Fantasy Court - How to handle an illegal roster (1 Viewer)

[zallen]

In week 2, one owner started an illegal lineup (he started 3 RBs and 4 WR/TEs; our rules permit 2 RBs and 4 WR/TEs, or 3 RBs and 3 WR/TEs). What’s the best protocol for remedying this violation? I presume it's retroactively benching one of his violating starters? But which one? I can think of two options: (a) bench his most recently activated starter – i.e., reverse the lineup move that actually caused the violation, or (b) bench the highest scoring player among his violating starters - i.e., the highest scoring RB or WR/TE.

I see legit arguments for each. “(a)” is simple and logical, though it doesn’t establish much of a punitive deterrent for this sort of screw up. On the other hand, “(b)” would present plenty of deterrent.

How is this situation most commonly handled? (FWIW, our league is operated on the CBS Sports website.)

[bTW, if there's another forum or thread at which this question would be more suitable, please let me know.]

 

[GregR]

I prefer a standing rule with teeth, like to remove the highest scoring player(s) that make the lineup legal, as a way of encouraging owners to make sure they submit a legal one.

Since you don't have a standing rule to guide you, and that is kind of harsh, you might want to handle this one more leniently though. And then set whatever permanent rule in place for handling any occurrences after this.

If the guy previously had a legal lineup then changed it, reverting might be the answer that would be least objectionable to the most people. But I'd make it clear how any further occurrences will be handled now that the entire league has been forewarned. I've done this a few times (gone with a mild solution but then set in place a sterner rule to handle it), and it's gone over well with my leagues.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

In my local league, illegal roster submissions result in an automatic forfeit. But that's a little harsh.

Of the options you presented, I would definitely go with (b).

Would this change a win into a loss for this owner? Do you base anything (playoff berths, weekly prizes, etc.) on points scored?

 

[ponchsox]

Option A seems the most logical solution and make sure you set a precedent going forward.

 

[zallen]

FWIW, the outcome of this particular match-up will be the same, regardless of which remedy is employed - (a) or (b). Points scored can also affect waiver wire priority and tie-breaker situations for playoff seeding.

 

[dagwood]

Illegal lineups should result in a zero for the week. Send a message to the league.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

I'm assuming there are no rules that address this already?

 

[Captain Hook]

Leagues should have rules for this - or use default rules at the host site.....Are there not rules on cbs?

How did cbs allow him to submit an unlawful lineup?

Take out his last player in and IMMEDIATELY let everyone in the league know what the rule is going forward.

 

[Kleck]

You know your league and owners better than we do. Is it more of a local/friend fun league or big money with guys you don't personally know? Has the owner/team in question tried circumventing the rules before, or honest mistake?

If it's more local/fun and there is no punishment rule in place, I'd go with (a) since CBS shows the lineup details in the transaction logs and it will be easy to correct. Going forward, or for 2012, I'd establish some sort of punishment rule like you have suggested with (b).

 

[squistion]

In week 2, one owner started an illegal lineup (he started 3 RBs and 4 WR/TEs; our rules permit 2 RBs and 4 WR/TEs, or 3 RBs and 3 WR/TEs). What’s the best protocol for remedying this violation? I presume it's retroactively benching one of his violating starters? But which one? I can think of two options: (a) bench his most recently activated starter – i.e., reverse the lineup move that actually caused the violation, or (b) bench the highest scoring player among his violating starters - i.e., the highest scoring RB or WR/TE.

I see legit arguments for each. “(a)” is simple and logical, though it doesn’t establish much of a punitive deterrent for this sort of screw up. On the other hand, “(b)” would present plenty of deterrent.

How is this situation most commonly handled? (FWIW, our league is operated on the CBS Sports website.)[bTW, if there's another forum or thread at which this question would be more suitable, please let me know.]

Although it is too late now, that is part of the problem. I am in leagues in MFL and RTsports and those sites do not allow the submission of illegal lineups (one can't exceed the designated number of starters at any position). You might want to consider switching to one of these sites next year (or one that is similar) and then you won't have to deal with this issue in the future.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

FWIW, the outcome of this particular match-up will be the same, regardless of which remedy is employed - (a) or (b). Points scored can also affect waiver wire priority and tie-breaker situations for playoff seeding.

See, this is my concern with the "be lenient this time and set a stricter rule going forward" solution. Generally I'm ok with such an approach but you can't let this guy potentially benefit from his illegal lineup. It's not necessarily "logical" to revert his roster to the last legal iteration before he submitted the illegal lineup - obviously he intended to change something. Since you don't know which actual combination of players he intended to submit as his final lineup (and since it's his responsibility to ensure his lineup is legal - and CBS Sports makes it fairly obvious when you've submitted an illegal lineup), I think you have to err on the punitive side.

 

[ponchsox]

FWIW, the outcome of this particular match-up will be the same, regardless of which remedy is employed - (a) or (b). Points scored can also affect waiver wire priority and tie-breaker situations for playoff seeding.

See, this is my concern with the "be lenient this time and set a stricter rule going forward" solution. Generally I'm ok with such an approach but you can't let this guy potentially benefit from his illegal lineup. It's not necessarily "logical" to revert his roster to the last legal iteration before he submitted the illegal lineup - obviously he intended to change something. Since you don't know which actual combination of players he intended to submit as his final lineup (and since it's his responsibility to ensure his lineup is legal - and CBS Sports makes it fairly obvious when you've submitted an illegal lineup), I think you have to err on the punitive side.

Correct, you don't know what his intentions were. Perhaps he simply forgot to bench someone. I'm curious what the last move was. Did he add Arian Foster and forgot to bench Ben Tate for example? In that case, he would have benefitted from leaving Tate in his lineup. Now I believe there has to be a penalty here.

 

[Hugonel]

Easy call because it won't affect this week's result. Go with the completely fair, but harsher, rule of benching the highest scoring player.

That also avoids the Plan B scenario where someone puts in 2 players at the same time later in the year and you can't tell which player was the most recently activated started because there are two, but only one of which results in an illegal line up.

 

[dagwood]

You guys are way too nice. Illegal lineup. He gets a zero. Guaranteed that all owners will pay attention going forward.

 

[oldmoney]

+1 on zero points for illegal lineup

Asking the commissioner to try to devine intent is unfair to both the other players and the commish too.

 

[Short Corner]

Zero points can has too much bearing on other owners (ie giving this weeks opponent an undeserved win.) We go with lowest total combination of players involved and a $25 fine ($500 league.)

 

[King of the Wolfies]

illegal lineup = zero

 

[jon_mx]

Option B all the way, whether it would have changed the outcome or not. He made a mistake, and that is a reasonable penalty. I can't see doing the zero points thing.

 

[zallen]

Thanks for all the advice. To answer some of the questions ... Our league is 16 years old; we're a league of friends; we all know each other; been on the CBS site for at least 10 years, and changing to another site just isn't an option. About half of us are relatively casual players. The guy in question is one of them, and I'm certain it was an honest (albeit careless) mistake. The CBS site does allow us to see exactly what lineup changes were made, and when. For some inexplicable reason he activated an extra WR at the same time that he switched his starting and reserve DST. I understand the forfeit argument, but I don't think the CBS site affords a means for going that route. And I don't think the league has any appetite for punishment that severe. For better or worse, the CBS site WILL allow an owner to start an illegal lineup, although the "set lineup" page DOES warn the owner of the illegality of his lineup.

 

[nickdiesel]

I believe the fairest way to do it is to drop the highest scoring player for the offending position. I do not like the the zero points rule in that it affects other areas like waiver pick up in some of my leagues and even possible tie breakeers way down the road.

the eliminating last transaction requires too much work for the commish, the easiest approach is to punish the person by saying if you submit it illegaly the highest scoring players are going to be dropped.

 

[Joe Summer]

You guys are way too nice. Illegal lineup. He gets a zero. Guaranteed that all owners will pay attention going forward. half the league will quit

But then again, you may prefer to play in a league that isn't any fun.

 

[dagwood]

You guys are way too nice. Illegal lineup. He gets a zero. Guaranteed that all owners will pay attention going forward. half the league will quit

But then again, you may prefer to play in a league that isn't any fun.

No, but I do prefer to play in a league with owners who can count to six.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Change it to a legal lineup, but remove his highest-scoring player from the illegal one (from the positions affected), and put in his lowest-scoring player from the eligibles he didn't start. That is his penalty for starting an illegal lineup.

 

[mcintyre1]

You guys are way too nice. Illegal lineup. He gets a zero. Guaranteed that all owners will pay attention going forward. half the league will quit

But then again, you may prefer to play in a league that isn't any fun.

All of my leagues are illegal lineup = zero. No one has quit for that reason that I know of.

 

[The Gator]

we do option B for the first offense, second offense and beyond is a forfeit

 

[dagwood]

You guys are way too nice. Illegal lineup. He gets a zero. Guaranteed that all owners will pay attention going forward. half the league will quit

But then again, you may prefer to play in a league that isn't any fun.

All of my leagues are illegal lineup = zero. No one has quit for that reason that I know of.

Are you really going to be upset if you lose an owner over this? Do you want owners who don't think its important to enter a legal lineup? We are setting the bar pretty low when we just expect you to be able to enter a legal lineup.

 

[Joe Summer]

You guys are way too nice. Illegal lineup. He gets a zero. Guaranteed that all owners will pay attention going forward. half the league will quit

But then again, you may prefer to play in a league that isn't any fun.

All of my leagues are illegal lineup = zero. No one has quit for that reason that I know of.

Are you really going to be upset if you lose an owner over this? Do you want owners who don't think its important to enter a legal lineup? We are setting the bar pretty low when we just expect you to be able to enter a legal lineup.

You know who else had a zero tolerance policy about fantasy lineups? Hitler.

 

[kardplayer]

I would go with b) - take out the highest scorer amongst his starters. Then put a rule in that that is the way you will handle going forward too. It's a little harsh, but not unreasonable. A much better solution than backing out his last move IMHO.

CBS can be setup to have illegal lineups = 0, so he (and others) could make a reasonable argument that the league "rules" as defined on the website don't allow you to go to 0.

 

[Short Corner]

You guys are way too nice. Illegal lineup. He gets a zero. Guaranteed that all owners will pay attention going forward. half the league will quit

But then again, you may prefer to play in a league that isn't any fun.

All of my leagues are illegal lineup = zero. No one has quit for that reason that I know of.

Wait until someone misses the playoffs because another owner got a freebie via an illegal lineup forfeit.

 

[houndirish]

Our rules stipulate that an illegal roster automatically reverts back to the previous week's starting lineup. No consideration is given for a player who is no longer on your roster. So if you started Tony Romo in week 1 and dropped him (don't sweat the example) you wouldn't get his points in week 2. Similarly, you wouldn't reap the benefit of any players you picked up in that week's waivers. You also would be given no bye week consideration. This is a dynasty IDP league with 15 weekly starting players so it's uncommon for teams to have the exact same lineup every week. Lastly, offending owners also get hit with a fine (fictional league currency). It's not a huge figure but it does at least ensure there will be some penalty incurred to an offender.

Could the offending team still win under those conditions? Sure he could. Should he be allowed to? My feeling is yes. Illegal lineups are not equivalent to purposeful cheating. People make mistakes. It happens.

In 6 years we've had two instances of illegal lineups. In one of those cases, the owner actually shorted himself (forgot to start a tight end). He lost that game both with the lineup he submitted and the replacement one.

 

[zallen]

We have 2 co-commissioners, and I'm not one of them. I think I'm going to lobby for for option (b), especially since it won't cost this guy his win this week. I'm thinking that, if we can use this as an opportunity to set the precedent for the harsher penalty, while still allowing the offender to keep his win in this instance, that's sort of a win-win situation. That'll be my argument anyway. But our guys tend to be softies, which is ironic since half of our owners are lawyers, myself included.

 

[Bri]

last legal lineup, so his week 1 one.

 

[footballnerd]

revert to the lineup from the previous week, just as if the site blocked the line up change from happening.

btw I would contact CBS to have something installed that blocks illegal line up changes from occuring like how MFL has.

 

[Prinefan]

May sound like a hardacre here but I think it's a goose-egg.

 

[aardball44]

"Illegal roster, that's a paddlin'..."

 

[aardball44]

May sound like a hardacre here but I think it's a goose-egg.

This.

 

[Pipes]

revert to the lineup from the previous week, just as if the site blocked the line up change from happening. btw I would contact CBS to have something installed that blocks illegal line up changes from occuring like how MFL has.

This

 

[RUSF18]

Why would a site like CBS even allow illegal lineups to be submitted? Yahoo doesn't, FYI.

 

[pittstownkiller]

Giving him zero could adversely effect (to his benefit) his standing in the waiver-wire, or even next year's draft; go with last week's line-up.