History of WFDF Rules

  • December 26, 2020 at 1:23 am #1884
    Sylwester Przybyla

    Hello all,

    this is probably off-topic but is there an Archive of all WFDF-Rules-Editions somewhere?

    Here is one for the US-Rules:

    Is there something similar for WFDF-Rules?

    I´m curious about how the split between WFDF and the US-Rules happened. Does anyone know some details about the why and when?

    December 26, 2020 at 6:10 am #1886
    Rueben Berg

    The 2000 version of the rules is the oldest I have (see attached)

    I might upload all the previous versions I have some time, when I gee the chance.

    I don’t know the history of how/why the rules diverged from USA to WFDF.

    December 26, 2020 at 5:02 pm #1887
    Sylwester Przybyla

    Thanks for the Info Rueben.

    This may be a stupid question but why do we keep developing two different rule sets?

    Would it be a crazy idea to fully merge the rules so we have one rule set again (let´s not talk about AUDL-Rules)?

    As far as i know most players don´t care that much about the advantages/disadvantages of each rule-set. WFDF has just released a new version of their rules. There is little to no discussion about it. I guarantee if WFDF would have just said: We discontinue our own set of rules and from now on will play with the USAU-Version there wouldn´t be that much of an outcry.

    Some people would be unhappy about the introduction of observers but apart of that I don´t see any USAU-Rule where the rest of the world would say: We can´t play with this.

    December 26, 2020 at 10:48 pm #1888
    Rueben Berg

    WFDF will not be introducing Observers. The WFDF Congress cemented “Self-officiating” as part of the WFDF By-Laws last year to confirm this: https://wfdf.sport/2019/03/wfdf-approves-of-additional-revisions-to-bylaws-following-further-in-depth-review-after-congress/

    There are other philosophical differences between the WFDF and USAU approach, some of which stems from the use of Observers, or around simplicity, or this key principle: “there are no harsh penalties for inadvertent breaches, but rather a method for resuming play in a manner which simulates what would most likely have occurred had there been no breach”

    A more reasonable question could well be – why would a National Federation continue to have a rule set that varied from the rules of the World Federation?

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.