Commissioner Corner Message Board
you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the posts
Based SOLEY on the two rules you posted:
The dumping doesn't count as its only one player (may be nitpicking, but it is plural in the rule, they could have said "player(s)” or some variation but chose not to do so). In addition, have you scrutinized every single drop all season and made determinations that each and every one improved the team? If a manager dropped an uninjured player but didnt add another back immediately (instead perhaps waiting for his/her favorite blog to make a post before deciding who to add), would you have called them out for violating a rule (I would hope not)?
For the second rule, the collusion doesn't fit as it clearly states it must be to the benefit of only one team and not both; they both benefit from this dual drop/add.
Now the deal itself is a little sketchy, as a commish I would be a little put off by it, but how crazy do you want to go with the ban hammer?
With waivers in place the opportunity for it to not work as they hope exists. If they are #1 and #2 in priority they have to burn those top spots to do this deal, so it has a real cost to them (and a benefit to everyone behind them in priority).
You obviously are a caring commish and want everything to be 100% fair, you even take the time to read the rules - many do not - and try to apply them as best as possible. In this case though, this is one I think you should let pass.
player players doesnt really matter how many.
theres no nitpicking either, when a player that put up 60 points in 3 weeks now 75 in a month hits the wire everyone sees that. And how can it not be collusion when they basically are saying ill help your team this week and you help me next week. 2 shady deals dont make 1 legal one.
There is no banning or discipline I just want everyone to follow the rules and make it fair.
By the looks of some of the questions that commishes are asking on this board it kinda seems that noone is really trying to play fair so I shouldnt complain with the leauge I run.
Thanks for the posts.
- 2 Replies to Lee H
You asked the question based on the rules you posted which were not broken - until you apply your biased convoluted view. You clearly already had your mind made up before you asked, so why did you even bother?
Initially I thought collusion, but as Matthew explained in depth, i would let it pass without concern. With waivers in place, it could easily have gone another direction, as other teams may have had opportunity to claim the player(s). Give them credit for finding a way to get something done after the trade deadline, and courage to take the chance. Its a game, for crying out loud! No worries.