jbran23 Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 (edited) I see an unwarranted veto coming up in my league and I want to be able to link this thread to my league so everyone can read it so the more people with unbiased opinions that comment the better. What are your feelings on vetoing trades and what is your league policy? Thanks guys. Edited September 26, 2010 by jbran23 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLGRAF Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 In our league, you object about a trade to the commissioner, then he puts it up to the league for a vote. I think if a majority of league members think a trade is out of whack, canceling it is reasonable. But, to me "out of whack" means blatantly collusive, and not just one guy fleecing another dumber guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slambo Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 No trade should ever be vetoed unless obvious provable collusion exists. I don't play in leagues where other members have the power to vote down a trade. I've been doing FF for 20+ years, been commishing my local for 10 years and have commished numerous other leagues at one time or another. In all those years I've only vetoed ONE trade due to drunken collusion/dumping that both owners admitted to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljbrun Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 In my one league that allows trades: No voting, no commish approvals, trades effective immediately. However, if a trade smells fishy the commish at his discretion can bring it up to the rest of the league w/in 24 hours (has never happened in the 5 years of this league's existence). We only care that there's no collusion. We don't try to run other owners' teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electricrelish Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 No trade should ever be vetoed unless obvious provable collusion exists. I don't play in leagues where other members have the power to vote down a trade. I've been doing FF for 20+ years, been commishing my local for 10 years and have commished numerous other leagues at one time or another. In all those years I've only vetoed ONE trade due to drunken collusion/dumping that both owners admitted to. Please PM me their names. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0-16 Again Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 No trade should ever be vetoed unless obvious provable collusion exists. I don't play in leagues where other members have the power to vote down a trade. I've been doing FF for 20+ years, been commishing my local for 10 years and have commished numerous other leagues at one time or another. In all those years I've only vetoed ONE trade due to drunken collusion/dumping that both owners admitted to. +1 except I have run my league for 18 years and have never vetoed a trade. People pay for there team and if they feel the trade improves their team, who am I to tell them they are wrong. Trades don't have to look fair, they just have to include owners that feel they are improving their teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slambo Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 In all those years I've only vetoed ONE trade due to drunken collusion/dumping that both owners admitted to. Please PM me their names. This happened in a work league that only existed for a couple of seasons. Never had a problem in my local. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbran23 Posted September 26, 2010 Author Share Posted September 26, 2010 Thanks for the replies fellas. Bumping this up for anyone else who wants to take the time and reply. The more the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAssface76 Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 Defenitly should never veto if it's even remotely reasonable, but you can't allow someone to dump thier team just to get thier favorite player. It was a baseball league, but in football terms, someone wanted to trade AP, CJ, AJ and Dallas Clark for Ronnie Brown and Ricky Williams because "i like the Dolphins" and "Im not gonna make the playoffs anyway". Obviously in football, this team is awesome. In baseball everyone has a few studs because you have 2wice as many spots. We vetoed this trade, and i won the league. I can say with almost 100% certainty i would'nt have won if we allowed that trade through. You simply can't allow some to gift wrapp a championship to someone because they just want thier favorite player. You might argue its not fair to the 2 people in the trade, but its more unjust to the other 12 people in the league trying to win fairly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcat Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 My current league -- the commish approves trades and haven't seen a veto. I assume they would bring shady deals up to the managers, but everyone plays fair. In one of my prior leagues -- every trade needed majority approval by the managers (no response within 24 hrs equaled approval). The commish didn't want to be responsible for the decisions. We saw one guy try to give away a stud RB two years ago because he was out of contention. This was the only trade I ever saw get vetoed because it was extremely obvious to everyone that the trade only helped the winning team. Scumbag move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMac32 Posted September 26, 2010 Share Posted September 26, 2010 My one league (12 team) has a 7 vote system. I personally hate it, but no trade has ever been stopped. I don't think a single person should have veto power. 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.