KYSteel 0 Posted October 7, 2009 Just wanted some opinions on this 1. I know I'll get some "that's why we dont use yahoo" but w/e. Ok on the rules/setting page of a yahoo league to anyone not the commish, an owner will see "Trade Review: League Votes" It does not indicate the # of votes needed to veto a trade. Knowing now the vote needed is 33%, however its not noted anywhere in the league settings. So this trade did not involve me at all, but Im concerned about trying to trade in the future. Im all for no vetos unless collusion. Here was the trade: Bernard Berrian Brandon Jacobs Antonio Gates for Team 2 Larry Fitzgerald Reggie Bush Chris Cooley 16 teams and so 6 votes would be needed to veto. And it was. On the message board many owners complained about the veto yet not one owner wrote anything to support it. The commish is looking into it and may change the rule, but that's yet to be decided. This also was for last week and did affect scores. I just wanted to know how you guys would feel about this. Not being able to see in the rules that the veto % is 33, and that none of the owners that did veto has given any reason as to why. This league isnt with friends but every1 in seems cool and the commish is very active. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,148 Posted October 7, 2009 Know your league rules before you draft. The onus is on you. If you are ignorant of the rules before the season starts then tough titty said the kitty. Doesn't matter how dumb the rule is or not, it's your fault for not knowing and/or proposing to change it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FrankRizzo 0 Posted October 7, 2009 Just wanted some opinions on this 1. I know I'll get some "that's why we dont use yahoo" but w/e. Ok on the rules/setting page of a yahoo league to anyone not the commish, an owner will see "Trade Review: League Votes" It does not indicate the # of votes needed to veto a trade. Knowing now the vote needed is 33%, however its not noted anywhere in the league settings. So this trade did not involve me at all, but Im concerned about trying to trade in the future. Im all for no vetos unless collusion. Here was the trade: Bernard Berrian Brandon Jacobs Antonio Gates for Team 2 Larry Fitzgerald Reggie Bush Chris Cooley 16 teams and so 6 votes would be needed to veto. And it was. On the message board many owners complained about the veto yet not one owner wrote anything to support it. The commish is looking into it and may change the rule, but that's yet to be decided. This also was for last week and did affect scores. I just wanted to know how you guys would feel about this. Not being able to see in the rules that the veto % is 33, and that none of the owners that did veto has given any reason as to why. This league isnt with friends but every1 in seems cool and the commish is very active. Fitz >>> Berrian Jacobs >> Bush Gates > Cooley looks like 3-3 ... even trade! When did this trade start? Before Sunday Fitz/Cooley much much much better than BB/Gates (who both finally scored after 4 weeks). Jacobs (who has been more a RB2/3) owner probably already set in RBs and now seriously upgraded getting Fitz .... unless they are complaining about that? I dunno, unless we see teams it's tough for people here to give an opinion. But even not knowing the teams, no need for veto. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KYSteel 0 Posted October 7, 2009 Know your league rules before you draft. The onus is on you. If you are ignorant of the rules before the season starts then tough titty said the kitty. Doesn't matter how dumb the rule is or not, it's your fault for not knowing and/or proposing to change it. Part of my point was that unless you are the commish there is no way to see the # of votes needed to veto. Now while assuming is a bad thing, most would think at least 50% was needed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FrankRizzo 0 Posted October 7, 2009 Part of my point was that unless you are the commish there is no way to see the # of votes needed to veto. Now while assuming is a bad thing, most would think at least 50% was needed. Agreed, 33% is ridiculous! If anything, it should be the opposite - 67% to VETO! Commish only sees the votes? Weird. But the system is the one making the veto/non veto decision right, not Commish manually? Then you really would have a problem ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KSB2424 3,148 Posted October 7, 2009 The trade is fine The veto rule is dumb The 33% veto rule is even dumber BUT none of that matters; you didn't ask what the rule was. Nobody dared to read the rules and think to ask. You guys assumed. So it's your fault for not knowing or asking. The rule is the rule. The season has started. You have to deal with it and propose to change it next year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KYSteel 0 Posted October 7, 2009 Agreed, 33% is ridiculous! If anything, it should be the opposite - 67% to VETO!Commish only sees the votes? Weird. But the system is the one making the veto/non veto decision right, not Commish manually? Then you really would have a problem ... 1st off thanks for the replies. It is the system, but what is being considered is making the commish being the only 1 who can veto, which is our only other option. Which leads me to... The trade is fineThe veto rule is dumb The 33% veto rule is even dumber BUT none of that matters; you didn't ask what the rule was. Nobody dared to read the rules and think to ask. You guys assumed. So it's your fault for not knowing or asking. The rule is the rule. The season has started. You have to deal with it and propose to change it next year. Good point. So you would say not to change the rule even if the other 10 owners want the rule changed? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
madd futher mucker 36 Posted October 8, 2009 As commish as well as a player in private yahoo leagues, I bellieve you can shut off the 33% veto option to allow for coimmissioner veto. Regardless, we've never had a problem with this. Even in the yahoo leagues where we DO allow for owner vetos, our rule is 75% required to veto. All vetoes are made by email to the commish rather than through any league veto system. Fact is, I am a commish in a PRIVATE yahoo league, and I've never even looked at the veto option part of the settings (if there is one). Assuming you play in a private yahoo league, you (or your commish) is making this a problem when there is no reason for one. Just pass a rule if you want league vote vetoes (which I personally think are very much more abused than commissioner vetoes) all vetoes must be registered through the commish. Then you can use any percentage that the league sees fit. Of course, I don't know anything about the yahoo public leagues. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BDuncan 3 Posted October 8, 2009 Why is 33% so terrible? What most people forget is that you have to remove the 2 people involved in the trade because they obviously are not going to vote against their own trade. Let's look at this for a minute. It is a 16 team league. 33% of 16 is 5.28, so round up to 6. Subtract the 2 parties involved in the trade, and you have 14 members. 6 out of 14 is 42.8%. You are basically 1 member shy of requiring a 50/50 split to veto the trade, even though it is set at 33%. In most leagues you will have at least 1 or 2 guys that ignore the league notifications for trade vetoes and the veto option is only open for a couple of days. This sounds reasonable to me. Most leagues require 50% minimum, which in your case would be 8 out of 14 owners (57.14%) after subtracting the 2 involved parties. I usually play in 10 or 12 man leagues. The true value of a 50% veto in those would be 63% for a 10 team league and 60% for a 12 team league. That is what the Supreme Court of the US would call a "super majority." If you wanted 66% you need 11 votes to overturn. 11 out of 14? Are you kidding me? That is 79% when you remove the 2 trading parties. What if 2 of your members don't look at their league email notifications because they are busy with (god forbid) actual work? Tell you what... don't make lopsided trades, and you probably won't have 6 people in your league voting to reject the trade. If you really have 6 guys in your league that are total dickheads then you should try to find a different league to play in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigBlue7 0 Posted October 8, 2009 Sounds like the people who think it's YOUR problem (for not knowing the rules or whatever they've listed)...use the veto button to make sure their competition isn't getting too strong. There's really no other good reason to use it. It's load of crap. Obviously the collusion argument is fine. I can't believe that people in ANY league think that it's their job to manage any team but their own. As I've said before...if me and 95% of the league see that clinton portis is gonna be a bust in week 3...and for some reason i'm able to trade him straight up for Slaton or whoever... to a guy who thinks portis will turn it around. Do you REALLY think it's your responsibility to veto that trade because you KNOW that portis is not gonna turn it around? No it's not your job. Stay the F outta it unless it's clear that 2 people are trying to stack a team. That's what the veto button is for. It's pretty simple. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
