Out of my 8 years of playing in Yahoo public leagues, this is the first time I've ever run into the dreaded veto.
(And yes, I know that some of you will say "This is what you get for playing in public leagues." I know...but I have at least 1 PL team per year because of tradition.)
I'm a big believer in watching all of the other owners in the league and seeing who makes the most moves in the first week. It tells me that owner isn't happy with their team. Then I swoop in and see if there is anyone they have that I can buy low on.
I find one such owner and see that his starting pitching isn't anything great (Peavy and Schmidt, but then Olsen, Maddux, and Hudson). Meanwhile, I have a TON of SP (Halladay, Felix, Sheets, Harden). I'm looking for a bat and maybe some steals. I'm also looking to clear out a few guys from my bench so I can pick up a few players from the WW. I offer:
I GET: Lance Berkman, Willy Taveras (Willy is on his bench because he has Pierre)
HE GETS: Roy Halladay, Nick Markakis, JD Drew (He drops Craig Biggio)
Obviously, even with Berkman's struggles, the deal gives us both what we need. Seeing how he needed pitching and I needed hitting, is it that lopsided of a deal that it should be vetoed? I posted a message on the front page of the league asking the other members what made them veto. Currently, I'm in 3rd and the other guy is in 5th, so it's not like he's having a fire sale or anything.
I guess my question is this: Is there something I'm missing? Is my judgment off that much that I can't see that this deal is extremely lopsided? Or is this a case of other owners vetoing a deal just to spite us?