League Dispute Question

[MnLefty]

Again - irrelevant.

 

Unless all owners are allowed to reverse moves that don't work out as they anticipated no owners should be allowed to reverse moves that don't work out as anticipated.

 

After 3 pages I'm just flat out curious to know specifically which error or change caused such a giant issue.

 

I'd also say that I could hear an argument for differentiating between a true system/data entry error where ESPN just flat out had it wrong, and a statistical correction made by the NFL, but lets not go there now.

[SecondString]

After 3 pages I'm just flat out curious to know specifically which error or change caused such a giant issue.

 

I'd also say that I could hear an argument for differentiating between a true system/data entry error where ESPN just flat out had it wrong, and a statistical correction made by the NFL, but lets not go there now.

Not sure, but a couple people have asked so I'm going to try to find out. It was definitely an "adjustment" because the score stayed close all the way throught he game, and hours after its completion, six points were deducted. Team A's owner thinks it had something to do with the NYG defense. I'm going to see what I can find out.

[untateve]

You know, I can't remember who the player was, but he wasn't on any injury reports. The coach of the team had said nothing and by all reports, the player was going to start. I went out and when I returned, I found out that the player was a late game scratch. Now, I had gone by all official reports and yet I received a 0 because I started that player. I feel I should have been allowed to start someone else after the fact because I relied on official information.

[Big Country]

Since this has gone into a lot of hypotheticals, I'll pose another one.

 

Let's say the socring change did not happen, so they remained tied.

 

This owner drops Thomas and picks up Young. Young somehow ends up with negative points. The owner then loses the tiebreaker because his bench does not outscore the other guy. Would he ask for the move to be reversed under these conditions? Would you be okay with that?

 

 

Now, another hypothetical. Again, the adjustment had not happened. He makes the roster move and ends up with the win. Now come Thursday of this week, there is a stat correction and it turns out he would have ended up with the win without the move. Would he ask, 5 DAYS later, to have his move reversed? Would you be okay with that?

 

 

 

I guess my opinion/point is this... he made a move based on the information available to him at the time. After he made the move, something happened outside of his control but within the normal realms of this game we play that change the action he would have taken. To me, this is no different than if he had read a report that Player X was going to play and started him, but then, it turns out the player was a real late scratch and did not play. Should he be allowed to change his starting lineup decision? He made a move based on information available to him at the time, the information changed, and thus the action he would have taken changed.

 

 

Somehow I think we are at the point in the discussion where it is pretty clear that the majority of the MB users feel that the move should not be reversed, but no matter how many say that, no reason will change your viewpoint. I can live with that... agree to disagree.

 

Your best course of action would probably be to have your friend ask to have it taken to the league as whole for a vote. He can lay out his argument as to why he feels the move that he made should be reversed, and then let the league speak with their vote.

[SecondString]

You know, I can't remember who the player was, but he wasn't on any injury reports. The coach of the team had said nothing and by all reports, the player was going to start. I went out and when I returned, I found out that the player was a late game scratch. Now, I had gone by all official reports and yet I received a 0 because I started that player. I feel I should have been allowed to start someone else after the fact because I relied on official information.

Nice try, but not even close to the same thing. Already had this arguement earlier in the thread too. In your hypothetical example, the information came from a third party who had no knowledge of or interest in the FF league. In the real life case, the information on which the decision to drop a player was bsed was provided by the league's adminstrator, who is responsible for scorekeeping the games. Kind of like the referee in an actual game. No comparison, sorry.

Edited October 11, 2011 by SecondString

[detlef]

Based on poor information from pretty much every FF website out there, I spent a high draft pick on Rashard Mendenhall in two leagues. In both cases, Darren McFadden was available at the time and I would like to switch that pick please.

 

TIA

[Bring Back Pat!!!]

Nice try, but not even close to the same thing. Already had this arguement earlier in the thread too. In your hypothetical example, the information came from a third party who had no knowledge of or interest in the FF league. In the real life case, the information on which the decision to drop a player was bsed was provided by the league's adminstrator, who is responsible for scorekeeping the games. Kind of like the referee in an actual game. No comparison, sorry.

 

And referees make mistakes all the time. Leagues even admit so to real teams after the fact, and yet a game result has never been reversed after the fact due to a referee error during a game.

 

If this is how you are looking at it, like an "administrator" error, my answer remains the same, too bad, they made a mistake. It was still the players conscious decision to cut Thomas. He could have made the decision that potentially losing Thomas was not worth one win, that Thomas could help him win more games later in the season than just one.

 

He made his choice, too bad that he doesn't like the results.

[Grits and Shins]

I'm not sure why you even bothered to ask if you can't even hear what the massive majority here are saying to you.

[untateve]

Nice try, but not even close to the same thing. Already had this arguement earlier in the thread too. In your hypothetical example, the information came from a third party who had no knowledge of or interest in the FF league. In the real life case, the information on which the decision to drop a player was bsed was provided by the league's adminstrator, who is responsible for scorekeeping the games. Kind of like the referee in an actual game. No comparison, sorry.

 

The League Administrator did not make a mistake. Unless I've misread ESPN rules, all scores posted are unofficial and preliminary until the following Saturday. To treat them as official and permanent prior to that is a mistake that the owner in your league made.

[SecondString]

Since this has gone into a lot of hypotheticals, I'll pose another one.

 

Let's say the socring change did not happen, so they remained tied.

 

This owner drops Thomas and picks up Young. Young somehow ends up with negative points. The owner then loses the tiebreaker because his bench does not outscore the other guy. Would he ask for the move to be reversed under these conditions? Would you be okay with that?

 

 

Now, another hypothetical. Again, the adjustment had not happened. He makes the roster move and ends up with the win. Now come Thursday of this week, there is a stat correction and it turns out he would have ended up with the win without the move. Would he ask, 5 DAYS later, to have his move reversed? Would you be okay with that?

 

 

 

I guess my opinion/point is this... he made a move based on the information available to him at the time. After he made the move, something happened outside of his control but within the normal realms of this game we play that change the action he would have taken. To me, this is no different than if he had read a report that Player X was going to play and started him, but then, it turns out the player was a real late scratch and did not play. Should he be allowed to change his starting lineup decision? He made a move based on information available to him at the time, the information changed, and thus the action he would have taken changed.

 

 

Somehow I think we are at the point in the discussion where it is pretty clear that the majority of the MB users feel that the move should not be reversed, but no matter how many say that, no reason will change your viewpoint. I can live with that... agree to disagree.

 

Your best course of action would probably be to have your friend ask to have it taken to the league as whole for a vote. He can lay out his argument as to why he feels the move that he made should be reversed, and then let the league speak with their vote.

Hmmmm. Pretty well said. I suppose it is possible that an adjustment is made days after the fact, and by that time, the dropped player would have been scooped up off of the ww. I could not support reversing the move at that point, no. But in our actual case, the move could have been easily reversed with no other disruption, and in my opinion should be considered. The main point being that an owner should not be penalized by the errors and innacuracies of the leagues administrator.

 

Your point "he made a move based on the information available to him at the time. After he made the move, something happened outside of his control but within the normal realms of this game we play that change the action he would have taken" is well taken. I completely understand that viewpoint, which seems to be the consensus here.

Edited October 11, 2011 by SecondString

[SecondString]

I'm not sure why you even bothered to ask if you can't even hear what the massive majority here are saying to you.

Hearing it loud and clear Grits...why are you so averse to a discussion that involves opposing views? Nothing wrong with that...makes the world go 'round.

[Joessfl]

Do not reverse the transaction.

[STL Fan]

Shouldn't Taz have run through this thread naked by now? Or did I miss it?

[Joessfl]

You missed it.

 

 

[tazinib1]

Shouldn't Taz have run through this thread naked by now? Or did I miss it?

 

 

 

Post #61

[SecondString]

Shouldn't Taz have run through this thread naked by now? Or did I miss it?

Oh yeah, he already streaked through, you missed it.

 

I'm out boyz...thanks very much for the lively discussion, and I can count votes. I concede. I lose this arguement! I'm good with that, not the first time, won't be the last. Thanks for the input.

[delusions of grandeur]

Hearing it loud and clear Grits...why are you so averse to a discussion that involves opposing views? Nothing wrong with that...makes the world go 'round.

Discussion is fine, but you not only continue to blindly dispute the vast majority objective viewpoint, but go even further to dispute the system that ESPN has told you in writing is the way that they score and make corrections. Do you have a rule in writing to handle this situation differently? No, so you go by the way ESPN does things, which is not to make it official until as late as next Saturday.

 

The owner who made the hasty move wasn't any more wronged than the owner who had his tie taken away after the fact (and as I argued earlier was really attempting to wrong the other owner by playing the system, and has to live with the consequences of making a move to do so).

 

So if you truly wanted to have a discussion, it should have never made it this far once we made the point about scoring not being official at gametime; Please stop trying to get the answer you want to hear, because it's been proven undeniably from ESPN themselves that this is their procedure, and absent a rule that necessitates different action, you go by their procedure.

 

[/endthread]

Edited October 11, 2011 by delusions of granduer

[SecondString]

Discussion is fine, but you not only continue to blindly dispute the vast majority objective viewpoint, but go even further to dispute the system that ESPN has told you in writing is the way that they score and make corrections. Do you have a rule in writing to handle this situation differently? No, so you go by the way ESPN does things, which is not to make it official until as late as next Saturday.

 

The owner who made the hasty move wasn't any more wronged than the owner who had his tie taken away after the fact (and as I argued earlier was really attempting to wrong the other owner by playing the system, and has to live with the consequences of making a move to do so).

 

So if you truly wanted to have a discussion, it should have never made it this far once we made the point about scoring not being official at gametime; Please stop trying to get the answer you want to hear, because it's been proven undeniably from ESPN themselves that this is their procedure, and absent a rule that necessitates different action, you go by their procedure.

 

[/endthread]

Man, you are so far off the mark it's not even funny. Your cred was lost way back in page 1 or 2 of this thread, so don't scold me for posting my opinions...capisce??

[delusions of grandeur]

Man, you are so far off the mark it's not even funny. Your cred was lost way back in page 1 or 2 of this thread, so don't scold me for posting my opinions...capisce??

So I lost my cred here for having opinions, with the primary one in question being one that 99% of fantasy players and ESPN agree with? I don't think you want to know what being so stubborn about the issue and taking shots at people is doing for your cred, kid.

 

The only reason we even continue with this is because you keep saying that no one is going to convince you otherwise that this deserves special consideration because of some well-documented "administrator error" that is in actuality how the game works with preliminary scoring before it becomes official. You're wrong and your commish is right. Sorry.

 

Have a nice day though!

[untateve]

The League Administrator did not make a mistake. Unless I've misread ESPN rules, all scores posted are unofficial and preliminary until the following Saturday. To treat them as official and permanent prior to that is a mistake that the owner in your league made.

 

+1

[Joessfl]

This all ended so soon.

[The Wolf]

I was about to weigh in at post 24 but figured this topic was over and done with...

 

...HOW THE HE11 DID THIS MAKE IT TO 4 PAGES????

 

This is such an open and shut case if I ever saw one in 17 years of playing fantasy sports. And yet the debate rages on...

[flemingd]

Not sure, but a couple people have asked so I'm going to try to find out. It was definitely an "adjustment" because the score stayed close all the way throught he game, and hours after its completion, six points were deducted. Team A's owner thinks it had something to do with the NYG defense. I'm going to see what I can find out.

If you play team QB, Brad Smith had a rushing TD that might be it.

[flemingd]

I'd also say that I could hear an argument for differentiating between a true system/data entry error where ESPN just flat out had it wrong, and a statistical correction made by the NFL, but lets not go there now.

That's actually a pretty significant point. If it's a system error I can see cutting the guy a break - that's what I was basing my original discussion on, but I just re-read the original post and now have no idea where I got that from. If this is a standard scoring change that happens regularly, then yes he needs to stick with his move.

[Grits and Shins]

That's actually a pretty significant point. If it's a system error I can see cutting the guy a break - that's what I was basing my original discussion on, but I just re-read the original post and now have no idea where I got that from. If this is a standard scoring change that happens regularly, then yes he needs to stick with his move.

 

I strongly disagree ...

 

1) He made a decision to go without a bench, this decision carries with it a risk that he would lose on tie-breakers.

2) After seeing that the risk he took to go with no bench might cost him the game because he went with no bench, he made another decision - to make a roster move to improve his bench so that he might get a win. I say "might cost him the game" and "might get a win" because scores are at best PRELIMINARY until the software updates the final standings sometime Monday night/Tuesday morning. But even then the games are NOT FINAL until the kick off of the next week's games. He made a conscious decision to mitigate the risk of his losing because he had no bench by making a roster move. If you've been playing fantasy football any length of time (say 5 minutes) you know that scores and stats are very often misrepresented during the course of the games. For somebody to ask for a do-over because of just such a misrepresentation is asinine.

 

Bottom line ... if he didn't want to risk losing Daniel Thomas he shouldn't have cut him. What ESPN may or may not have shown him in regards to scores is irrelevant because said scores are PRELIMINARY and not FINAL.