Yep, and that's how it should be. If the commish is in the trade, then #2 & #3 review it. I proposed that idea because the league has had a problem like this every year and they all hate the idea because what it all really boils down to is they wanna be able to sabotage each other.
The other thing he's done this year is make it so that all Waiver pickups have to be submitted to him until the end of the claim period on wednesday morning when he processes them. So you have to email him your picks because he didn't set up the league right and won't listen to anybody on how to fix it.
Its a league of amateurs and I think after all this I'm done. These people have no idea how a fair league works and after 5 years I've had enough.
And also I guess my feeling is that putting the same trade through after the league voted it down is basically disrespectful to the league and the system you've put in place. No there's no rule against it, but its just not right. People paid their money to play in your league, and when they use the system you've given them and don't like what they decided you do it anyway, well, I don't think that's right.
but if i am getting you right he didnt "put the trade through". it got vetoed, he argued that, and he re-proposed it, and it went up for review again and went through that time. whats the difference if that happens the next day or if it was 3 weeks apart? you all could have vetoed it again.
padrino990_200 wrote:but if i am getting you right he didnt "put the trade through". it got vetoed, he argued that, and he re-proposed it, and it went up for review again and went through that time. whats the difference if that happens the next day or if it was 3 weeks apart? you all could have vetoed it again.
There isn't a difference, it was just spite. And I did veto it again.
excatly. it sounds like the league is being totally unreasonable with their vetoes. ive seen it before. a league i am in this same thing happened, everyone was vetoeing everyone elses trades. finally the commish stepped in and said he was suspending the veto system because it was ruining the league.
did he hold a vote on it? no. but he's in charge and he made a decision and everyone ended up agreeing that it was the right one. sometimes being a commish isnt popular, and sounds like he is just sticking up for himself by telling you all off.
i think if i was the commish i would have done the same thing. there have been times in the league i commish that i noticed there were problems and had to make a decision.
THEOT wrote:Yep, and that's how it should be. If the commish is in the trade, then #2 & #3 review it. I proposed that idea because the league has had a problem like this every year and they all hate the idea because what it all really boils down to is they wanna be able to sabotage each other.
We do that in a few of my leagues. We have a commish (1) and a co-commish (2) that pass/veto trades. Then we have a 3rd co-commish for trades involving (1) or (2). Then we have a 4th co-commish for trades involving both (1) & (2). After reading all the mightmares that people go through in some of their leagues, I consider myself very lucky. Noone in any of my leagues (11 this year ) would collude/cheat so we never have to veto any trades.
shagworth wrote:Did the guy break the rules? I don't think so, everyone could have vetoed it again. Did he bend the rules? Probably...But the trade should have never been vetoed in the first place.
I agree with shagworth on the original issue. Nothing you can do this year. But next year you can try to push for a rule change where once a trade gets vetoed it can't be submitted again. I'd say to push for getting rid of the league vote but you've already done that without success.
JasonSeahorn wrote:Commish overstepped his powers. The league is set up that enough votes will veto a trade, and that's what happened as you said. Commish putting it through again is breaking your league rules, he's a dirty cheater, get the tar and feathers.
i disagree...i dont see why that trade should have been vetoed...i would have tried to put it through again too (maybe make a case to the league). obviously it went through the second time for some reason
Exactly Dan. (may be the first time I have disagreeed with Mr. Seahorn in the CC)
Nothing dirty about resubmitting a deal that shouldn't have been vetoed the first time. Give us one reason the deal should have been vetoed? An average QB and a RB who is very likely in line for 80% of teh workload in the next 2 weeks in return for a very good young qb and a RB who is on his way out. Perfectly legit.
I have often thought of all these lawsuits in small claims courts for guys geting screwed by league votes. Dude pleading his case...
your honour, I knew CJ4.24, Forte, Slaton and Royal would be gold and these morons voted down my LT2, Holt., LJ trade. I could have and should have won 5K and I want the damn money!!!
It's not that the trade should have been vetoed to begin with (because it shouldn't of), but they have a voting system and under that system it got vetoed.
I'm basing this off what the OP said...If the commish had a discussion with other managers about the trade, and they decided to let the same trade through, then it's no problem. From what the OP said this didn't happen, since the commish told them to "get bent" (probably told them off or something), and resubmitted the trade right before the deadline since he doubted all the other managers would be constantly checking the league to see if the trade was resubmitted.
It's not a clear cut thing but the commish, IMO, is doing something weird/shady here.
Thanks to deluxe_247 for sig, he is welcome to sail with the Captain too! I will win all of the fantasy cafe games.....next year