[blml] re claim

[Ed Reppert]

On Dec 31, 2007, at 11:58 AM, gesta at tiscali.co.uk wrote:

> +=+ There are evidently differing opinions as to why the
> Drafting Subcommittee (not the WBFLC) did what it did,
> and what was the intention.

I gather from your following comments that you consider the DSC's  
intentions irrelevant, now that the 2007 laws have been published.

> No individual can interpret the law with authority

Um. Careful, Grattan. You are undermining the authority of the TD on  
site.

1997 Law 81C5: "The Director’s duties and powers normally include the  
following: to administer and interpret these Laws and to advise the  
players of their rights and responsibilities thereunder."

2007 Law 81C2: "The Director (not the players) has the sole  
responsibility for rectifying irregularities and redressing damage.  
The Director’s duties and powers normally include also the following:  
to administer and interpret these Laws and to advise the players of  
their rights and responsibilities thereunder."

No significant change there, AFAICS.

> and this will remain a matter for the WBFLC at its next meeting. In  
> the interim it will be for Zonal Authorities, or in default of them  
> NBOs, to provide
> interim interpretations of the laws. Of this there is no doubt.

There's doubt in my mind, at least, as to whether they will actually  
*do* that. And until they or the WBFLC do provide interpretation, it  
devolves on the TD on site to interpret the laws.

I would also submit that readers should remember that the  
interpretation of one ZA or NBO has no force in other jurisdictions.