need advice on argument in league...

[i_am_the_swammi]

But again, maybe the OP can explain better why this is such an important rule to you to the point of punishing a team with 1 less player in their lineup over what could be an honest oversight... I've not drafted kickers both on purpose and on accident because I had my eye on other players, and I really don't see an issue if I wait until later to drop my 18th, 17th, 16th, etc., to do so, rather than being required to then... Not trying to second guess your rules, but I guess I don't see the reasoning in making it a requirement that you draft a position that tends to be a dime-a-dozen anyway (or any position for that matter. You pay your entry, you manage your roster as you see fit)...

 

That's pretty much the essence of why I said he should be able to drop whoever he wishes to add his kicker.

 

In most leagues, drop/add opens before the start of the season. In most leagues, I could theoretically draft 9-10 RBs if I wanted, then drop (or trade) those that got hurt, won a roster battle, and/or got cut after the last preseason game, and make myself a legal roster in time for Week 1.

 

Truly, it just sounds like the guy completely forgot the rule...again, likely a byproduct of him not being present at the draft.

[Goopster24]

If he as targeting him in the last round, it sounds to me as if he completely forgot about the "must have a kicker" rule. Likely a by-product of him not being able to be present at the draft. Had he been there, I am sure it would have been noticed by someone, and likely mentioned at some point a few rounds earlier in passing...which then would have given him the chance to adjust his strategy if indeed he really wanted Hernandez.

 

Tough spot for sure.

 

Question: in Week 2, is it illegal to not have a kicker? Or could a team opt to go without one?

 

"Completely forgetting" to me is the same thing as "having no intention." That isn't an excuse if you break a rule IMO. Yes, if he was present at draft, he would have known he had to draft a kicker; it was said out loud during the draft. If he was present at the draft, maybe he would have drafted Hernandez earlier because he was "targeting him."

 

But he wasn't present at the draft so these are hypothetical.

 

To your question, teams are required to start a players each and every week. Again, I don't know how other leagues do this. I know we have this rule in place so teams can't "throw games" at end of season to get a better matchup in postseason.

[i_am_the_swammi]

The rule is that every team must draft a kicker. He did not draft a kicker. Doesn't get any simpler than that does it?

 

Yep pretty simple.

 

The problem is that there is no clearly defined path/penalty if someone breaks this rule.

[Goopster24]

The rule is that every team must draft a kicker. He did not draft a kicker. Doesn't get any simpler than that does it?

 

That's what I said at first but there are definitely issues that complicate this unique case, specifically the fact there is no penalty in our constitution AND I was in charge of drafting the player he "illegally" drafted for another team.

[i_am_the_swammi]

"Completely forgetting" to me is the same thing as "having no intention." That isn't an excuse if you break a rule IMO. Yes, if he was present at draft, he would have known he had to draft a kicker; it was said out loud during the draft. If he was present at the draft, maybe he would have drafted Hernandez earlier because he was "targeting him."

But he wasn't present at the draft so these are hypothetical.

 

But important nonetheless, especially since you, as Commish, have to levy a penalty that right now doesn't even exist.

 

In my mind, it makes a difference if the guy did it on purpose, or just plain forgot. A court of law certainly takes intent and circumstance into account....you should too.

[Goopster24]

But important nonetheless, especially since you, as Commish, have to levy a penalty that right now doesn't even exist.

 

In my mind, it makes a difference if the guy did it on purpose, or just plain forgot. A court of law certainly takes intent and circumstance into account....you should too.

 

So according to what I've said, and what Owner A said to me, what do you think was his intent? Did he forget or did he not intend to draft a kicker?

[i_am_the_swammi]

So according to what I've said, and what Owner A said to me, what do you think was his intent? Did he forget or did he not intend to draft a kicker?

 

hard to say...I don't know the owner, his history in "working the rules". Does he really seem like the kind of guy who would break a rule on purpose (re cheat) in hopes no one catches the error (and this is a glaring error).

 

IMO, he just forgot....it would be pretty stupid to break a rule on purpose that would be so obvious to catch.

[delfamdelfam]

I don't see how you can punish him if there is no rule in place. He didn't know the rule cause he wasn't at the draft and you didn't remind him so it can't be his fault.

 

If the league requires he start a kicker then fine, he should have to drop someone on his team to roster a kicker, but that player shouldn't be Hernandez, if he wants to drop someone else for his kicker he should be allowed.

[Azazello1313]

pretty clear IMO. Team A needed a kicker with the last pick. he shouldn't have been able to pick hernandez. he gets a choice of kickers. Team B gets hernandez.

 

I think you've probably pretty much nailed it down at this point, but this is indeed the right call IMO.

[Goopster24]

I don't see how you can punish him if there is no rule in place. He didn't know the rule cause he wasn't at the draft and you didn't remind him so it can't be his fault.

 

If the league requires he start a kicker then fine, he should have to drop someone on his team to roster a kicker, but that player shouldn't be Hernandez, if he wants to drop someone else for his kicker he should be allowed.

 

But I side with the argument and thinking that this would result in the other argument with people saying "well I woulda drafted that player if he was available, why do I now have to use FAAB to try and get him?"

[Azazello1313]

I don't see how you can punish him if there is no rule in place.

 

it's not "punishment", it's simply reversing an illegal roster move.

[delfamdelfam]

it's not "punishment", it's simply reversing an illegal roster move.

but in his mind he wasn't performing an illegal move when he drafted Hernandez. It's not his fault nobody told him the rule and then the commish who made the pick didn't tell him.

[Goopster24]

hard to say...I don't know the owner, his history in "working the rules". Does he really seem like the kind of guy who would break a rule on purpose (re cheat) in hopes no one catches the error (and this is a glaring error).

 

IMO, he just forgot....it would be pretty stupid to break a rule on purpose that would be so obvious to catch.

 

Yeah, I'm going both ways on his intent. Good owner, two time winner, smart guy.

 

The thing that some are missing here in this thread is this: "if" I would have caught the error, he WOULD NOT have been allowed to draft Hernandez in final round. If he said at the point, "well, I didn't know, can I drop an earlier player? I really want someone right here that I've been targeting," I would have said simply "no."

[delusions of grandeur]

That's pretty much the essence of why I said he should be able to drop whoever he wishes to add his kicker.

 

In most leagues, drop/add opens before the start of the season. In most leagues, I could theoretically draft 9-10 RBs if I wanted, then drop (or trade) those that got hurt, won a roster battle, and/or got cut after the last preseason game, and make myself a legal roster in time for Week 1.

 

Truly, it just sounds like the guy completely forgot the rule...again, likely a byproduct of him not being present at the draft.

No, but if you just let him drop a player, then that's not doing anything... That's just the same as having no rule in place, since he assuredly would do so before taking a 0 at kicker... What we're proposing is replacing the pick because it was illegal... Again, the 15th, 16th, 17th round picks weren't illegal, the 18th was because he should have had no other choice at that point...

 

I agree that if circumstances were different, and more people were getting jipped out of the opportunity at the player, then it would be different and require discretion, but it's simple here... The guy after him had expressed to the commish that he was planning to take the player Owner A illegally took, so you award him the player, and Owner A has to choose from FA kickers available to replace his pick...

 

Then the only way he's going to create issues there is if the player that he replaces on Owner B's roster is one that the next players would have drafted... If that's the case, then maybe give them the same opportunity to replace that player for their 18th if they would have drafted him instead, doing this according to draft order until everyone is satisfied and you've gotten through the draft correctly.

 

I know that sounds complicated, but is really the simplest and fairest way to do it.

[delusions of grandeur]

but in his mind he wasn't performing an illegal move when he drafted Hernandez. It's not his fault nobody told him the rule and then the commish who made the pick didn't tell him.

Unless it is a secret rule book, then he should have known the rule.. A commish has a lot to keep up with, especially in this case updating a Google spreadsheet for the guy, so he can't be expected to catch everything and hold people's hands.

[Goopster24]

but in his mind he wasn't performing an illegal move when he drafted Hernandez. It's not his fault nobody told him the rule and then the commish who made the pick didn't tell him.

 

So how is that different from speeding and not knowing the speeding limit?

[The 13ers]

I understand the rule, but I don't agree with it.

 

If the rosters are locked for the first week, why not let a team play without a K? What's the problem if he/she won't start a player at a position?

 

If the Packers went with 10 players, not 11, they don't get penalized for it. They have a disadvantage.

 

If a team wants to hoard a third TE, I say let him. I've told my teams(I'm the commish) if you want to draft all kickers, then do it. It's your team. You'll lose, but it's your team.

[Goopster24]

No, but if you just let him drop a player, then that's not doing anything... That's just the same as having no rule in place, since he assuredly would do so before taking a 0 at kicker... What we're proposing is replacing the pick because it was illegal... Again, the 15th, 16th, 17th round picks weren't illegal, the 18th was because he should have had no other choice at that point...

 

I agree that if circumstances were different, and more people were getting jipped out of the opportunity at the player, then it would be different and require discretion, but it's simple here... The guy after him had expressed to the commish that he was planning to take the player Owner A illegally took, so you award him the player, and Owner A has to choose from FA kickers available to replace his pick...

 

Then the only way he's going to create issues there is if the player that he replaces on Owner B's roster is one that the next players would have drafted... If that's the case, then maybe give them the same opportunity to replace that player for their 18th if they would have drafted him instead, doing this according to draft order until everyone is satisfied and you've gotten through the draft correctly.

 

I know that sounds complicated, but is really the simplest and fairest way to do it.

 

This is non issue I believe but good point.

[delusions of grandeur]

I understand the rule, but I don't agree with it.

 

If the rosters are locked for the first week, why not let a team play without a K? What's the problem if he/she won't start a player at a position?

Dude, you already asked this once, and like I said, it's agaisnt the rules to not draft a kicker, and you're screwing another team out of a player they would have been able to draft otherwise... It's not a fair solution in this case.

[Goopster24]

I understand the rule, but I don't agree with it.

 

If the rosters are locked for the first week, why not let a team play without a K? What's the problem if he/she won't start a player at a position?

 

If the Packers went with 10 players, not 11, they don't get penalized for it. They have a disadvantage.

 

If a team wants to hoard a third TE, I say let him. I've told my teams(I'm the commish) if you want to draft all kickers, then do it. It's your team. You'll lose, but it's your team.

 

No women in this league.

 

I don't like ever comparing situations like this to what "actually" happens in the NFL. Think that's silly.

 

There is no position limit in our league. If a player wants his whole bench to be quarterbacks, he is allowed to. This rule is stated in the constitution, actually right near the rule about having to draft a full lineup.

[i_am_the_swammi]

I guess I give people the benefit of the doubt.

 

Had Owner A been present, he would have heard the commish remind everyone that "you have to draft a kicker". With this reminder, he could have then adjusted his draft plan accordingly so he could ensure he'd get Hernandez. But because he was at a disadvantage to everyone else in the league by not being present when the rules were read, he is now at the mercy of what the Commish decides.

 

if I were him, I'd recognize that it was indeed my fault...and then be really bummed at my leaguemates for potentially insinuating that I was trying to cheat.

[delfamdelfam]

So how is that different from speeding and not knowing the speeding limit?

did he know the rule before hand? If that is the case then yes Hernandez should go to the next guy in line and he should have to take a kicker.

[Big Country]

Seems clear - rule in place states that a full starting lineup must be drafted. Oversight or not, come the 18th round, whether he intended to draft Hernandez or not, he should not have been allowed to. In order to comply with the league rules, it seems that dropping Hernandez from the roster, as it was an illegal pick, and putting in a kicker is the most logical solution. Allowing him to drop anyone else is not a logical solution to this issue. Not having this owner follow this rule at this point just sets a poor precedent of bending rules, whether it was an oversight or intentional attempt to circumvent the rules is irrelevant.

 

Providing the next team Hernandez is a little tricky, but likely of minimal impact. I say tricky because technically you need to check with the owners that picked afterwards whether or not they would have taken the guy you took over the player they took if you assign Hernandez to the team requesting him.

 

 

Now, to the completely separate question about the rule itself, I've played in leagues that require full starting lineups be drafted and played in those with no requirements on the draft. I've also played in leagues that allow moves post draft but prior to Week 1, and I've played in many leagues that do not allow transactions until after the week one games. I have my preferences, but I would not be so bold as to say one is a better system than the other. Different strokes for different leagues.

[Goopster24]

did he know the rule before hand? If that is the case then yes Hernandez should go to the next guy in line and he should have to take a kicker.

 

The rule has been existence for 12 years. We have never had an issue like this.

[Goopster24]

I guess I give people the benefit of the doubt.

 

Had Owner A been present, he would have heard the commish remind everyone that "you have to draft a kicker". With this reminder, he could have then adjusted his draft plan accordingly so he could ensure he'd get Hernandez. But because he was at a disadvantage to everyone else in the league by not being present when the rules were read, he is now at the mercy of what the Commish decides.

 

if I were him, I'd recognize that it was indeed my fault...and then be really bummed at my leaguemates for potentially insinuating that I was trying to cheat.

 

While he has said he was targeting Hernandez in the last round, he has said it is his fault that he didn't know the rule. He just believes he shouldn't have to give up the last pick, a guy he was targeting; he wants to choose the player he drops. He doesn't care about the kicker; he said give me anyone.