FFL Commishioner Decision

[Dave B]

My opponent last week started Ray Rice and Brady Quinn. He picked up both players when he had already used up all of his alloted transactions. This week, the commish said that he Ray Rice would be removed from his team and Tyler Thigpen would be put back on (reversing the last transaction).

The team owner is now asking if R Rice was disallowed, then he should have had McGahee starting in week 10. He started McG in the prior week.

If he gets these points, it would change the outcome of the game and put my into a 1st place tie instead of a one game lead.

Thoughts? Can you really disallow an illegal transaction and ASSUME that he would have left an expected injured player who didnt play at all in week 9 to start in week 10? He had one other back on his roster who had zero points.

[beer batter]

So the commish didn't catch the illegal transaction until after the games were played? Kind of a gray area, but there's no way he should be able add a different player in his starting lineup after the games are over.

If the transaction is illegal then I'd say the whatever player(s) that were acquired illegally should not count towards his total for that week and that team will get 0 points for that position in his lineup after removing the illegally acquired players.

[Dave B]

That is correct, it wasnt caught.

At the same time, it is a friendly league and we try to keep things fair.

From the other players perspective, if I had McGahee get 15 points AND the new player get 15 points and was stripped of those points because it wasnt caught, I would be upset. Starting a bad player and getting zero points then wanting to insert someone else is pretty poor IMO.

[ole]

I would agree with BeerBatter, if the transaction was illegal then those points should be erased. Penalty would be 0 pts for said players. Commish should have to approve any transaction before it is allowed in any league. Even in friendly leagues you have to play by the rules, if you have them : )

ole

[Craigums]

I wouldn't allow it. If anything he should lose that spot on his roster for that week.

[nofishfisherman]

I am the commish for my league and this reason is why we allow unlimited transactions. Although we have never had any issues with someone abusing the system.

If I were to limit transactions I would probably lay out the penalty for going over the limit before the season started.

I would probably lean toward giving 0 pts for that position as a penalty. The only other option is if the commish can try to be impartial and figure out what player likely would have been put into the spot if the transaction would have never occured, then just apply that players points to that weeks game.

Its a tough call, I can see both sides of it from a commish's perspective. I say make it simple and just disallow any points for that position, the player should understand that its a penalty for breaking the rules.

[PierBridge]

From the sounds of your league I'd say you are tied for first now.

Good Luck!

[LMITOUT]

I agree with nofish. If they understood that there is a limit on the number of transactions prior to this happening (should be documented prior to the season), then the penalty for an invalid roster would zero points for that position.

Making an assumption of which player they would have started opens up the door for future woulda, coulda, shoulda's and the precedent has been set and it will be tough to reverse the process.

[Dave B]

My next argument would have been that he might have tried to make a trade to fill a position where he didnt think he had a worthwhile healthy player.

He made the right decision last night and let thing stand w/ R Rice in there, ergo, no points.