This thread should have ended with this, the first response.
rcarena wrote:Were you guys colluding? No? Then the deal should stand.
I don't get leagues that veto trades b/c other managers don't like them. None of their business.
Amen. Every manager has their reasons for accepting a trade, even if they are based on overly optimistic projections about a player's performance. Hell, even if they are based on sheer stupidity or irrationality, there is absolutely no reason a trade should be vetoed unless it can be proven that the owners were colluding. No one has a problem when a stupid manager drops a player that shouldn't be dropped (probably because they have the possibility of benefiting from that owners stupidity). They only have a problem with stupid moves when they don't serve their own self-interests. Absolutely ridiculous. You should have your commish read all the posts here.