All the training in the world won't let females hit the ball as far as males.

Really???

Research Premier Girls Fastpitch

honestly, my initial response before reading anything else below is ... why doesn't ISF use a code from the countries that invented the sport? Why is your default that those who established the game in the first place should change to use the rules of some newcomer (relatively speaking)... it seems to me you're asking the question backward.

As to why there's different rules for different levels - it would not make sense for the rules for adults and kids to match - they have different skillsets and abilities, and safety is a different level of concern for adults and kids. College lands in between adults and kids.

Don't tell NFSA.
Or Dixie.

Wrong.

But anyway, if there were only one code for each game, there'd be only 1 kind of football in the world. You might as well ask why there are separate codes for softball & hardball, when obviously it's the same basic game. Come to think of it, there wouldn't be cricket or stickball either, let alone Finnish and some more exotic versions of baseball.

Maybe what you're asking is, why have rule codes that are so similar to each other as to invite confusion? Like, nobody's going to accidentally slip a football into a baseball game, but someone might accidentally slip a 12" circ. softball into a 16" game, or whistle the ball dead for encroachment as in Fed in a NCAA football game. Is that what you're asking? That they make games distinct enough to avoid gotchas?

It's not so much that as that since we're not going to be playing with them, why bother having the same rules?

Australia & New Zealand were on their way shortly after the introduction of Rugby Union to adopting their own rules variants the same as Canadian & American football developed. But then they started playing internationally and dropped such national rules as the "force down" score.

If basketball teams in the US & Canada played internationally a lot, I'm sure they'd go by one rule set.

Not a chance. The NBA is a business and would only adopt international rules if there was more money in it for them. Come to think of it, NCAA Div I basketball is the same.

Back to softball, the fundamental reason for so many rule sets is the same: money. Fed and ASA (at least for awhile) seemed to be attempting to consolidate rules where they could both agree. I don't know if that effort is still on-going. But, all of the alphabet organizations are basically about making money from team registrations, running tournaments, etc.

Wikipedia article says it was first played there.

Hey genius, just because you throw "American" in front of it doesn't mean you have to be a member of it to belong to a group.

I am not a member of a the ABA. There is no requirement. Nor am I a member of the NYSBA.

No one is required to join. Good analogy though :rolleyes:

If much of their regular schedule was home or away against foreign teams, they would converge on one rule set. It could well be FIBA's adopting NBA rules more than vice versa.

Consider the contrary. If NBA or NCAA 1 teams played, say, 20% of their games against foreign teams, do you really think they'd be willing to handicap themselves by playing half those games under different rules? Same for the foreign teams.

Even for ice hockey, that's true only if you count only games played with a puck. Hockey games on ice (using a ball as in the field game) were recorded long before it was played in Canada.

This is the answer. Different people run these different leagues, and they all have different priorities. There is also no incentive to conform to international rules: at least not an incentive strong enough to override a general libertarian mentality.

I don't understand the need for Federation football rules. For one thing, Federation only allows states to adopt alternate provisions in specific rules. In Texas, we use NCAA rules for football and we can have whatever exceptions we like. Want to add provisions for a coach's ejection that's not in the NCAA rule? No problem; do it. Further, there is 6 man and 8 man football played in other states and each state would be free to adopt the NCAA ruleset for whatever size field or number of players they want. The reason it isn't done (at least with some states) is that there is a perception that the NCAA rules committee won't pay any attention when states voice concerns over rules. But the ability to change those rules makes that point moot. Want to eliminate all blocking below the waist that doesn't occur at the line of scrimmage and involve all linemen? No problem -- just make an exception and write out a rule.

Basketball is the one area where Federation rules are needed for the simple reason that a lot of teams travel across state lines for tournaments. When I first started working basketball in the late '80s, the differences between Fed and NCAA weren't that great. Now, they are, and the NCAA basketball committees have been making really stupid rules changes for almost a decade -- like basically eliminating the player control foul if the offensive player is within 6 miles of the basket. Thus, Federation is needed in basketball.

For US pro leagues, their ruleset has evolved over time from something similar to amateur rulesets early in their history to what they are now. These rules are not solely focused on the competitive aspects of the sport, but for fan enjoyment. Plus, they see themselves as a step above any and all amateur competition, so they put in rules that set themselves apart. There's no doubt about that.

I couldn't care less about international competition of ANY kind, so whoever can write whatever code they want. However, if football ever went international, I suspect they would sit down with the NCAA and NFL books and find a happy medium.

In Fed, states can add whatever provisions they like. They simply risk a seat at the rule writing table. In basketball, for example, many states use a shot clock when there is no provision/allowance for that within the NFHS rules.
Worst case scenario for them, they don't get to vote on rule changes. Kinda like Texas doesn't get to vote on NCAA rule changes.

Well, Andy, I was trying to not be specific, but that was the first thing that came to my mind.

For that matter, why not also point out LL softball, Babe Ruth softball, ASA BASEBALL, etc. and in all cases, it was about money and control.

The ASA was formed on the premise of organizing and bringing a standard to a game that was being played all over the country under different names and rules, many baseball oriented.

The Official Rules of Softball (which were based on what we now know as FP) were pretty standard and used by just about every organization. The book used to be smaller thinner than the NFHS book with minor variations for NCAA, NAIA & NFHS listed on a page. It was pretty standard and because sportsmanship and fair play was a strong suit in the countries culture in the mid-20th century, there was no need for all the chicken shit rules (like the LBR :) ) needed.

The ASA has long acknowledge the right of a local association to set their own rules, no matter how ridiculous some may be :) but that didn't stop others from turning the game into a business (which pretty much forced the ASA down the same road) and in turn splintering a sport that is starting to dwindle especially since being removed from the Olympic games.