There have been so many posts on the topic of the all powerful veto. I think the whole notion of a veto is nonsense, and while this is only a post that expresses my opinion it has some practical application, and I think it's something to think about.
While a veto option might be a necessary option in a public league, (as collusion could be a problem) it is NOT necessary in leagues that are filled with Cafe members and the like.
If you play in a league with knowledgable members that know what they are doing and respect the game, vetos are not necessary. All of those who are at the cafe clearly like a good challenge and most of us play in some sort of Cafe league as well.
I'd imagine that all of you who play in cafe leagues have some sort of veto option, right? The question is: Why? Is it really necessary? Everyone says it's just a fail safe for collusion, but if you are playing in a league with a bunch of cafe members, then if one of them cheated they would be ostracized in these forums. I think the situation naturally polices itself.
The veto is a tool that was implemented for extreme abuses of the system. I can understand its application in public leagues, but in leauges that we play in it is just silly. The veto has morphed into something that it wasn't meant for. People now use it just to block other peoples trades. It decreases the challenge and it's really a horrible thing to do.
Bottom line, just play in leagues with Cafe members that know what they are doing and you respect and think will be good competiton. That, in turn, will promote better leagues and everyone will be happy.
I intend to commish a league next year (or maybe even a mid-season) that has NO veto option. I think the veto has been abused, and I think that any good cafe dominated league does not need the veto. Any perspective cheaters will be scorned in these forums, and that in and of itself is enough of a deterrent to not collude.
Moral of this story: Anyone who has the ability to click the mouse has the ability to make their own decision on their team. It's none of your business if you think it's horrible trade, end of story. Run your own team, not theirs.
I'd like to see a system where the commissioner has the only veto right and it is clearly stated that it can only be used when/if he sees a pattern of colusion. In MLB, teams don't get to vote on trades, only the Commish. Trades involving the commisioner, should be subject to a veto vote, however.
I'm currently in a league where the commish controls vetos. That's all fine and good, but I just don't think it is necessary. Why does there need to be an option for vetos if you are playing in a league with people you know personally or from these boards? I know that if anyone of them colluded, they would be scorned and therefore there doesn't need to be a failsafe for collusion. I just think that vetos have gotten out of hand, and they should be done away with in leagues that are among people who know each other in some way. Fill yourself in leagues with people that you know won't cheat and you will be better off anyway.
thehat wrote:I understand the need for protection in money leagues where there could be collusion, but that's it.
You beat me to the punch. If there's money involved, there's got to be a veto... Cafe or not.
Abuses are just as rampant in money leagues. Honestly, people are more prone to resort to slimy tactics to win. I understand this sentiment, however, and perhaps vetos could be voted on by outsided sources not within the league. I play in a money league with friends and we have no veto process. We are friends and we trust each other. I understand needing a veto in a money league, but I just don't play in money leagues unless I personally know the people involved.
Amazinz commishes a league I'm in where trades go through automatically, with no review. If, however, it is collusional, he still has the option of reversing a trade (as commish has lineup control). So basically, no vetoing, unless commish thinks it's important enough to go out of his way to fix it, in which case he has stated he will first contact both parties and ask for their reasoning behind a trade. Commish trades are subject to veto votes, however.
That's about as anti-veto a policy can get, I think. And it works well (so far at least)
Major League Manager
Joined: 2 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: my home is in NYC, my heart is in PNC Park