Vetoed Trade BS

[Henry Tuttle]

I'm not in the RCF League, but I just had to vent somewhere...

I'm the commish in a $$ league at work. A week ago I instituted a new rule for no trade vetoes, as I'm strongly opposed to that idea, but saw no option to outright disable vetoes. So I informed everyone I'd be pushing through trades as they came in.

Yesterday I agreed on the following trade:
I trade DeMarco Murray & Jeremy Maclin for
Darren McFadden & Hakeem Nicks

Now I'm sitting at 3-4, not blowing anyone out of the water, trading with a guy that's in playoff contention @ 4-3. Obviously no collusion going on here. But apparently a group of guys ahead of me in the rankings got together and vetoed the trade before I could push it through. As the commish, I don't want to abuse my power and force the trade through, but I feel like these guys are way out of line. Not to mention that one of the guys who voted against the trade actually beat me this week. Then, the same guy has the audacity to try to get me to push through a trade where he gets Andre Johnson for Johnny Knox (from an abandoned team). I thought I'd make a good commish, as I'm 100% about being fair, but this has really got me down.

Whatever happened to sportsmanship?

 

[bcort]

You tried to trade rape the guy. It was deservedly vetoed.

 

[Henry Tuttle]

You tried to trade rape the guy. It was deservedly vetoed.

Wanted to think of a good way to word this, but essentially all I can come up with is "you suck". Sorry if that's too boring for you.

 

[The Oi]

Yeah, that's a terribly unfair trade. But if the guy agreed to it, that should be fair and square.

This is why I (a) always commish leagues that I'm in (b) don't allow the league to vote on trades.

I'm fair with it and have never vetoed anyone, but I hate the idea of some other assholes colluding to prevent me from making a reasonable trade. Especially given that I'd almost never veto someone else's trade. It'd have to be even more ridiculous than yours.

 

[bcort]

Wanted to think of a good way to word this, but essentially all I can come up with is "you suck". Sorry if that's too boring for you.

Heh, you asking us what happened to the sportsmanship after posting about an awful trade that you got some idiot to agree to speaks volumes. You want sportsmanship or you want to be pissy because the guys got you on a shitty deal?

I don't like vetoes on trades, but I also don't let complete idiots play in my leagues.

 

[Shakalu M.D.]

Why in the world would someone make that trade to begin with?

 

[Randolphkeys]

One thing that always sounds shifty is a commish changing the rules after the rules are put into place at the beginning of the year. If you see an issue as commish, it's best to save your changes until next season. Otherwise, you will always have a legion of members accusing you of misuse of power.

 

[jlj3184]

You tried to pull the classic sell high (Murray), buy low (McFadden) move and got caught. Get over it. I think vetoes are gay, but that's the way your league is set up.

 

[CHEECHREBORN]

One thing that always sounds shifty is a commish changing the rules after the rules are put into place at the beginning of the year. If you see an issue as commish, it's best to save your changes until next season. Otherwise, you will always have a legion of members accusing you of misuse of power.

This.

I agree that trade vetoes are stupid for the most part because the leagues that I actually care about consist of guys that are serious about winning and therefore are unlikely to get butt raped in a trade. However, trade raping a person that has given up on their team shouldn't happen and it is the commish's job to prevent those trades from going through.

 

[Henry Tuttle]

One thing that always sounds shifty is a commish changing the rules after the rules are put into place at the beginning of the year. If you see an issue as commish, it's best to save your changes until next season. Otherwise, you will always have a legion of members accusing you of misuse of power.

Word. I gave everyone ample time to speak against the change, but no one did. Still, with hindsight and all I realize I should've left it.

 

[Chris]

You tried to pull the classic sell high (Murray), buy low (McFadden) move and got caught. Get over it. I think vetoes are gay, but that's the way your league is set up.

Somebody tell me since when is selling high/buying low considered a cheap or unfair tactic.

 

[Scrote Squad]

Somebody tell me since when is selling high/buying low considered a cheap or unfair tactic.

No one said it was cheap or unfair. But the point of a league vote (as the OP's rules state) is for people to help protect the dipshits of the league from trading their stars for a flash in the pan.

In my league, a guy traded Turner for Gronkowski after Hernandez sat out a week. I don't veto trades, but it's the same thing. Owners who want parity sniff that shit out and veto. All things within league rules.

 

[Chris]

No one said it was cheap or unfair. But the point of a league vote (as the OP's rules state) is for people to help protect the dipshits of the league from trading their stars for a flash in the pan.

In my league, a guy traded Turner for Gronkowski after Hernandez sat out a week. I don't veto trades, but it's the same thing. Owners who want parity sniff that shit out and veto. All things within league rules.

Oh, I see ... I mean, in my opinion the votes are to prevent collusion. It's not anyone else's fault if somebody is dumb.

 

[Scrote Squad]

Oh, I see ... I mean, in my opinion the votes are to prevent collusion. It's not anyone else's fault if somebody is dumb.

I understand.

But look at it like this -- you're in first, but barely. The guy behind you makes two separate trades that rip off two guys that are morons, stacking his team that just became leaps and bounds better than yours. Wouldn't you then be in support of a group vote deciding whether or not the trade is unfair?