The Complaint Department
May 26, 2015
The MHSAA office is one of the few places of business a person can telephone and still be greeted by a real live person.
Our real live person, Laura Roberts (no relation), has become a favorite of many MHSAA member school employees and registered officials because of her friendliness and command of facts. However, I recently overheard Laura say that the most frequent way she is greeted by other callers is, “I want to register a complaint.”
What is frustrating to Laura, and to the rest of the MHSAA staff, is that the caller’s complaint is so often about something the MHSAA is without authority and responsibility to fix. For example ...
- Complaints about coaches’ decisions regarding who makes the team and who gets playing time or who is playing what position are misdirected to the MHSAA. The MHSAA does not hire or supervise any coach, and has no authority to intervene in such matters as these; yet the parents’ complaints of this type come often to the state level when they should never ascend above the local school level.
- Complaints about officials’ decisions during the regular season are misdirected to the MHSAA. The hiring of contest officials outside of MHSAA tournaments is outside the authority of the MHSAA.
- The same is true regarding the days and times that regular-season contests are held.
- The same is true relative to the facilities utilized for regular-season events.
- Complaints about student conduct or training rules are misdirected to the MHSAA. Local boards of education jealously guard their sole authority to determine and enforce rules related to drinking, smoking and good citizenship.
- Complaints about all-state teams are misdirected to the MHSAA, which has never named a single all-state team in any sport. Sometimes it’s a media group which names these teams; sometimes it’s a coaches association; but it’s never the MHSAA which does so; and neither the media nor coaches associations answer to the MHSAA on such matters.
On these and other topics, the MHSAA is the misdirected target of daily complaints from those who want to better understand why things happen as they do in their niche of school sports. Because there are new constituents to school sports every year, it will be a never-ending test of our patience and professionalism.
The Fourth Option
February 27, 2018
Throughout the years, schools of this and every other state have identified problems relating to school transfers. There is recruitment of athletes and undue influence. There is school shopping by families for athletic reasons. There is jumping by students from one school to another for athletic reasons because they couldn’t get along with a coach or saw a greater opportunity to play at another school or to win a championship there. There is the bumping of students off a team or out of a starting lineup by incoming transfers, which often outrages local residents. There is the concentration of talent on one team by athletic-motivated transfers. There is friction between schools as one becomes the traditional choice for students who specialize in a particular sport. There is imbalance in competition as a result. And there is always the concern that the athletic-motivated transfer simply puts athletics above academics, which is inappropriate in educational athletics.
All states have developed rules to address the problems related to school transfers. In some states, it is called a “transfer rule” and in other states a “residency rule,” because linking school attendance to residence is one of the most effective tools for controlling eligibility of transfers. None of the state high school association rules is identical, but all have the intention of helping to prevent recruiting, school shopping, student bumping, team friction, competitive imbalance and sports overemphasis. The goal of promoting fairness in athletic competition and the perspective that students must go to school first for an education and only secondarily to participate in interscholastic athletics is paramount.
The transfer/residency rule is a legally and historically tested but still imperfect tool to control athletic-motivated transfers and other abuses. It is a net which catches some students it should not, and misses some students that should not be eligible. This is why all state high school associations have procedures to review individual cases and grant exceptions; and why all state high school associations have procedures to investigate allegations and to penalize violations where they are confirmed.
Over the years, state high school associations have considered four options to handle transfers. The first two options are the easiest courses: either (1) let schools decide themselves about transfers, as Michigan once did, but this leads to inconsistent applications and few states now subscribe to such an approach; or (2) make no exceptions at all, rendering all transfer students ineligible for a period of time, but this becomes patently unfair for some students and no state high school association subscribes to that extreme, although it would be easy to administer.
The third option – the ideal approach, perhaps – would be to investigate the motivation of every transfer and allow quicker eligibility or subvarsity eligibility to those which are not motivated by athletics, but this is very time consuming if not impossible to administer. No state high school association has sufficient staff and money to consider every detail and devious motive of every transfer.
This is why a fourth option has been most popular with most state high school associations. This is a middle ground which stipulates a basic rule, some exceptions (we have 15 exceptions in Michigan), and procedures to consider and grant waivers – a primary role of the Michigan High School Athletic Association Executive Committee.