Would Yahoo Veto This Beltre Deal? WHIR

[sigriffey]

Our league is set up where if someone lodges a protest then an extra 24 hours are tacked onto the processing time as Yahoo reviews everything to determine whether or not to veto. So I noticed after making this deal that the process time shifted from Saturday to Sunday. Do you guys see Yahoo vetoing this? They recently vetoed my bid to deal Crawford for Jeter (which was ridiculous IMO but likely due to injury concerns regarding Crawford). It's worth nothing that Beltre is not keeper eligible, though I'm sure the protestor conveniently doesn't mention that.

This was the deal that was accepted:

Sending: Rasmus and Moustakas
Receiving: Adrian Beltre

12 Team H2H DAILY LEAGUE with 6 Keepers Season to Season, each for 3 years max. * means a keeper entering this season
Stat Categories: R, 1B, 2B, 3B, HR, RBI, SB, BB, AVG -- IP, CG, W, L, ER, ERA, K, SV, WHIP

MY CURRENT TEAM

C Salvador Perez
1B Prince Fielder*
2B Jose Altuve
3B Miguel Cabrera*
SS Hanley Ramirez*
OF Ryan Braun*
OF Jacoby Ellsbury
OF Adrian Gonzalez
UT David Ortiz
UT Colby Rasmus
UT Mike Moustakas
BN Mike Napoli
BN Emilio Bonifacio
BN Carl Crawford
DL Giancarlo Stanton
DL Dustin Pedroia (Returning 7/19 - need to drop someone or clear a roster spot via trade)

SP Clayton Kershaw
SP Cole Hamels
SP Roy Halladay
RP Craig Kimbrel
RP Aroldis Chapman
P CC Sabathia
P Zack Greinke
P Chris Sale
BN Tommy Hanson
BN Tim Lincecum

[pjtroy34]

My god, if they vetoed the Crawford for Jeter deal then every deal is fair game to be criticized.
This one is a classic win now for win later so I think it's legit, but who knows what those dorks will think.

Side note, sounds like you need to find a new league if people are protesting these deals.

Mine please?
viewtopic.php?t=450689

[WaCougMBS]

sounds like you need to find a new league if people are protesting these deals.

[snash]

sounds like you need to find a new league if people are protesting these deals.

[chowder]

That's ridiculous...vetos are unfortunately sometimes used only to make sure other teams do not get better rather than for their intended purpose of avoiding collusion. I hate when the vetos happen only because the person voting for veto is only concerned about their team possibly losing.

Please help:
viewtopic.php?t=450705

[somervillesoxfan]

Thats a fair deal and should not be vetoed.

help!
viewtopic.php?f=26&t=450741#p3548809