The Arizona Interscholastic Association (AIA) voted on the updated transfer rule Mar. 4 and it will go into effect July 1, 2016. With the new clauses, in-state transfers may find it more difficult to move to another school and continue playing their sport.

Previously, a student-athlete who moved from one school boundary to another would only be eligible to play if they moved houses. If they did not, they would have to sit out the entire season.

“This new transfer rule takes out whether you moved or not and treats all transfers the same,” Athletic Director Jennifer Burks stated. “If you transfer from in-state, whether you move from Chandler boundary to Perry boundary, whether you don’t move at all, you have to sit out 50% of the season.”

This applies to all levels and the reason for a student’s transfer does not matter.

“That rule is for people who live right here [in Perry boundaries] and move across Germann cause they want to play football at Campo Verde. It stops people from jumping schools,” Principal Dan Serrano stated. “It’s going to be interesting to see what happens over the next year because if I move from Tempe to Queen Creek because I bought a new house, should my kid have to sit out half the games?”

Some may agree that this update makes transferring easier for student-athletes because now they only have to sit out half the season. Others say that it makes it more difficult on those who actually moved and now have to be penalized by sitting out. “If you start out at a school you don’t like then that’s understandable. And I know there’s issues where kids find out that the program athletically is not for them,” Burks stated, adding, “I think the rule should have only been for varsity athletes.”

“Quite frankly, I’m not a fan of the way it sounds,” Serrano stated. “As long as I’ve been around high school sports transfer rules have always been controversial [but] I’m a firm believer that wherever you start your freshman year [is] where you should stay.”

One of the main causes for this revision was a pattern of dishonesty found in many transfer student-athletes. Athletic directors would often have to act as “private investigators” to find out if students actually moved residencies.

“We would seriously go to the person’s house; we would go into their home, into their bedroom, bathroom kitchen. We’d make sure that it looked like they were actually living there,” Burks stated.  “It was getting to be ridiculous. It felt like an invasion of their privacy.”

The Arizona Interscholastic Association (AIA) is back at it again.

They are changing previously simple rules to make them more confusing for the average citizen.

The transfer rule was easy to understand. You move schools and houses? Good for you; play your sport? You transfer schools? That’s not loyalty; sit out a year. Simple.

But no, the AIA doesn’t do simple.

We learned that from the divisions fiasco. This fall the AIA rearranged the divisions. No one was happy with their division placing so the AIA, in an attempt to cover themselves, allowed an “appeal process” to take place. This allowed schools to challenge the AIA on their school’s placement and essentially move to whatever division they wanted. This great idea lead to uneven divisions and a pathetic 17 teams in Division-I.

And so the AIA is doing it again. Now all transfer students—regardless of moving houses or just moving schools—have to sit out half a season.

And I get what they are trying to do. They don’t want any school paying for little Johnny’s new house just so he can play football for their team. And they don’t want parents moving schools and houses just because little Suzie doesn’t like the volleyball coach at her current school.

But this doesn’t really solve that. Recruiting and bad parenting are going to happen no matter what the AIA tries to enforce.

I just feel bad for the kid whose dad got a job three towns away and has no choice but to move. Kids like this used to be able to play, but now they are being punished.

How does that make sense? Punish kids who have no choice in the matter in an attempt to stop recruiting? Maybe those students should take a page out of the division fiasco’s book and try to appeal.

And maybe they will, but if they do, then what’s stopping little Suzie from appealing?

Actually, that’s not a bad idea. Let little Suzie appeal so the AIA can see her case specifically.

The rule is too broad. Transfers happen for all kinds of reasons and should be treated on a case-to-case basis. So let them all appeal so the AIA can handle it case-by-case.

What I don’t understand is how every time the AIA tries to fix something, they seem to make it worse. And I understand they have a lot of people that they have to deal with and try to please. They are never going to make everyone happy; I get that. But everyone sit out half a season? Really?

It’s almost as if all of the AIA big-shots were crowded around a table, grumbling about pleasing everyone and trying to find a solution. “Well if instead of forcing some people to sit out a whole year and some not at all, let’s just make them all sit out half a year!” And everyone else thought that was a great idea–greatest thing since pre-peeled oranges.

Are you kidding me? This compromise accomplished about as much as the Emu War of 1932. Actually that’s offensive to emus, who gained freedom from Australia after a month of flying feathers.

The AIA did what only it can do: replace a simple rule with a confusing one that doesn’t really fix anything.