USA Amendments vs. USA Rulebook

This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.

Comments about this discussion:


As the IUF Rulebook is making itself more and more applicable to smaller competitions, like NAUCC, it is becoming less necessary for the USA to have our own rulebook. At this point, there are still some rules that merit modification for our use at NAUCC, hence this committee's existence. However, we are at the point where we don't really need an entire rulebook to be published. I suggest that we simply create a USA set of amendments that could exist in a small publication. This publication would reference the rules in the IUF Rulebook but not rewrite the majority of the rules in the IUF Rulebook that we don't need to modify. This would actually help tremendously in that it would make it very clear exactly where the USA differs from the IUF.

Mark brought up the issues of verbiage in Chapter 1. This is definitely something to be addressed. A great example of this is where the IUF Rulebook talks about World Champions. In the USA, we would probably want to have a place to talk about North American Champions. This could be accomplished easily if we have a book of amendments. We could have a place in the amendment book that would define what a North American Champion is. Then there could be a rule that would state that anywhere in the IUF Rulebook that references a World Champion, should be a North American Champion for USA competitions.

I welcome thoughts on this idea. I think that it could really help direct some of the things that people have brought up in other discussions.


What would you propose for when IUF rulebook is updated or changed.  Is USA based upon amendment to a specific edition until the USA ratifies shifting to the next edition?


The amendment booklet would need to be updated each time the IUF Rulebook is updated. There is a chance that it could just be ratified like you say but yes, it would be linked to one edition of the IUF Rulebook.


This is an interesting proposal. Recognising that our regional variances from the IUF rules for event discilpines are limited, the content of an amendment booklet for any USA-specific changes to Sections 2-10 would be concise.

However, since Section 1 is where the operational aspects of the rulebook such as event organisation, facilities and cadence of rulebook review/amendment are covered, I would like to continue to maintain a unique Section 1 in it's entirety for the USA. Section 1 is also where much of the wording needs to be adjusted to make it applicable to the USA and NAUCC - I think an amendment booklet covering these wording changes would need to include some large sub-sections anyway (for example the proposal to carry forward Sections 1.1 and 1.1.1 already tabled for discussion).


I like Mark's idea of having a distinct Section 1, I think.  But would that allow us the freedom to mandate helmet use in racing, for example?  And how about the timeline?  I worry, for example, that we might adopt a 5-minute time limit for club (aka, large group) without enough preparation time.


I guess I should clarify my response... My suggestion is to retain a complete USA Rulebook Section 1, but with it publish a list of amendments (relative to the IUF Rulebook) for Sections 2-10. As an example, if mandatory use of helmets for track racing is passed, this would be noted as an amendment to Section 2.3 Safety Gear.


This seems fair. Although I don't think that we really need to have everything in the IUF Rulebook Chapter 1 changed to fit the USA it certainly is simpler than nitpicking through it.

Copyright ©

Unicycling Society of America