Fantasy Football Ruling Issue

Mark L · #1 12-09-2006, 02:05 PM

Ok here's the jist of it, I'm sure someone else will step in with more detail.

In our 2+2 dynasty (deep keeper) league two teams agreed to a trade. I forget the exact details but the two key players were Frank Gore and Deangelo Williams. For whatever technical reason in the league the trade did not go through when it was expected to. (I believe this had something to do with a game on a thursday and yahoo messing up.)

The player trading for Gore wanted him because he has a shot at making the playoffs. He ended up losing and was thus eliminated from the playoffs. (I believe he would have lost even had the trade gone through.)

Now he no longer wants to do the trade, stating that the value of the trade has changed. The guy on the other end of the deal is a little pissed, and says that the first guy wouldn't be backing out if williams didn't have a big game.

The league is kinda divided on what to do here. Thoughts?

Triumph36 · #2 12-09-2006, 02:13 PM

From the facts presented here, it sounds like the deal should go through. Problem is, is there any evidence that both people agreed to the deal?

Just because things have changed doesn't mean the deal shouldn't go through - it was agreed upon at that time.

Mark L · #3 12-09-2006, 02:20 PM

Yeah both players agreed to the deal. Neither of them are denying that. (Btw I am not one of them.)

MEbenhoe · #4 12-09-2006, 03:49 PM

The trade was something like Gore + Keyshawn + junk player for Deangelo + Baltimore D + Random player + 1st round pick next year, which will now likely be around #4 overall(out of 12 teams).

edit to add: I am also not one of the two teams involved in this trade, but the argument being made by the guy who had traded gore was that had gore had a good game and deangelo tore his ACL he still would've been forced to take the trade.

Spota · #5 12-09-2006, 04:29 PM

Deal goes through. And FWIW, D. Williams will be losing carries since Foster is back.

HajiShirazu · #6 12-09-2006, 04:49 PM

Whether or not you force them to make the trade, and I personally don't think you should force the guy to trade since he is no longer able to get the same value he originally agreed to, you need to make sure that nobody is allowed to do this in the future. Otherwise "that guy" might figure out the error in the system and start trying to freeroll people.

doughhater · #7 12-09-2006, 06:34 PM

The exact situation went like this.

Team 1 has the Baltimore defense on Thursday. He then accepts a trade on Friday trading away BAL/DeAngelo/1st rounder for Gore/Keyshawn so that he can play those players on Sunday, kind of a 2 for 1. He does this because that week is a must win for him in order for him to have any shot of making the playoffs. Yahoo decides that since the BAL defense has already played that week they are ineligible to be traded and nullifies the trade. Team 1 loses and is eliminated from the playoffs. Now Team 2 is angry and thinks that the trade should be honored.

BigSoonerFan · #8 12-09-2006, 07:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The exact situation went like this.

Team 1 has the Baltimore defense on Thursday. He then accepts a trade on Friday trading away BAL/DeAngelo/1st rounder for Gore/Keyshawn so that he can play those players on Sunday, kind of a 2 for 1. He does this because that week is a must win for him in order for him to have any shot of making the playoffs. Yahoo decides that since the BAL defense has already played that week they are ineligible to be traded and nullifies the trade. Team 1 loses and is eliminated from the playoffs. Now Team 2 is angry and thinks that the trade should be honored.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't make an illegal trade (i.e., trading a player/defense that has already played while the others haven't). The trade was invalid and Player 2 made a mistake in not knowing this. (but who doesn't already know this?) His loss.

MEbenhoe · #9 12-09-2006, 07:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The exact situation went like this.

Team 1 has the Baltimore defense on Thursday. He then accepts a trade on Friday trading away BAL/DeAngelo/1st rounder for Gore/Keyshawn so that he can play those players on Sunday, kind of a 2 for 1. He does this because that week is a must win for him in order for him to have any shot of making the playoffs. Yahoo decides that since the BAL defense has already played that week they are ineligible to be traded and nullifies the trade. Team 1 loses and is eliminated from the playoffs. Now Team 2 is angry and thinks that the trade should be honored.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect, the trade was made Wednesday night/Thursday morning, but didnt clear in time due to our league's 1 day review period.

thenatedogg3 · #10 12-09-2006, 08:27 PM

You left out an important fact. Team 1 would have scored 20 less points if the trade went through. If the trade would have helped him win, than he would have a real argument. Also that trade was accepted no later than thursday afternoon. I check the league every day and I am positive that it happened before the thursday night games. The fact that DeAngelo had a great game and Gore had a bad one is the real issue here. I am sure team 2 would have taken the trade if DeAngelo blew out his knee and Gore ran for 200. Thats how fantasy is, you deal with the moves you make. Team 1 should just deal with it. If gore has a great week this week, will team 1 now want to do the trade again? Cant just let a guy go back and forth whenever he wants.