Player asking league to veto his trade

[Waias15 1]

so me and owner made a trade 2 days ago

i give: Cobb, Tannehill, Freeman
i get: Vereen, Wayne, Kelce, SJax

 

he wanted Cobb bad so he was willing to give up more on his end and i needed to shore up some depth due to injuries

now since Vereen was having a big game and getting lead role the kid called a bunch of other owners and had them veto the trade
i got the email before the game was over that it had been vetoed
i let him know immediately that it was bullchit and he'd be kicked out of legit leagues for chit like that

am i wrong?

 

and HE was the one who proposed the trade in the first place cuz he wanted Cobb, said Vereen wont get lead role, etc

hes a close friend but hes one of those guys that lives for fantasy
and hes always butting in to other guys about their trades and what they should/shouldnt do
or who to start against other teams

i am the commish as well but i dont want to seem like im rigging anything in my favor

i did commish evaluated trades last year and he insisted we have it as a vote this year. i knew it would cause issues

 

not sure where i should go from here

 

 

 

 

 

[weepaws 2,460]

How much time do you give to dispute trades ?

[Waias15 1]

How much time do you give to dispute trades ?

2 days

[Ryan1761 0]

You could always make him suspend (bench) his players he wanted to trade for 1-2 weeks since he did that. Even though this is just Fantasy football, we still have good bit of money flying in our league so that is just unethical. That definitely wouldn't fly in our league and it would have to be a unanimous decision among everybody to allow the veto, not just a majority in that situation.

[bubba29 3]

once a trade is agreed upon, the league can vote to veto it within 2 days. if either team wants to use any of those players traded, they need to get majority vote before kickoff of the game any of the players are playing in (unless 2 days have passed). otherwise none of those players should be eligible to play. just my opinion though. bottom line is, vereen should not be available to him if the veto came after the start of that game. that is crap if he expects that to be the case.

 

btw, i know a guy like that. good guy but he got a little overboard with FF. he was the commish of our league. he was traveling on a monday night. a guy he had going monday night ended up being late scratch. after the game was over and without input, he retroactively changed his lineup and put another player off his bench who did play monday in his lineup. this ended up giving him a win. his argument was that if he had access to phone or pc, he would have made that change. sure but he didn't and he lost. the league ended up ousting him from his commish spot 2 days later. things have been fine ever since.

[49erGold 36]

It is an unfair trade lmao... the league voted it is worrisome that he called people so their is collusion. In the future you can get new owners but this one is paid for and mid-season... so whatever they voted on is legit.

 

Someone did a Cobb + Wright for Marshall and got all mad it was unfair deal... maybe I should post yours up lol. In the future you can do unanimous vote but I like majority cause some people don't check the trades during the week and I can barely get my league to vote 40% on anything lol... so 50% is legit.

 

Now if there is a repeat case then I be concerned but it's very biased when you are the said party and commissioner benefiting from the deal... having sole veto power I think is bs... cause a commish has so much power anyways. To be fair you need a vote cause it effects the whole league. How many deals you vetoed during your time? Maybe their was bad blood and the league got back at you for past vetos.

 

Do another deal with Cobb and don't make it so lopsided lol... Vereen is off the table now. That guy sounds like an idiot thinking Vereen wasn't going to get a major boost its ridiculous 80-20 split I was shocked how little Bolden was used. Welcome, to voting veto trades... you can't completely fleece a dumb owner lol.

[SAA 12]

One thing is for sure... he should not get any credit for Vereen!

 

By the way, I think it is a fair trade. Not sure why anyone would veto it.

[49erGold 36]

If the trade is vetoed after he benched no credit... if he started Vereen he gets credit. Most deals delay trades if a player plays on TNF ff starting lineup.

[Cuse9 128]

Trades being vetoed is just bad. Too many guys will veto a trade based on how much better it makes one team rather than the players in the trade.

 

In any event. There really isn't anything you can do. The rules give two days, two days had not passed, so it was still up for veto. Does it make sense....no. The only thing I would do is nix vetoing for next year. If you are a fair commish, you should be the rule. Trades only get shot down if there is collusion involved. As a commish for 20 years I turned one trade down due to it looking way to fishy. I conversed with other tenured members and for the integrity of the league I vetoed it. There have been numerous questionable trades that ended up being fair....so you never know. I don't like giving other owners power to decide if they like the trade you made for your team.

[Showboat 145]

Ugh.... Yet another reason leagues should NEVER allow trades to be subject to league votes.