Insta add/drop changes everything. You did the right thing then and my mind is changed
You did the right thing. Would never have even asked what the trade was. Rules were set and as commish your job is to enforce them. Wouldn’t have even asked the league if they wanted to allow the trade so that was really your only mistake.
As a reminder. Please treat each other with respect. We may have different opinions, but calling people idiots and douche bags (and spelling it wrong) isn’t really the #FootClan way.
It was no harm no foul asking the trade was, I was just curious what he had in mind. And I am close friends with all these people other than the new guy and we have a group chat where discuss changes and questions, etc. But at the end of the day the conversation was between me and the new guy and after hearing the trade, I said no anyways. I wasn’t a fan of the instant waiver claim but that is what people wanted. And also Josh I never said those words, a person that commented on my post did. Its a forum, I think people can speak freely.
to me this is for sure collusion and no other way to look at it, If i were you i would let the league know and bring up another vote on adding back in a waiver period where drops cant be claimed. If you league doesnt want it then thats fine but if i was commish i would use this as an example and have them rethink it. As a Commish really your only job is to make sure guys are playing inside the rules and fairly. I would also put it to a vote on what to do with the 2 people involved in this after all its their league also, some people like to be the authority and make the call themselves which is also fine at the end of the day you will know whats best for your league if you been playing with them for awhile you are the Commish for a reason if they didnt trust you they wouldnt play in the league.
Hell yes you did the right thing…
Absolutely I would have done the exact same thing
You need to have a convo with him at the end of the league and tell him youre going to remove him from the league
I completely disagree with the majority here, other than honoring the trade deadline - which was the only possible outcome.
The league having money on the line, doesn’t change anything for me. Rules are rules and the point of fantasy is fun and entertainment. I don’t expect people to be ‘better’ in a money league.
As a commish you cannot make a judgement if the trade is fair or not. Not as in you are not qualified. It’s literally not possible. No way to know what will happen tomorrow or the next day.
Was there a rule against dropping a player and picking up another player immediately, as these teams did? Without a rule against it, there is no recourse other than suspecting or accusing collusion (again assuming a rule against it exhibits).
I’m aware these are minority opinions and that this thread is several days old. I only commented because I have a differing opinion.
Finally, it is up to OP to commish the league in the way they want and the participants to accept it. To each their own.
So I rarely veto any trade. But a deadline is also there for a reason. If a deadline is passed, no exceptions should be made. even if it was a fair trade, doesn’t matter. Rules are there for a reason and people have made decisions based on those rules so it’s unfair to change it last minute to accomodate one player.
As for the second part, players who are out of the playoffs shouldn’t have locked rosters unless your league has a lower bracket/consolation competition. I am of the belief that you should never really be vetoing trades as a commissioner based on what you deem to be fair. In this instance though, it’s pretty easy to show collusion. He is giving up a backup RB for a top 10 starting RB. I can’t see any benefit to the side getting yeldon so when 2 teams collaborate to the benefit of only one team, that is the very definition of collusion. So even if trade deadline hadn’t passed, if I was commissioner, I would’ve locked this trade, notified the league I am intending to reverse the trade due to collusion and give both sides a chance to justify the trade, which in this instance, i find it impossible for them to do.
Technically they didn’t break the rules so I’d let it slide but next year you need to have waivers for this very reason. I think the issue (I’m on your side here btw) is that the rules are a little broken with the “no waiver” rule. If your rules allow for that collusion to occur then it’s up to you to change them for next year. However, that doesn’t mean you can’t poop in a bag and then drop the poop off at the gentlemen’s home with a note that says “this is what I think of your “poopy” tactics”.