A tough commish decision:

[stoner420]

wow this is one of the hardest things ive had to face....

last night one of the guys in my league was drunk and he signed on and proposed a bunch of trades, not really expecting any one to agree to them.

one of his trades was in fact agreed on though.

then when he woke up in the morn and saw the trade again he regretted it and wanted to take it back because he was drunk and not thinking straight.

as the commish i dont like to veto things... but in this case one of the people involved doesnt want it to go through...

i eventually decided to put it up to a league vote excluding me and both members involved. did i do the right thing? what would u do?

[great gretzky]

NO -- YOU are responsible for your actions. If he is going to treat the league that flippantly, why should you save him from himself?

[John Bonzo]

You are responsible for what you do when you are drunk because you made the decision to drink and get drunk.

That said, i think that a league vote was a good decision (though i dont see why you couldnt vote in it too).

What exactly was the trade?

I personally would vote that the trade stands.

[Dawgpound 1613]

Putting it up to a league vote seems like a good idea. If it is too lopsided, they'll likely veto - why let a league-mate take advantage?

If not, and they buy the "I was drunk" story - then they can decide to let the guy off. If they don't, then his tough luck. Obviously the other team liked the deal, so why should he be disadvantaged because the other guy changed his mind? Buyer's remorse sucks - but sometimes you have to deal with it.

But, again, I think you made the right call - let the league decide.

[stoner420]

the drunk kid traded klesko and schilling for dunn and s. green...


its a pts league so dunn kinda sucks due to his k's... its a pretty unfair trade, not horrible... but pretty lopsided in my mind

[stoner420]

what i ended up doing was have each member of the trade make a post that argued their side of the debate. now each member needs to come on and vote about it...

im not going to vota A because i really am not sure which side id vote on

and b so that there is no possible tie in votes

[ensanimal]

this happened in one of my leagues as well. i fgure the trade has to go through. TUI (Trading Under the Influence, thanks to whoever it was ) is not a valid reason to reject a trade.

if this gets vetoed, what is to stop another owner from making a trade, the next day seeing he doesn't like the trade as much anymore, and then coming back with this same story.

[great gretzky]

the drunk kid got a pretty good deal IMO.

Basically got green and dunn for schilling.


State of mind is not a fair reason to overturn a trade. So if someone was unuslaly angry at the time, do they get another chance?

I never overrule a trade that was offered and accepted, when the player OFFERING did so stupidly. You didn't have to do it.

[matmat]

trade should go through.

"sorry officer, I didn't mean to run over the lady, but I was drunk!"

????

[bluefire7]

them getting drunk isn't your problem.. who's to say they aren't just making an excuse from buyers remorse like dawgpound said? what happens if they get drunk again and do the same thing? i think you made a good decision in a league vote, and letting everyone else decide their fate. that said, i also believe that you should issue a warning stating that for the future, if they wanna take the fantasy baseball league seriously, then their actions are no longer protected. THERE'S NO CRYING IN (fantasy) BASEBALL!!