being an american citizen in my opinion.


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

National titles are a little different than USAT rankings but I also believe on those if you have taken permanent residence in the USA and have a green card/passport then you should be able to compete for those as well. 

I don't know what the rule is national title eligibility right now, but unless you are at the very least a permanent resident and have a green card you should not be allowed to compete. The National titles are USAT positions aswell, and anyone not eligible for USAT should not be eligible to compete somewhere they could knock someone out of the USAT running, that I'm against.


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

itbeso said:


> Political slogan? How about an idealogical concept. Oh no, that is too foreign to digest.


So much for my trying to keep it light. Harumph. (In this latest post of yours, I did enjoy the pun, intended or not.)


----------



## Casualfoto (Mar 10, 2009)

Kudo's to Mark M for recognizing that this is not just about who can shoot for a USAT shirt. This is really about building a program and developing young archers. Its about who can rank high enough to be given the opportunity to take advantage of the high performance resources that USAA has to offer. Squander the resources on participants with temporary or non resident status and there will never be pipeline of committed young US archers willing to commit to a high performance program. USAA has already discarded high performing college bound high school graduates by failing to support them during their college years. Now they are going to discard non college bound high performing US citizens in favor of high performing participants with temporary or non resident status. 

As for foreign nationals shooting for titles, I think this is a wholly separate issue. Its unfortunate that USAA tied this issue to the USAT issue. We must welcome international participates to our tournaments and allow them to shoot for gold. _Of course we could always tell them to stay away. Then they could tell us to stay away from their tournaments and in the end we would have no opportunity to gain international experience. Very productive!_ What needs to happen is that a fair, and possibly very complex, system for calculating USAT points needs to be developed. It has to allow international archers to participate while at the same time fairly account for USAT points.

Just my two cents.
CP


----------



## Casualfoto (Mar 10, 2009)

Before someone takes me to task, I need to go back and clarify my comments about USAA discarding college archers. My comments are directed toward the individual high performing high school graduate moving on the college, not the USAA college archery program. That’s a whole other story, some very good, some not so good. But it’s not fodder for this thread.
CP


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

why not just have a non-resident class ? we seem to help non-residents much more than our own American residents with families that have paid there fare share of taxes,many also have come from military family backgrounds.most of these other countries love our American money they want us over in there countries !


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Pete53 said:


> why not just have a non-resident class ? we seem to help non-residents much more than our own American residents with families that have paid there fare share of taxes,many also have come from military family backgrounds.most of these other countries love our American money they want us over in there countries !


We did. It was called "guest." 



> Squander the resources on participants with temporary or non resident status


Or (here's a crazy thought...) the U.S. Citizens could just SHOOT BETTER.  Crazy. I know...


----------



## Casualfoto (Mar 10, 2009)

Crazy.........not so much......maybe an oversimplified view. Crazy would be a high performance program that addresses all the aspects of developing young talented archers. Recruiting ringers might win a metal or two, but it's not going to help build a program.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

let`s give all the money to American citizens who want to try and become better ,no money at all to non-residents on anything including education and no company tax deductions if they sponsor a non-resident. don`t tell me educated non-residents always are better students ,that`s a lie I have seen and paid for and i am still helping pay for because I worked , paid taxes and raised my own children to be responsible too. one son actually has that great ability in archery that most of us only wish we had but he works and help`s pay his loans off.i am sure there are plenty more young archer`s in America too that could be great archer`s too than we know,hopefully in the next 5-10 years.


----------



## spartaman64 (Jul 5, 2016)

I was born in china but i lived in the US for over 3/4th of my life and i consider myself more american than chinese. the reason why i dont get american citizenship is because i have little reason to and its relatively easy for me to get US citizenship but hard to reverse it if for some reason i want my chinese citizenship back. and if i want to persue competitive archery i would rather represent team USA than team china


----------



## iArch (Apr 17, 2015)

amsurf said:


> So, John, to follow your logic you were perfectly okay with corporate America exporting manufacturing jobs overseas decimating the “middle class” to better their bottom line because “winning takes care of everything”? You’re okay with corporations exploiting our visa system, to import foreign nationals in taking skilled jobs in this country, to reduce their labor expenses and improve their bottom line because “winning takes care of everything”? You’re okay with allowing foreign national athletes to be on our national teams, to win more medals because “winning takes care of everything”? I guess, if the Olympic Charter allowed it, we could have sent a more capable team comprised of foreign nationals to the 2004 Olympics to attain medals in archery because “winning takes care of everything”!
> 
> It is a privilege and an honor to represent your country at national and international events. It’s just incredulous to me that people, especially Americans, think that citizenship doesn’t matter. Many in this country’s history have sacrificed and even died to have the privilege to just call themselves Americans. How shallow and meaningless it will be to watch a foreign national stand on the podium at a World Event representing the US while the national anthem is played and have it mean nothing to that person who made no sacrifice or commitment to this country to attain that privilege. Wow – they had to lay off international competition for a year! Big sacrifice.
> 
> ...


Let's keep it civil. It's not very American to disrespect a member of Team USA is it now?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Mark, you clearly have passion for this topic. 

It's not one that upsets me that much because there are solutions available on the field of play for those who earn them.

That's how I see it. Just a different approach to the the "problem" so to speak.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Heck, if we want to drag up a 13 year-old example, I suppose there are a number of "solutions" to this issue... I can think of a few former USAT archers you can ask for ideas.

A "damn shame" is what happened to one of our best female prospects in the past 30 years.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

Mark you are 110 % right > all members or a individual person should be a tax paying American citizen to be on any America national team or a individual person event that represents any American national event.no exceptions but in America we have these snowflake people who want every day to be a blue bird day la-la -la-la !!!!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> should be a* tax paying* American citizen


Well there goes 1/2 of the USAT squad... LOL


----------



## iArch (Apr 17, 2015)

Pete53 said:


> in America we have these snowflake people who want every day to be a blue bird day la-la -la-la !!!!


LOL is 'snowflake' trending right now?


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

limbwalker said:


> Well there goes 1/2 of the USAT squad... LOL


 good ! we need real American citizens win or lose that are tax paying citizens ! let`s keep our American money in our great country and only help our American citizens. its simple:> if you want to shoot on the USA team become a American citizen and pay your fare share of taxes. i bet> President Trump would agree with that statement ,its just common sense . we have American citizens that are archers who can take over that other half of those non-citizens on our USA TEAM .


----------



## J Wesbrock (Jul 6, 2016)

itbeso said:


> Please, does anyone not understand the concept of National Championship.


Two years ago my daughter and I shot the NFAA Indoor Nationals because she wanted to shoot it. I was a bit surprised to see that someone from Europe won Pro Male Freestyle. He's an incredible shot, and by all accounts a nice guy and all, but I couldn't help scratch my head at why someone from another country was allowed to compete for a US national championship.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

J Wesbrock said:


> Two years ago my daughter and I shot the NFAA Indoor Nationals because she wanted to shoot it. I was a bit surprised to see that someone from Europe won Pro Male Freestyle. He's an incredible shot, and by all accounts a nice guy and all, but I couldn't help scratch my head at why someone from another country was allowed to compete for a US national championship.


Uh, what about the US Open golf tournament, or for that matter the British? Should Americans not be allowed to win the British Open?



> good ! we need real American citizens win or lose that are tax paying citizens !


You didn't get the joke, but that's okay.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

limbwalker said:


> Uh, what about the US Open golf tournament, or for that matter the British? Should Americans not be allowed to win the British Open?
> 
> I did get it just that I hope your not right ?
> 
> You didn't get the joke, but that's okay.


 > the us golf open ? atleast the word or name national wasn`t used. to many of us national means our country "America"


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

limbwalker said:


> Uh, what about the US Open golf tournament, or for that matter the British? Should Americans not be allowed to win the British Open?
> 
> 
> 
> You didn't get the joke, but that's okay.


The British Open is not a national championship tournament. Neither is the US open as i'm sure you are full aware of.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Oh for pete's sake...


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

limbwalker said:


> Oh for pete's sake...


>cute > the joke about half the team ,ya I did understand it but kinda have wondered just how many none-American citizens shoot on our archery teams ? should be none ever again.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Are we as a group, concerned about this just in archery, or in all sports?


----------



## rharper (Apr 30, 2012)

Pete53 said:


> >cute > the joke about half the team ,ya I did understand it but kinda have wondered just how many none-American citizens shoot on our archery teams ? should be none ever again.


You are really complaining about a problem that does not exist. http://www.teamusa.org/USA-Archery/Archers/National-Teams-and-High-Performance/US-Archery-Team-Rankings Look at the rankings and see all the US flags in front of all the names.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

FWIW the coach can be a check on concerns of abuse of the system. An archer whose commitment is a concern in any way, who nominally makes USAT, might rot and not be sent to any tournaments his or her year. That might be true of training or other sporting issues, but could also be true if we think someone is abusing the eligibility.

Ditto RA. On that one in particular, within the rules, the coach decides who to bring in and train. If the performance is poor and/or the team relies on people who mess us over, there is accountability for that.

Conversely, though, if an archer wants to come here and compete for us and is in the immigration process and of status, but not passport holding, why not carve out an exception that might encourage them to try and become American. People are talking up the abuse scenario but what about the next Lorig or Park? 2/3 of the would-be women's Olympic team were immigrants. Well, in theory we could speed up that process by bringing candidates into the RA and if they earn teams, we have fast tracked a quality archer into the team. Soccer and other sports do this all the time. There is even a specific visa for this:

https://www.uscis.gov/working-unite...rkers/p-1a-internationally-recognized-athlete

The coach would have to be mindful of whether they will get a passport fast enough to help, but there again is where some discretion might be more valuable than a bright line. And if the coach gets burned in his choices, well, that goes to whether the coach should keep their gig.

The men made the Olympic medal stand with a kid on the team, and there are other kids on the USAT, I don't see that as a development problem (except for precise podium position, which is a luxury problem as opposed to a competence one). The women's team is another story, but there is an interesting argument to be had about what their team would look like if x% of the team didn't retire every Games. Imagine if, more like the men, you just accumulated cycles' worth of archers who had made the Games. In that scenario I don't know if the issue is development (except at the high level argument of why aren't we as good as Korea) so much as attrition. I mention that because the closer this is down the spectrum of mature, well-developing program, the less inclined I am to hear how we aren't putting the effort into kids and are content to fix it with migrants.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

passport or a green card NO way ! atleast one year a TAX PAYING AMERICA CITIZEN. coach needs to see his W2 and or citizen status

bid deal korea excels in recurve, America is more about compound bows now and America does ok in the compound division,we also need to spend more money and time with our your in that compound division.


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

Meanwhile here in Chula Vista all this week, Team USA has been reaping all sorts of benefits from the presence of 70 or so of those pesky furriners y'all seem to hate. Funny ol' world huh.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Pete53 said:


> passport or a green card NO way ! atleast one year a *TAX PAYING AMERICA CITIZEN. coach needs to see his W2* and or citizen status
> 
> bid deal korea excels in recurve, America is more about compound bows now and America does ok in the compound division,we also need to spend more money and time with our your in that compound division.


Just an JYI:

Undocumented immigrants pay over 12 billion/yr in taxes and would have no problem showing you a w-2. http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-01/study-undocumented-immigrants-pay-billions-in-taxes
Also see: Immigration and Taxation - Internal Revenue Service


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

>--gt--> said:


> Meanwhile here in Chula Vista all this week, Team USA has been reaping all sorts of benefits from the presence of 70 or so of those pesky furriners y'all seem to hate. Funny ol' world huh.


I think some here need to know what "all sorts of benefits" may include.

SP, quit injecting facts into this emotional diatribe. LOL


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

limbwalker said:


> Are we as a group, concerned about this just in archery, or in all sports?


forgot to mention this question : all sports even school scholarships .reason : American citizens pay the most taxes and are the soldiers for america and no more immigrant scholarships,tax deductions or immigrant free-bees .become a citizen of America the legal way if you want some type of a benefit or help period.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

Seattlepop said:


> Just an JYI:
> 
> Undocumented immigrants pay over 12 billion/yr in taxes and would have no problem showing you a w-2. http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-01/study-undocumented-immigrants-pay-billions-in-taxes
> Also see: Immigration and Taxation - Internal Revenue Service


12 billion/ a year ? bet undocumented immigrants legal and illegal cost twice or three times in tax loss revenue and tax money givin to immigrants in the form of medical care ,food stamps ,welfare ,police enforcement needed,schooling and probably some others not mentioned. do you really want to go there ? we haven`t even got started on money given to all these countries and our American soldiers living and dieing protecting the world !> with never even a thank you ???? so when are immigrants and the world going to pay America back > Seattlepop ?


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

This thread is now out of bounds. I hope the mods close it.


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

International archers competing the USA contribute to making our archers better. More participation is better than less. It is my opinion that the ranking for US archers should only be against other US archers. There must be a mechanism for separating out non american citizens for the final ranking for US teams. Maybe a USA only national event along with the open. How can you call a team, Team USA, when it is possible none of the shooters on the team are american citizens.

We must have a standard that favors USA archers for USA teams. Just because an american archer marries another archer from another country doesn't make it right to change the rules so a couple can compete together on the national and international stage.

The only way to force real change, as a membership, is to not pay your membership and boycott the major tournaments as one big group. The members of USA archery are USA archery. Not just the few at the top or at the training center. The people at the top and at the training center need to remember that if you drive out membership there won't be money to support you.

John is somewhat right. Winning should fix everything, except when the rules change to favor others, then it does not.

Gary


----------



## kballer1 (Aug 31, 2010)

American's only on the USA teams, it doesn't make any difference if you have lived in the US for 40 years if you didn't bother to become a US citizen you shouldn't be allowed to compete for a spot on the USA team.
All you want is to have your cake & eat it to.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Pete53 said:


> forgot to mention this question : all sports even school scholarships .reason : American citizens pay the most taxes and are the soldiers for america and no more immigrant scholarships,tax deductions or immigrant free-bees .become a citizen of America the legal way if you want some type of a benefit or help period.


I hope you're this upset when major US corporations move their operations overseas to avoid paying taxes.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

midwayarcherywi said:


> This thread is now out of bounds. I hope the mods close it.


Should have closed it a while ago.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

gairsz said:


> International archers competing the USA contribute to making our archers better. More participation is better than less. It is my opinion that the ranking for US archers should only be against other US archers. There must be a mechanism for separating out non american citizens for the final ranking for US teams. Maybe a USA only national event along with the open. How can you call a team, Team USA, when it is possible none of the shooters on the team are american citizens.
> 
> We must have a standard that favors USA archers for USA teams. Just because an american archer marries another archer from another country doesn't make it right to change the rules so a couple can compete together on the national and international stage.
> 
> ...


Just *because an american archer marries another archer from another country* doesn't make it right to change the rules so a couple can compete together on the national and international stage...

HA! I never even thought about that. Very interesting... So a little "window" into the process maybe? 

As for my comment about "winning" - the point was that if you out-shoot everyone then you have nothing to worry about. I know personally that if I lost out on a USAT squad because a foreign national ranked higher than me, my first reaction would not be "they don't belong there!" - no, my first reaction would be "I should have shot better."


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Just *because an american archer marries another archer from another country* doesn't make it right to change the rules so a couple can compete together on the national and international stage...
> 
> HA! I never even thought about that. Very interesting... So a little "window" into the process maybe?
> 
> As for my comment about "winning" - the point was that if you out-shoot everyone then you have nothing to worry about. I know personally that if I lost out on a USAT squad because a foreign national ranked higher than me, my first reaction would not be "they don't belong there!" - no, my first reaction would be "I should have shot better."


Remember, if you make USAT there is a stipend. It is about the money. It is not about fairness. National and international archery in this country is very expensive, except for the very few at the top. Those at the top that are thinking of themselves should remember where the money comes from. If the membership demands something then they should make it so. Have a vote. Let see what the member thinks. Not just the athlete rep that is only thinking of what is good him.

If they keep this rule change then the membership should sit this year out. Save your money. Then let's see what is really important. US athletes competing for USA? The financial well being of USA Archery? Only medals for USA Archery and the USOC? Or do they really care about the americans that pour their blood sweat and tears into this sport.

The national tournament schedule amounts to a concert tour across the US every year. Fees have gone up every year, and additional charges for coaching credentials also have been implemented. We pay to play with no real chance competing against resident athletes shooting every day. Who is really benefiting? USAT Stipends are handed out to mostly fully funded shooters from the RA Program. Yes, they finish higher, but they are already funded. Non RA shooters should be getting that money to help training efforts for shooters that can't be a resident athletes. The rest of us are are not important. The answer is always, become an RA.

So, now USA Archery wants to give stipends to non american citizens if they make USAT. How does that make any sense?

Gary


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

gairsz said:


> Remember, if you make USAT there is a stipend. It is about the money. It is not about fairness. National and international archery in this country is very expensive, except for the very few at the top. Those at the top that are thinking of themselves should remember where the money comes from. If the membership demands something then they should make it so. Have a vote. Let see what the member thinks. Not just the athlete rep that is only thinking of what is good him.
> 
> If they keep this rule change then the membership should sit this year out. Save your money. Then let's see what is really important. US athletes competing for USA? The financial well being of USA Archery? Only medals for USA Archery and the USOC? Or do they really care about the americans that pour their blood sweat and tears into this sport.
> 
> ...


Finally, someone who isn't afraid to be politically incorrect. Well stated Sir. I wish everyone on here who advocates for foreign archers could be given a lie detector test. Just think about the hypocrisy and lies that would be brought out.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

If i go to any other country and shoot their national tournament, i am in the guest catagory.

I shot the Arizona state outdoor one year. I lived in Vegas. Guess what, i was in the guest catagory.

I have no clue why people dont get this. If you are in the mix for rolling rank points at a USAT or Nationals to make the US team, you should be a US citizen. 

Chris


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

Optics has been a word that has been used in the media over the past year or so. 

The optics of this situation look bad, and reflects entirely on a particular couple in archery and USA archery. There is favoritism and politics in everything. This crosses a line, and the membership needs to stand up. The athlete representative needs to represent all the athletes. Not just one. 

Gary


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

The reality is that American sports teams include foreign nationals. Been to a soccer game lately? Baseball? I haven’t been to a Mariners game since Ichiro left. 

USAA is adopting a similar philosophy of the best players get to play. USAA wants to build the best team possible to represent us in the world arena. Simple, and in no way unique.

Unfortunately, the timing could not be worse. We are now, more than ever, a polarized Nation over immigration policy and our emotions often get the best of us as we have seen in this thread. 

Perhaps the discussion could center on ALL American sports and whether or not foreign nationals should be allowed to participate. Otherwise, I think this debate should find its way over to the political section of AT where “anything goes”.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Those american sports teams are not USA national teams representing the USA. 

Those are private teams owned by corporations. NFL, NBA, etc are corporations that own the system and the teams. Not the same thing we are talking about here.


And this isnt about immigration. Let be clear. Its about eligibility to represent the USA at World cup, World Championships and International tournaments and muddying up the system to rank and pick those archers.



Chris


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

midwayarcherywi said:


> This thread is now out of bounds. I hope the mods close it.


no its not out of bounds, most of us voted for Trump from what I have read, most are not snowflakes who voted for hillary and we the true Americans want to see change to help American tax paying citizens in all USA teams including Archery teams in American National tournaments. so if we want America to be great again we need to help too in anyway possible to help true Americans.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

kballer1 said:


> American's only on the USA teams, it doesn't make any difference if you have lived in the US for 40 years if you didn't bother to become a US citizen you shouldn't be allowed to compete for a spot on the USA team.
> All you want is to have your cake & eat it to.


 this needs to be read again ! X2 from me >well done


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

chrstphr said:


> Those american sports teams are not USA national teams representing the USA.
> 
> Those are private teams owned by corporations. NFL, NBA, etc are corporations that own the system and the teams. Not the same thing we are talking about here.
> 
> ...


No foreign nationals in the NCAA? There is apparently a review of that system as well: http://www.espn.com/college-sports/news/story?id=4579737

We are essentially competing against professional teams on the world circuit, so I think the analogy applies. USAA is merely trying to keep up. 

I agree that this should not be a debate about immigration policy, but Pete53 wants one with his "no true American", "liars" and "hypocrites" ad-hominem attacks. False news! Pathetic!


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

We are also talking about Olympic Archery here, aren't we?


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

Why would foreign shooters be able to make USAT, and receive stipends from USA Archery for training if they are not allowed on the USA Olympic Team unless they are citizens? This decision was made to accommodate a few select people. Shouldn't we be funding athletes that can compete in the olympics for the USA? Or should we be funding athletes that can return to their home country and compete against us?

It seems like a no brainer to me.

Resorting to political partisanship is not helpful.

Like I said. If you don't like the rule, boycott the USAT tournaments. Shoot your local tournaments and put your money where it will do some good. USA Archery and Coach Lee only want the RA's to compete at world events anyway. Ask anyone that had the rules change time and time again to advance RA's into positions to compete pushing archers that have earned the right to shoot at world events left out. 

Gary


----------



## ewan (Aug 28, 2007)

Dirty foreign shooter here, checking in. Thoroughly enjoyed this thread A++ would read again.


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

ewan said:


> Dirty foreign shooter here, checking in. Thoroughly enjoyed this thread A++ would read again.


Did someone use the term, "Dirty foreign Shooter"?


----------



## Atascaderobow (Nov 4, 2014)

Let's play pretend here: If Brady got fed up with shooting for the US could he go to Korea and make their team without being a citizen? Does the door currently swing both ways?

I can't see how using golf tournaments as a comparison works for the sake of argument. Unless I am missing something winning the US or British open don't count toward getting on the host(s) national team.

If a foreign national wins a USAT event couldn't you give them the kudos, and all the millions of $$$$ they earn by winning, then give the next highest ranking USA citizen the points to qualify for the USAT? If a forgien national sets a record make it like you see on track and field or swim meets.... show the World record and US record. That way we still get to shoot against the best, but it doesn't affect our USAT team standings.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

If you take the meritocratic aspect of this so seriously how do you not at some point have to reconcile that with what it would mean if some foreign archer came in and whipped our butts and earned a spot? Most of the outdoor qualifiers to wear the shirt are multi-event processes. USAT has its set. World outdoors is a long trials process. Olympics is a long trials process. If someone tries that hard in our series and makes the team, and you're acting like the meritocracy is so sacred, then shouldn't I want them on my team as the best?

Also, re the question of "why should they be in our camp" before being Olympic-eligible, what if the next Khatuna Lorig is committed here, living here, training here, competing here, but in the 5th year of some 5 year period she has to wait out to get a passport. Or what if she is eligible immediately for citizenship and just waiting on approval of a passport application. I would want the US coach, in his discretion, to be able to anticipate her upcoming value to the team, get her into camp, get her on teams she can be on, and get her dealing with the rigors of international archery. Or I can be a stickler and insist on the passport and delay the process even though the basic result of them becoming a citizen might be no less inevitable.

US soccer routinely does this and just had a couple people in their January camp training before recent games. Kekuta Manneh was born in Gambia and played some for their youth national teams as a kid. He moved here at age 16, played youth soccer in Texas, was signed out of HS into pro MLS, has been playing pro here 4 years. He had to get a passport -- check, finally -- and then get a waiver from FIFA to change allegiance. He did not suit up for games because he was not officially eligible, but the coach decided to go ahead and start training and evaluating and integrating him this January anyway. As a result, if he does get the waiver done for this spring and summer, he can slide right into the team. Or you can pull some mix of "you're really Gambian til you have the passport and everything" and "our camp is only for citizens" and if we need him for important qualifiers this year, we don't know how he stacks up against our other campers.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

That being said, AZ is no longer WRE, you can tell from the registration list what that's done to the foreign archer signup, and the most likely scenarios of people still involved will either be students or permanent residents, who you might want to encourage to stay here and become eligible, or people like Duenas making a cameo at some event, repp'ing their home country and no intent to make our teams. I can't buy some serious foreign archer is building 4 American 70m events into their schedule to sneak on our team only to stab us in the back.


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

Atascaderobow said:


> Let's play pretend here: If Brady got fed up with shooting for the US could he go to Korea and make their team without being a citizen? Does the door currently swing both ways?


Depends on the other countries rules. In some smaller countries, you could do something like that and get away with it. 

(Snip)


> If a foreign national wins a USAT event couldn't you give them the kudos, and all the millions of $$$$ they earn by winning, then give the next highest ranking USA citizen the points to qualify for the USAT? If a forgien national sets a record make it like you see on track and field or swim meets.... show the World record and US record. That way we still get to shoot against the best, but it doesn't affect our USAT team standings.


The whole problem is how a foreign national can theoretically affect how our current USAT system is calculated. Current calculations use OR rankings as part of the ranking process. 

However, let's delve into something a bit deeper and more impactful. The pocketbook, specifically of individual archers, gets influenced if you have more foreign nationals involved in the tournament. 

Instead of Toja, which everyone seems to be focusing on, I'll use Linda Ochoa Anderson as this example, mainly because she already has her Permanent Resident card and now is starting to list Utah as her state of residence. If (big if) she started her 1 year of penance and got her release from Team Mexico, she is far further along (in theory) than Toja would be in terms of the long term process to become a member of Team USA. 

If Linda won the 2017 Arizona Cup as a Compound Senior Female, that means that it not only impacts USAT rankings for the other Compound Women in rankings (knocking the next highest US woman down a level or three), any women she eliminated in the OR's can't realistically be calculated properly. 

So, let's say that Linda eliminated Crystal Gauvin in the 1/16ths and Erika Jones in the 1/8ths. Crystal gets a 17 ranking, Erika gets a 9 ranking. If a Linda type couldn't compete, who knows where Crystal and Erika would end up?

But that's small potatoes compared to contingency money. The leap and gap between 1st/2nd/3rd is huge. And since this is USAT rather than Vegas or ASA/IBO, contingency can and will be different (and likely unpublished). But I know that the money difference is huge. Eliminate foreign nationals from the OR's, and you increase your chances and contingency payout if you're an archer on the bubble. 

So, using last year's Arizona Cup - if you eliminated all of the foreign archers in the Compound Senior Women, you just boosted your overall chances in getting a higher ranking by 20 percent. To those on the bubble, that 20 percent is worth the fight.


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

Considering that the AZ Cup is no longer a WRE, one might consider a substantial amount of the foreign participation "problem" will take care of itself. (and, the contingency money is likely to follow, as the event has far less value to sponsors as a simple USAT event)


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

>--gt--> said:


> Considering that the AZ Cup is no longer a WRE, one might consider a substantial amount of the foreign participation "problem" will take care of itself. (and, the contingency money is likely to follow, as the event has far less value to sponsors as a simple USAT event)


Hehe. I just used the Arizona Cup as an example since it's on my mind. I have a meeting regarding it in 30 minutes. It's nothing glorious- we are doing an inventory on flip score cards.

One could use JOAD Outdoor Nationals and the Chinese Taipei team influence they have on the Cadet USAT ranks as an even more extreme example.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> that means that it not only impacts USAT rankings for the other Compound Women in rankings (knocking the next highest US woman down a level or three), any women she eliminated in the OR's can't realistically be calculated properly.





> One could use JOAD Outdoor Nationals and the Chinese Taipei team influence they have on the Cadet USAT ranks as an even more extreme example.


I was about to do that, as I've brought this up years ago...

There is no way to accurately calculate or even estimate rankings for US archers.


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

I haven't kept up with this thread since my initial two posts and I don't intend on catching up beyond the last few posts. But whatever happened to playing the game? I remember Jay Barr's commenting on GTs podcast about the emergence of the set system and Jay was saying that it doesn't matter and it's the round that is prominent so you have to shoot the round.

These are the rules we are dealt and we have to play by them. 

Maybe it would matter if my livelihood depended on archery, but it doesn't. And I don't think very many people on this forum, save for GT, depend on archery for their livelihood (albeit in a completely different arena than this thread is talking about).


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

You raise an interesting point for discussion... 

If those whose livelihood does not depend on archery (most of us) don't weigh in and just -as Jay says (and as I suggested earlier) - simply play the game, then does that not lead to the rules of the sport favoring those who DO make their living from archery? And if so, then is that what we - the majority - want?

I believe we're in an interesting transition time where the once-amateur sport of archery is heading to a point where professional events and organizations, and true amateur events and organizations will go their separate ways. Personally, I welcome that time and cannot wait for it to arrive. This mixing of interests and needs of amateurs and professionals is really serving nobody as well as it could.


----------



## amsurf (Mar 8, 2009)

This issue isn't about making a living from the sport - and it's not about "these are the rules and we need to play by them". USA Archery has seen fit to change the rules without input from the membership. This rule change may not even change the make-up of USAT this year, but if they leave it as written it WILL impact the USAT teams in the near future. Honestly, I think it will impact the Cadet USAT and the Junior USAT before it impacts the Senior Division - so it's not about making money. It's about preserving out monetary resources and precious experiences that helps grow our youth. It's about the privilege of representing our country in amateur athletics, and YES, it is about the Olympics. I truly don't believe the rule change is necessary or right. That's the point of the petition, and to get the attention of USA Archery and let them know that we see through the lack of transparency.

Mark M


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

amsurf said:


> This issue isn't about making a living from the sport - and it's not about "these are the rules and we need to play by them". USA Archery has seen fit to change the rules without input from the membership. This rule change may not even change the make-up of USAT this year, but if they leave it as written it WILL impact the USAT teams in the near future. Honestly, I think it will impact the Cadet USAT and the Junior USAT before it impacts the Senior Division - so it's not about making money. It's about preserving out monetary resources and precious experiences that helps grow our youth. It's about the privilege of representing our country in amateur athletics, and YES, it is about the Olympics. I truly don't believe the rule change is necessary or right. That's the point of the petition, and to get the attention of USA Archery and let them know that we see through the lack of transparency.
> 
> Mark M


:thumbs_up


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

amsurf said:


> This issue isn't about making a living from the sport - and it's not about "these are the rules and we need to play by them". USA Archery has seen fit to change the rules without input from the membership. This rule change may not even change the make-up of USAT this year, but if they leave it as written it WILL impact the USAT teams in the near future. Honestly, I think it will impact the Cadet USAT and the Junior USAT before it impacts the Senior Division - so it's not about making money. It's about preserving out monetary resources and precious experiences that helps grow our youth. It's about the privilege of representing our country in amateur athletics, and YES, it is about the Olympics. I truly don't believe the rule change is necessary or right. That's the point of the petition, and to get the attention of USA Archery and let them know that we see through the lack of transparency.
> 
> Mark M


USArchery is managed by a board of directors, not the membership. The sooner the members can realize and accept this, the sooner they will understand how some of these decisions are made.

With today's ease of internet polls, it would be so incredibly simple to poll the membership. I know they can do this. I've seen it before.


----------



## Rylando (Jul 30, 2016)

limbwalker said:


> With today's ease of internet polls, it would be so incredibly simple to poll the membership. I know they can do this. I've seen it before.


It's stupidly simple. I know they've done it before for the Barebow outdoor format changes.. but that doesn't mean they'll listen to whatever the result of the poll was.. like the barebow outdoor format changes lol.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

itbeso said:


> Finally, someone who isn't afraid to be politically incorrect. Well stated Sir. I wish everyone on here who advocates for foreign archers could be given a lie detector test. Just think about the hypocrisy and lies that would be brought out.


What's the hypocrisy? Our rules would be WA legal on archer nationality:

2.4. National Teams
2.4.1. To be eligible to participate as a member of a National Team in International Events, an athlete shall have a valid passport from the country of which he is a National Team Member and shall not have represented any other Member Association as a National Team Member for at least one year before the date of the competition.

2.4.2. If an athlete wants to compete for a National Team other than the one for which he holds a valid passport, he shall have resided in the new country for at least one year before the date of the competition and shall have the written permission of the Member Association, if any, of the country from which he has a valid passport.

2.4.3. An athlete who has changed his nationality, or acquired a new nationality, may not represent the National Team of his new Member Association until one year after such a change or acquisition.

2.4.4. An athlete who has a valid passport of two or more countries at the same time may represent either of them, as he chooses. He shall, however, meet the conditions laid down in 2.4.1 to 2.4.3 above.

2.5. Athletes are not eligible to compete in World Archery events if they do not meet the requirements laid down above.

Having fulfilled "nationality," the issue is then meritocratic as our system generally works. USAT, Worlds, Olympics are all fairly objectively selected. The one distortion I think there is, is the bonus points for winning certain events tacked onto USAT totals. That has a slight status quo bias since we can't go win an outdoor world cup and get bonus points without first making the team. But we might also want to favor retention of archers capable of those performances, and give them a slight bonus. Otherwise, you earn it the hard way.

You can look at it as policing nationality or you can look at it, within WA's version of nationality, as trying to water back down pure meritocracy in case someone does try it. I think it's a tempest in a teapot more likely to apply to children brought here by visa workers, than adults.

At least some of the issue also arguably goes to the issue of whether USAA is truly Olympic focused or not. The theory on requiring a passport is Olympic focused. The nominal rule is USAA is our governing body for the Olympics and that's what it's about. But is it really? USAT doesn't get you the Olympics. Separate trials. USAT may get you world cups. But even world cups don't get you Olympics. So since all these things are WA competitions, do the Olympics wag the dog or do we play under WA rules for preparing for WA events? That's at least one dispute I see bubbling up below the surface here.

That and I still think the primary issue is kid archers here with their parents, who aren't citizens, maybe bumping so-and-so's kid off the USAT. I think we talk about Olympics but the rules settle that. I think we also talk about adult USAT but what are the chances an adult archer who needs to make a living is here doing our circuit instead of their own as some sort of sleeper. You go to something like Bangkok and Korean teams have rented small buses and small luxuries. Meanwhile a medalist like Tyack is a couple tables over at the hotel restaurant eating the same food I do, and grabbing a cab to the venue like me. I am sure outdoor world cup is more elaborate but at least some of this is based on a naïve sense of making a living off this. Any adult archer coming over here just to make our team would have to be a little crazy, or really badly want to be an American for some reason. You aren't making a trainload of cash even as Brady in this.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

rules need to be change at least here in America > shall or must be a tax paying USA citizen for one year before eligible to compete or practice on any USA amateur team including the Olympic USA team, also no "SPONSOR" tax deductions to any none American citizen.> simple you either be a tax paying USA citizen or you are not on any USA amateur team.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Azzurri said:


> What's the hypocrisy? Our rules would be WA legal on archer nationality:
> 
> 2.4. National Teams
> 2.4.1. To be eligible to participate as a member of a National Team in International Events, an athlete shall have a valid passport from the country of which he is a National Team Member and shall not have represented any other Member Association as a National Team Member for at least one year before the date of the competition.
> ...


Azzuri, the hypocrisy is the people on here advocating for something on a public forum to make it seem like they are "holier than thou" and more accepting of liberal policies than others. I think the reality is that most of these people would be scared to death if the world could see what they really think inside. Protest all you want to, the world knows.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

itbeso said:


> Azzuri, the hypocrisy is the people on here advocating for something on a public forum to make it seem like they are "holier than thou" and more accepting of liberal policies than others. I think the reality is that most of these people would be scared to death if the world could see what they really think inside. Protest all you want to, the world knows.


I think it's just I have a different bent from many other sports I have been involved in, soccer, track. Soccer and track have absolute passport rules but few hangups about training athletes-in-transition who want to come here and represent us. The hardcore principle underlying that -- as opposed to hypocrisy -- is fastest man down the track gets it. Or if you can help the soccer team. Meritocracy. if a foreign athlete develops an attitude problem they get dropped from training and have to earn their way back in. People are acting like it's becoming subjective gymnastics or something, but a lot of archery is strict numbers. You go to tournaments and what happens, happens. if you do not have MQS you don't get in RA and if you do, you don't stay in RA longer than x weeks. You make USAT from a formula and a set of tournaments. The travel costs thousands and the pay is merit based and not massive. It probably covers expenses except for Vegas or outdoor Worlds or something. You want on one of the trials teams, you go to multiple days for some things and multiple events for others. You cannot parachute in and do it. Too expensive, too many events. The process is its own deterrent.

I see two actual issues, which revolve around kids. The other kid is Korean and here on a visa with parents. Or, some foreign kid knocked my kid out in the semis so I finished a point shy behind the last person. The latter strikes me as anti-meritocratic. You lost. You want us to re-jigger the rules to give you more than the formula said because a foreign archer beat you. What about the kid who loses same round to an American? Do you get different points because they "should" or "shouldn't be there?" Kind of begs the question to me. I'd say semis is semis.

The other half is, focused on the "foreigner," the kid here on a visa. I get the opposition but I also think as a soccer or track player we tend to view that as an opportunity as opposed to a threat. US Soccer tries to win fights for dual nationals. Tries to help people get passports. We want the best team we can get, and if blah blah helps it, bring him in. If he's better than the next guy, has status, and has applied for a passport, or is waiting out a 5 year period as a kid, why not try and net them here? Maybe if mom and dad go to Korea, he or she stays. It does squeeze out some Americans, but go back to the basic meritocratic rule. Is the prime directive meritocracy or a blend of things. To me go with straight meritocracy and a flexible nationality rule. The work involved to get there is its own deterrent and the coach can have powers to thwart abuses, send people out of RA, not use them for world cups, etc.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

To me development is a separate issue. If there is a development problem, you work on scouting or coaching or whatever that issue is. My argument in terms of US Soccer, which has been in a domestic development swoon of late, missing 2 of 3 Olympics, and hit and miss at U20, is that if we can't get the job done it's cutting off your nose to spite your face further to oppose senior dual nationals coming in from someplace like Germany. I'll sit there and walk someone down the list of dual nationals on the senior men's roster. OK, imagine the team without that. If you want to fix development, fine, do that, but it's almost self-loathing to lump atop that strict nationality rules that rely heavily on that development system. OK, I will punish myself and deny any quick fix also.

Look at the US "Olympic" teams. 2 of the 3 women who emerged, but did not go, were not American born. I think that's caused by attrition but since both represented foreign countries, the more harsh we get, the more harsh any development or attrition problems will look underneath also.


----------



## Arsi (May 14, 2011)

Pete53 said:


> rules need to be change at least here in America > shall or must be a tax paying USA citizen for one year before eligible to compete or practice on any USA amateur team including the Olympic USA team, also no "SPONSOR" tax deductions to any none American citizen.> simple you either be a tax paying USA citizen or you are not on any USA amateur team.


So where does that leave the RAs? I am pretty certain they do not make enough on their allowance to necessitate paying taxes on. I guess tournament winnings count. Does equipment count as well?


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

Arsi said:


> So where does that leave the RAs? I am pretty certain they do not make enough on their allowance to necessitate paying taxes on. I guess tournament winnings count. Does equipment count as well?


 let`s keep this more simple to understand American citizens only> no non American citizens on any USA amateur team .passports will mean nothing except a ticket out of USA!


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

Azzuri, you lost me on your posts/ Not sure what your argument was but, I commend you on keeping everything civil.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

itbeso said:


> Azzuri, you lost me on your posts/ Not sure what your argument was but, I commend you on keeping everything civil.


Short version of those two posts:
(a) Other sports I come from are more welcoming than this seems to be. Soccer in particular they just had a guy in USA's camp who couldn't play the games but was in the process of switching nationalities. It was not viewed as intrusion, but as "how quick can we get him on OUR team." Guys like Bernard Lagat run for USATF now.
(b) I believe in pure meritocracy and by that I mean if you have to face Duenas at a USAT or get beat out by Bob Greencard for a USAT slot, that was part of the playing field. I don't know how we can rate some other guy's 1/4 loss to an American lower than your 1/4 loss to a Canadian. Quarters is quarters. And if you meet eligibility and come make our team, and beat out the usual suspects, I'm glad you're here making us better, not scared how you took our job.
(c) The coach can police abuses. We have more archers on a USAT than we can send to tournaments (8 versus 4 usually). He also probably has power to send home people from RA. If he thinks someone is abusing the privilege, I assume he can not use them or send them home.
(d) The point with development is I see that as separate from the final senior and masters teams themselves. One is I am attempting to identify potential future great archers and nurture them. The other is who we send to compete for the team. At the moment, 2/3 of the last Olympic RW team we did not develop. Depending how hardcore you are about nationality and at what stages, you either can fix your development weaknesses or are simply stuck with what you produce. My perspective, as with US Soccer which has struggled in the youth age groups lately, that dual nationals coming in as senior athletes are fixing our problem, not creating one. You then need to remember, separately, to go back over to the U23s and U20s and figure out how the prospect pipeline is busted. But the idea of punishing one's senior team quality for failing to develop better youth archers (like you can't bring in outsiders to address weakness) sounds like self-loathing to me. I'd say if someone wants to immigrate and become American and is in the process and can whoop our incumbents, I want them encouraged even if they are short a passport and won't have one for a year or two, if they meet the WA standard.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

Clarification, since I can't edit right on this machine -- archery is generally very welcoming and accessible. This is a rare stumbling block here.


----------



## Pete53 (Dec 5, 2011)

Azzurri said:


> Clarification, since I can't edit right on this machine
> 
> when you address weakness ya that`s kinda really true ? us the American citizen seems to have supported the world for to long and American`s are tired of this weakness of other countries,so if someone wants to be on an American amateur team why don`t these non-citizens just become an American citizen ? probably because if they remain a non-citizen they will get way more hand-outs or in simple terms MORE MONEY ! or as a snowflake call`s it support. that`s why we voted Donald Trump in as president to cut out all this free-be crap !


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

^
Karma says 10,000 Syrians are headed for your neighborhood. Lol.

Pete, there is a place on AT for political discourse. Do us all a favor and check it out: http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=68


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

Pete53 said:


> Azzurri said:
> 
> 
> > Clarification, since I can't edit right on this machine
> ...


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

>--gt--> said:


> Pete53 said:
> 
> 
> > You know, even President Trump seems to have become more civil. Perhaps give it a try yourself.
> ...


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

itbeso said:


> >--gt--> said:
> 
> 
> > Civility is open to perception. In my opinion, Mr. Trump has always been civil, so keep your snide comments to yourself GT.
> ...


----------



## gairsz (Mar 6, 2008)

Pete53 said:


> [QU
> Civility is open to perception. In my opinion, Mr. Trump has always been civil, so keep your snide comments to yourself GT.
> 
> 
> thanks the for help ! > must be snowflakes and non-citizens whining to let it be


LOL. Really? The perceptions of other is you are not being civil.


----------



## Arcus (Jul 7, 2005)

Pete53 said:


> thanks the for help ! > must be snowflakes and non-citizens whining to let it be


Please follow the advice in post #117.


----------



## Azzurri (Mar 10, 2014)

Like I said, I am convinced the real spoon stirring this debate remains not protection of the senior team but people being crabby about junior results. AZ not being WRE just dealt with most of that, and the most likely scenario I can think of is some Korean kid here with his parents who work for Samsung on a visa. The parents pay taxes on domestic income, are not here to abuse the rules, and the kid lives and competes where their parents do.

The idea of foreign benefits cheats making the team doesn't work. It neglects the geographic travel and cost demands of making a USAT or the like. You have threads on here dedicated to coaches and others who work for a living talking about the financial demands of USAT. And the suggestion is someone off welfare is running the circuit, getting coaching sufficient to leverage their abilities to the necessary level, and making the team? Seriously. People can argue this for politics if they want, but for archery, it's fake news.

Also, particularly for the men and to some degree the women, the road to success would be easier in 99% of other countries than here. We took second at the Olympics team to Korea. Implicitly, second hardest team in the world to make. Rationally, you'd be better off back where you came from trying to make their team, than taking on our talent pool. Look at the people who get other Americas slots to the Olympics, or the people from all over the world making teams for Worlds. Why would you give that up to chase our team? Duenas competes here a lot but then goes back to Canada and makes their team for all sorts of stuff. I don't know how patriotic he is, but rationally, does he give that up and come here and who knows where he slots in and if he makes 3 man teams?


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

Not the political forum. Barring one poster this has been a fairly interesting discussion.

As a former "legal" alien for 5 years in Colorado, I would have no interest in shooting for the US. Not because I have anything against the US, but because I am Canadian (insert Joe Canada joke here). My time in CO were some of my best years, both life and career wise. I think the opportunity for a little free training would be cool, but I can't imagine the efforts (or cost) it would take to get to that point would be paid off by the amount saved from the training and some subsidized travel. I could be wrong. 

As far as a national from another country competing for the US and taking up a spot, could it happened? I suppose, but there are easier countries to get onto the team for I am sure if that is their sole goal. And a lot of those countries would probably give them a pretty decent stipend.

Now, do I believe that foreigners should be able to compete in a "National" ranking tournament? I think the easy answer is it depends, but... it doesn't work in the current format of head to head. 

1. Could you have the national ranking system cut off at the qualifiers (nobody ousted by a "guest"), then have normal head to head matches for the title? That would leave out the "pressure" response of the competitors for National Ranking who may not do as well in head to head. 

2. Could you have two sets of head to head matches? One for the overall title, and one for the National ranking... sounds cumbersome. And then you have two "winners" at the end of the day. However, this could generate some interest, and frankly I think it could be done.

3. Could you just omit "guests" from the shoot-out (sort of a reverse #1)? I guess turnout numbers will tell, but I am betting on a significant decline.

So, long story short, I don't think there is an easy answer in the current format. And it is the format you have. So, I think USA Archery is trying to balance a lot of pressures. 

It will be interesting to see how the next couple seasons play out.

Cheers
Erik


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

Wow,

Sorry Azzurri,

Just realized I parroted a number of your points.

Cheers
Erik


----------

