Fantasy Football Ruling Issue

[Custer]

[ QUOTE ]
The real issue is how do I get some guy in a deep keeper league for money who thinks that Williams has better value than Gore at this point after one good game against Philly. I mean, Gore looks like and has been an absolute stud and Williams is totally unproven, that the trade was agreed to and then later reversed by someone trying to keep Williams is beyond belief.

-Michael

[/ QUOTE ]

It wasn't just Williams. It was Gore and 2 old bench warmers for Williams, Deion Branch, Baltimore D, and a top 5 pick next year.

[Victor]

seems like it shouldnt be a trade.

[Evan]

I don't understand why being unaware of the effects of a rule would be grounds for altering an agreement. When they agreed to trade whoever was playing the Thursday game it was publicly available knowledge that the trade couldn't go through until this week's games were over.

[Bulldog]

Keeper league or no, there should be a trading freeze from Thanksgiving through the end of the regular season. This is how my 11-year keeper league has done it; no problems.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, having read the way this went down, this is clearly a non-trade. If the league has a one-day review policy, and Thursday player cannot be involved in a trade this late. Clearly the owner who did not get to use Baltimore's defense has a legitimate gripe and the trade was illegal from the getgo, so no trade before it even gets to the issue of someone complaining.

-Michael

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my point of view, as well.

-McGee

[Big TR]

Just because website timing holds up a trade is no reason that the trade shouldn't go through. If there was no website and you did it all by hand, this trade would have happened instantly.

How can you guys be so tied to arbitrary rules setup by some website which flies in the face of the intentions of the two parties at the time the deal was consummated?

Unless the teams not involved have a huge beef with the trade and would otherwise object to it, this trade should happen.

Two items:

1. The guy backing out should be considered for removal from the league. That is an asshat move.
2. Put in a trade deadline earlier in the season. Trades made this late typically reek, much as this one did.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
Just because website timing holds up a trade is no reason that the trade shouldn't go through. If there was no website and you did it all by hand, this trade would have happened instantly

[/ QUOTE ]

You can set it up so that trades go through instantly (at least, on Yahoo! you can, and what you can do on Yahoo!, you should be able to do most other places). This league was set up under certain rules, and this trade didn't adhere to the rules. They aren't arbitrary, they are what was agreed to.

[ QUOTE ]
1. The guy backing out should be considered for removal from the league. That is an asshat move.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is harsh. Absent some information that the guy won't obey the commissioner's ruling, he isn't out of line at all. He's just asking.

[ QUOTE ]
2. Put in a trade deadline earlier in the season.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah.

-McGee

[MEbenhoe]

To all those discussing the trade deadline, this is irrelevant. We as a league chose to have no trade deadline so saying now OMG you guys shoulda had a trade deadline has nothing to do with this ruling.

[SuperUberBob]

[ QUOTE ]
Deal goes through.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. If it was already agreed to, there's no turning back.

[Bulldog]

[ QUOTE ]
To all those discussing the trade deadline, this is irrelevant. We as a league chose to have no trade deadline so saying now OMG you guys shoulda had a trade deadline has nothing to do with this ruling.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not trying to help with your ruling. I'm pointing out that this mess was assisted by a lack of a deadline.

As for a ruling, duh. The parties agreed. It is a done deal.