whomper Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 (edited) I have been commish of my main local for a while now. We are in our 14th year..Every year before the season starts we call a rules meeting. We go over all the rules from the previous year then we either add , subract or stay status quo. The other day a guy hit me with something that I was never asked before. I know this may be common in some of your leagues but its the first time it came up for me. He wanted to make a trade for another guys waiver rotation slot. The other guy had the 1 slot in the waiver rotation and it was obvious the guy not trading the waiver position wanted Warner. He was going to offer some fair players for it..My question really isnt if that particular trade or situation is fair but more so when a league members hits you with something that is above board and fair and not against your rules yet it would be the first time it has happen in your league how as commish do you look at it ? Do you say well since we dont have a rule against it I have to let it fly or do you say it may open floodgates to a situation that we arent prepared for and it should wait until next year so we can vote on it ? What do you think ? Again that example I gave is not what I am asking about specifically. The owner with top waiver priority never got back to the guy looking to make that trade so it was a moot point.. Edited October 19, 2007 by whomper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 (edited) My response would be that since we do not have a rule covering this situation, he cannot make the trade until it is discussed at the following season's rules meeting. In the interim, he could have had the owner in the #1 slot pick up the player he wanted and then made the trade. Things pop up all the time...even if you have a 50 page rule book (relax, we don't!) to cover situations, something not previously thought of will happen. As long as a commissioner has retained their integrity, the owners should be OK with most rulings. Edited October 19, 2007 by The Wolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 In the interim, he could have had the owner in the #1 slot pick up the player he wanted and then made the trade. This would have been the easiest way out of a potential hairy situation. But to your point, sometimes commish's do have to make decisions on the fly. There can't be a rule for everything. Suppose the player that wanted Warner was not offering players, but his 3rd round pick next year...then what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 (edited) Allow the trade. First of all, you don't have a rule against it. You can't as a commish start arbitrarily creating rules. Secondly, the trade of the waiver spot for a player would in effect be a trade of a player for a player, since as mentioned previously the original owner of the spot could select Warner & then trade him. Given that, I as a commish would absolutely not wade into the area of creating a rule that doesn't exist in the first place. Let the trade go with a reasonable logical basis behind it, and then if owners feel the need to address it, that can be done in the offseason. This isn't a situation that requires intervention - and commish intervention should always be done with great trepidation. Edited October 19, 2007 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otis29 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 We put this text in our rulebook a few years back: "If any rules questions come up that are not covered here, they will be resolved by the commissioner of the league at his own discretion." Most major rule changes are held off until the following year for a discussion or a vote, but when it's something that involves the interpretation of an existing rule (this situation might qualify), then the commissioner is able to make a change mid-year. To be honest, I don't think we've ever substantially changed a rule mid-year, but have had to modify the language of certain rules to clarify the intent. As with most things, this is where you hopefully have the respect of the guys in your league and they will assume you are making the proper decision with the league's interests at heart. And I agree with the previous poster, the cleanest way out of this is to have the guy with the #1 waiver priority select the player and then trade him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#1 Niners Fan Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Why wouldnt the guy with the #1 waiver priority just pick up Warner, then trade Warner to the other team for the players they wanted to give up for the waiver slot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 I asked this exact question a week or so ago. Let the trade go through was mostly the replies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tega Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 I wouldn't allow that at this time. In my opinion (as a past Commissioner myself) this needs league approval. It should be something that the league OKs before the season. Then personalities/bias don't sway their decisions. Our league rule is lowest scorer gets to choose 1st (unless there are IR replacements). The highest total scorer doesn't get to pick his 1st pick untill everybody else gets their 1st pick. Trades on someone picked up off the waiver wire can't be done until the following week. That gives everyone a chance to see who was picked up by teams. It gives everyone a fair shot for asking for a trade with someone else. I think if you allow waiver wire swaps - "funny business" could start and cause a lot of conflict. jmho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elrond Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 The league I commish has a clause similar to this... "If any rules questions come up that are not covered here, they will be resolved by the commissioner of the league at his own discretion." And this would very likely be my answer... My response would be that since we do not have a rule covering this situation, he cannot make the trade until it is discussed at the following season's rules meeting., My other mail league has the same "commissioner discretion" clause and I am all but sure the Commish of that league would give the opposite ruling (ie, not prohibited = s/b allowed) and I would be fine with that. There really isn't a wrong or right answer IMO as long as the ruling is reasonable and consistent with past actions. FWIW, both the leagues have a rule on trading waiver priority, and it is allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 Why wouldnt the guy with the #1 waiver priority just pick up Warner, then trade Warner to the other team for the players they wanted to give up for the waiver slot? Our free agent and trade deadline ends at Friday 10pm..Once waivers were processed ,which I do manually , the moves for the week are done..Therefore he couldnt trade Warner until a week later..I know it may be short sighted But I know the guy trying to get Warner didnt want to wait a week Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 (edited) I wouldn't allow that at this time. In my opinion (as a past Commissioner myself) this needs league approval. It should be something that the league OKs before the season. Then personalities/bias don't sway their decisions. Our league rule is lowest scorer gets to choose 1st (unless there are IR replacements). The highest total scorer doesn't get to pick his 1st pick untill everybody else gets their 1st pick. Trades on someone picked up off the waiver wire can't be done until the following week. That gives everyone a chance to see who was picked up by teams. It gives everyone a fair shot for asking for a trade with someone else. I think if you allow waiver wire swaps - "funny business" could start and cause a lot of conflict. jmho. Good post..This is how I was thinking but was struggling with the fact we had no rule against it..I do appreciate all the points of view though..Thanks all. Edited October 19, 2007 by whomper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 The role of the commissioner is to act in the bnest interest of the league. When it comes to these gray areas that are not specifically covered by the rules, it is the job of the commissioner to make a ruling in the best interest of the league that more clearly defines the rule. Thus, in this particular situation, as commissioner, it would have been your responsibility to make a decision in the best interest of the league regarding the trading of waiver position and to publicize that ruling with the league. Perhaps set up a process such that if an owner does not like the ruling that they can ask that it be brought to a league vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 The role of the commissioner is to act in the bnest interest of the league. When it comes to these gray areas that are not specifically covered by the rules, it is the job of the commissioner to make a ruling in the best interest of the league that more clearly defines the rule. Thus, in this particular situation, as commissioner, it would have been your responsibility to make a decision in the best interest of the league regarding the trading of waiver position and to publicize that ruling with the league. Perhaps set up a process such that if an owner does not like the ruling that they can ask that it be brought to a league vote. I agree..I just think sometimes rules made on the fly arent as thought out and debated as the rules made in the offseason and if you make a hasty decision the slippery slope of chicanery could be right around the corner. You are correct though.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 I agree..I just think sometimes rules made on the fly arent as thought out and debated as the rules made in the offseason and if you make a hasty decision the slippery slope of chicanery could be right around the corner. You are correct though.. I would strongly suggest that in addition o the steps in my first post, any rule added/amended/deleted/etc. during the course of the season be reviewed fully in the offseason and put through your standard rules procedures before becoming a permenaent fixture in the league rules. But, I firmly believe that the commissioner needs to have the abilities to rule on these gray areas during the course of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 I would strongly suggest that in addition o the steps in my first post, any rule added/amended/deleted/etc. during the course of the season be reviewed fully in the offseason and put through your standard rules procedures before becoming a permenaent fixture in the league rules. But, I firmly believe that the commissioner needs to have the abilities to rule on these gray areas during the course of the season. All true..We do do that in the offseason when we vote something in that pops up during the year that I impliment as commish.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.