What is the right move? (1 Viewer)

[rikishiboy]

Let me start by saying I am the commish.

Background-- Owner discovers a player is not eligible to play a position according to league rules. Owner thinks rule is stupid and protestsby saying he will no longer play anyone at that position until said player is eligible. Owner has another option on his team to play that position.

My feeling -- I view this as minor tanking ( only 1 position I know, but the principal is the same if it was the whole team) and so I put his other eligible player in his lineup, because I felt it was the right thing to do. It is not fair for some owners to play a weakened team in this situation.

League Response -- Some in the league feel I did the wrong thing and should just let the owner have his little protest.

My compromise-- I said for this week my decision stands, but if the owner decides to go through with his protest I will allow it next week and beyond.

Still disagreements-- So anyway some still say I should have never altered his lineup. What would you do?

 

[pollardsvision]

I'd be inclined to make him field a full lineup and be sure the league understood my reasons. If a good number in the league had a big problem with that, I'd let it go and let the guy protest.

I'm guessing there's a good chance the guy's team really isn't much worse without a player at this position (since he's so adamant about getting someone else to qualify there).

 

[ditka...mike ditka]

who is the player and what position is he trying to play him at?

 

[Wrigley]

Isn't it fun being the commish?

Let him have his little protest........the only one he's hurting is himself.

 

[Oh Yes!]

what if the guy you put in goes 0-19 that week?

 

[Captain Hook]

1) Either the league has a rule or it doesn't

2) If the rule is clear and everyone else is aware and playing by it, the Commish must enforce this rule (and all rules so if some disagree you must say ALL rules must be followed and enforced)

Really this sounds pretty silly - is it a brand new league? Does the league have rules.......................if so you can ask the owner (who is being a childish ars) and others Why?

BUT you should not have changed his lineup - you should have talked to him, gone through the rule and told HIM to make the change.

You say some are disagreeing? Goes back to #1 - leagues need clearly defined rules - when they have them and have agreed to them, no one should have a problem with them being enforced.

 

[daddo39]

Let me start by saying I am the commish.Background-- Owner discovers a player is not eligible to play a position according to league rules. Owner thinks rule is stupid and protestsby saying he will no longer play anyone at that position until said player is eligible. Owner has another option on his team to play that position.My feeling -- I view this as minor tanking ( only 1 position I know, but the principal is the same if it was the whole team) and so I put his other eligible player in his lineup, because I felt it was the right thing to do. It is not fair for some owners to play a weakened team in this situation.League Response -- Some in the league feel I did the wrong thing and should just let the owner have his little protest.My compromise-- I said for this week my decision stands, but if the owner decides to go through with his protest I will allow it next week and beyond.Still disagreements-- So anyway some still say I should have never altered his lineup. What would you do?

In all the roto leagues i'm in you must field a full lineup. I think you did the right thing.