[blml] ...have we really come to this??? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Nigel]

[Tim West-Meads & John Probst]
"The Director is bound by these Laws and by supplementary
regulations announced by the sponsoring organisation."

Which is mitigated by L80F "to publish or announce regulations
supplementary to, but not in conflict with, these Laws."

[nige1]
I hate the mess of local regulations. Nevertheless, the arbiter of 
whether a local regulation conflicts with the law is the the WBF or 
local legislature -- certainly *not* an individual director or player.

[Tim West-Meads & John Probst]
As a TD I refuse to enforce regulations which are in conflict with the
laws.  Illegal regulations are not binding on TDs and "interpretations 
of law" by bodies other than the WBFLC have no legal standing.

[nigel]
I think such official interpretations do have legal or regulatory 
standing. Although, we all agree that the laws and regulations, 
themselves, *should* be clear enough to stand on their own; and any 
corrections should be made *in place* rather than buried in some 
leopards loo.

[Tim West-Meads & John Probst]
The TD's primary duties include running the game according to the 
laws. If, in the opinion of the TD a regulation is illegal, then he 
*should* disregard it as it is in conflict with the Laws. An 
interpretation handed down by the WBFLC, however, is an 
interpretation, and has the force of law. So Tim and I are in 
agreement, as is mostly the case.

[nige1]
IMO, even if you think a rule is wrong then: as a player, you should 
abide by it; as a director you should enforce it. Of course you should 
protest vociferously. You should resign, if you are a director and 
feel strongly enough to do so.