Commissioner Error looking for a fair solution

[talan37]

Here is the situation:
Auction keeper league(keep 1 year at what you paid then blind bidding that you can match or not on anyone held more than a year).

Our free agent selection process during this season is as such:
Any owner can "elect" any number of free agents to be bid on during mon-thursday. Bids must be placed by sunday morning, and sunday afternoon they are tallied and whoever has the highest bids gets the players. Players not won remain "available" to be bid on. You can elect any minor/major leaguer. The elections are posted to a board, and every week the remaining pool of "available" players is posted.
Everyone gets 100$ FAA money for the season.

Because you can elect a player from minor or major leagues, not all players are in our actual sites system but the bids themselves go through the site. What this means is if you wish to elect someone who isn't in the system you need to specificy a write-in candidate that noone would want. People place bids on the write-in, and whoever wins gets a "write-in" on there team. When the player reaches the majors there official database entry is added to the owners team and the write-in removed by the commissioner.

The problem: This process was done for Clay Buchholz before he reached the majors. Bidding went according to rules and his write-in was placed on owner A's roster at 6$. By the time buchholz was added to the database owner A was out of contention, so while he was still updating his lineup, he wasn't paying an enormous amount of attention. Thus he never noticed that the actual database entry was never added to his team and he remained with the write-in for the rest of the season.(the commissioner forgot) This wouldn't be an issue except in the last bidding period of the season Owner B bid on the existing database entry of Clay Buchholz not knowing that he had been taken. Buchholz was then added to Owner B's team as well.

Obviously the Commissioner screwed up(not me) but he is fair and is trying to figure out the best solution. His proposed solution is that Buchholz remains on Owner A's team at 6$, and player B is allowed to select another free agent that was available at the time(had been elected) for 1$. Does this seem like the most equitable solution?

[Matthias]

Yes.

Although if you want the benefit of how the law thinks about it (I'm taking the Bar on Tuesday and am just going nuts) Owner B, without knowledge of Buchholz being taken, and without Owner A properly recording that he had already won Buchholz, would win. It encourages owners to stay on the ball.

I might do it your suggested way in this instance and then let everyone know that it would be done the other way from now on.

[talan37]

Well, Owner A did have the write-in, which "counts". We have a very open bidding system so people can't "sneak" guys on to there roster for way below value, instead this creates a bidding process for valuable guys.

It was not the owners fault but the commissioners fault that he wasn't moved over. While the owner could "remind" him to do it, he is not required to do so, the onus is on the commissioner.

[Bloody Sox]

Yes - I agree with your solution. Player A should not have to keep track of that situation. It would be nice if he did, but its not his obligation. Too bad for Player B - anything he gets as a benefit is a bonus.

[talan37]

The issue was resolved. Owner B was content with taking another free agent.(johnny cueto)