did i goof as commissioner

[badabingcrew]

team a wants to pick up leonard henry during our waiver period, he gets confused with our website and is unable to make the transaction. he does however post on the league message board during the waiver period the transaction he intended to make. after the waiver period ends the free agent period begins and team b promptly picks up leonard henry.
i ruled for team a and awarded henry to him based on the fact he posted his intentions during the waiver period. however several owners think i erred in my decision.
thoughts?
mcnair,pennington,palmer
holmes*,henry*,pittman
mason*,chambers*,price*,keyshawn,boldin
f.jones*, b williams
josh brown,kasay*
nyj

[BigMusky]

I think you did the right thing.

[Vybes]

I also think you did the right thing especially if Team A made his intentions known during a time where, if he understood how things worked, he could have picked up the player without a problem.

[FF Newbie]

You made the right call.

[Gunslinger]

We had 2 similar things happen in my dynasty league this season. In the first instance (offseason) the owner stated that a player was missing from the players list and mentioned a specific player on their roster they were wanting to drop to pick him up. The player was awarded to the owner.

A couple weeks later another owner mentioned that Fred Russell wasn't on our player list and that was it. Another owner swooped in and took him when he appeared as a free agent (it's a very deep league so anyone who could possibly contribute will be snatched up, btw) and the owner that posted the original message about him missing from the player list pitched a fit. In that case, however, the owner that posted the message was out of luck since they didn't post a complete transaction. He was essentially trying to just reserve Russell which is bogus. Of course, Russell is no longer on any roster and we just laugh at them both for getting so heated about it.

So - in summary - since you say the owner mentioned the entire transaction he/she was trying to make I think you absolutely did the right thing.

[Plindsey88]

If he posted during the WW period, and he had priority, but technical problems caused the foul up, then you did the right thing... I am curious to know how he knew to post, but did not know to make the transaction.... Wouldn't they be the same website?

[The Jury]

Either way you're both right and wrong. It's a win-win/lose-lose spot.

[badabingcrew]

If he posted during the WW period, and he had priority, but technical problems caused the foul up, then you did the right thing... I am curious to know how he knew to post, but did not know to make the transaction.... Wouldn't they be the same website?

it wasn't technical difficulties but rather team a incompetence that led to the confusion. he was trying to make the waiver transaction by using the add/drop link instead of the waiver wire link.

[Plindsey88]

The fairest solution, IMO, is a Terrell Owens type of deal... Team A should get his player, but he should have to give something up to Team B because of his incompetence... I don't know what, yet, but I'm sure you can come up with something....

[Arlo]

You made the right call. Technical difficulties, even if they could be considered an owner's fault, shouldn't interfere with a league.