Another tanking on purpose issue

[Azrael]

Collusion = Cheating

People are taking this

"A trade should only be vetoed if there is cheating" and making the jump to this

"Attempting to not win a game on purpose is only wrong if there is cheating"

Do you need it any clearer?

Matthias,

Collusion = cheating but not the only means to cheat.

Fixing a game is cheating. Fixing a game can be done by one person. It does not require collusion.

[Peacesells]

Back to the original point. Every league I am in (5 this year) and have been in for 17 years has a rule stating you must field a complete line up each week.

If, these 2 players do not field lineups the commish must go in and reinstate both of their previous weeks line ups.

Problem solved.

Peace

[spodog]

Just plain wrong.

[Deathwarmedover]

Here is my theory on the whole thing. Unless you have an agreement to the contrairy you should always err on the side of being too ethical. If you have to ask, DON'T do it.

On the other hand, if the league has an ongoing practice or an agreement then that overrides the above statement.

2 examples of this are 1 my biggest $ league has an anything goes policy. You have control over your own roster and trades and can do what you want. 3 years ago we had two players trade their draft picks making one better in one year and the other better in the next. Year 1 the team with the extra picks had a couple of injuries and noone would trade with them. The eventually fell out of the playoffs. The second year when it became clear that the team that had the extra draft picks that round was the favourite to win the teams that were out of it all worked to help his opponent win the game. The opponent screwed them all and didn't give them their players back in the off season and ended up winning last year as well (keeper league) basically this league is self-policing. Knowing it in advance you plan for it.

The other is actually my favorite league. Each team is expected to be competitive no matter what but the commish is not going to get involved in anything but the most blatant cheating. Anyone who acts unethically will not be invited back the following year. Knowing that the commissioner was not going to get involved, I had no issue when he refused to make a line-up change for me even though I sent the email before the deadline because the site was down and I couldn't log in to replace an injured player. I was playing his wife and I ended up losing by 2 points. If the policy wasn't clear I would be concerned about a conflict of interest for the commish but knowing that he has consistently not messed with rosters for any reason I didn't feel slighted.

I hope the teams didn't bench their line-ups unless it is a rule in your league to do anything to win.

Steve

[Azrael]

Anyway, yeah getting back to the original point, the 2 teams benche their guys and appear to be headed for a tie. No chatter on the message board as of yet.

[Deathwarmedover]

Anyway, yeah getting back to the original point, the 2 teams benche their guys and appear to be headed for a tie. No chatter on the message board as of yet.

Thanks for the update. Let us know what happens.

[lmcjaho]

So.......


What was the final result?

[Azrael]

Only team that's said anything is the team that finished 7-5-1 and lost on tiebreakers. Haven't seen anything from commish yet.

[Azrael]

Commish decided that since we hadn't said that it was something that you weren't going to be allowed to do then he wasn't going to punish the teams.

[noren0]

I don't see anything wrong with a #1 seed putting in a weaker lineup cause they would have a better matchup as the #2 seed but this is just plain bullschmitt. If this is not collusion, I don't know what is.