Can somebody explain this WBA super champ farce

Lets take SMW for example. Andre Ward is WBC champ & is WBA 'super' champ as he also holds the WBC belt making way for a WBA 'regular' champ. Carl Froch is IBF champ & will most likely be facing WBA 'regular' champ Mikkel Kessler this year. If Froch still has IBF belt when they fight what will have to victor? Under the rules wouldn't he be IBF champ & WBA 'super' champ usually? Obviously he can't because Ward is 'super' champ. But then how can he be regular champ if he holds another belt? Is there some ruling I'm missing here or is this a ridiculous situation the WBA have created that rarely occurs & they'll sort it out when it happens? I wouldn't be surprised if they strip the winner of the WBA belt to allow another non- belt holder to win it but could even end up with something as stupid (far-fetched) as WBA super interim champ!