|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Feb 19, 2009 13:43:40 GMT -5
Preliminary poll for the NAFHL body to voice their opinion in the David Perron custody battle. Please provide an explanation for your vote.
Official Ruling to be handed down shortly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Robyn - Flames on Feb 19, 2009 13:59:51 GMT -5
Clearly no GM in their right mind would drop Perron from their team. I apologize for not posting immediately, and felt it wasnt necessary after seeing Perron listed on my farm team as of the same day (02/16) that I dropped him.
Nos knows Perron is listed on my farm team and yet attempts to take advantage of the situation, shocking.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Feb 19, 2009 14:13:36 GMT -5
I don't see the need for a poll when we have a rulebook in place with clear wording. It's pretty cut and dry. Robyn did not follow the rules in place, he did not declare the transaction therefore the only logical conclusion was that he dropped him outright. How can that be disputed? Directly from the rulebook...
YOU NEED TO POST A MESSAGE TO DECLARE THE TRANSACTION IS FOR ASSIGNMENT NOT RELEASING TO THE FREE AGENT.
If you don't follow the proper procedures you lose your rights. This part of the rulebook is even bolded for further clarity. Here's an excerpt from a post I wrote on Yahoo in response to Robyn...
The rulebook was drawn up for a reason. How is anyone supposed to know how you're conducting your team, where you're sending your players, who you want to keep if you don't declare it? Should we simply drop all prospect players we have and assume they're all going to the farm? What's the point in posting farm transactions at all?
The bottom line is this, I followed the rules, Robyn did not. Assumptions hold no weight.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Feb 19, 2009 14:16:47 GMT -5
Clearly no GM in their right mind would drop Perron from their team. I apologize for not posting immediately, and felt it wasnt necessary after seeing Perron listed on my farm team as of the same day (02/16) that I dropped him. Nos knows Perron is listed on my farm team and yet attempts to take advantage of the situation, shocking. You declared nothing, period. It doesn't matter that Derrick assumed you'd declare it and added him to your roster page. In the end you did not declare the transaction anywhere to be seen here or on Yahoo. You didn't post it immediately? You had days to post it, the waiver claim takes days. I would have even been fine with it had you declared it the next day, or the day after, as long as he didn't make it to free agency, which he did. He was claimed. |
|
|
|
Post by Robyn - Flames on Feb 19, 2009 14:51:03 GMT -5
he did not declare the transaction therefore the only logical conclusion was that he dropped him outright. How can that be disputed? Directly from the rulebook... Derrick was the one that made the logical conclusion in this case by adding him to my farm team. No sane GM would have any intention of dropping Perron. You're following the letter of the law and failing to consider the intention of these rules. They aren't in place to punish people for making transactional errors, they exist to ensure organization, clarity and transparancy for the league's members. Clearly when a GM makes an error like this he's not intending to bypass or circumvent the rules. You cannot argue the fact that I had no intention of dropping Perron, you're simply ignoring this fact and neglecting the most important aspect. Consider a young male, 18, gets caught having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend. By your standards he'd be labelled a sexual predator and sent to prison for the rest of this life. In reality, the judge would look pass the direct wording of the law and seek the intent of it, to protect children from harmful predators. Now please stop being the fucking weasel that you are and stop this petty complaint. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Feb 19, 2009 15:05:29 GMT -5
he did not declare the transaction therefore the only logical conclusion was that he dropped him outright. How can that be disputed? Directly from the rulebook... Derrick was the one that made the logical conclusion in this case by adding him to my farm team. No sane GM would have any intention of dropping Perron. You're following the letter of the law and failing to consider the intention of these rules. They aren't in place to punish people for making transactional errors, they exist to ensure organization, clarity and transparancy for the league's members. Clearly when a GM makes an error like this he's not intending to bypass or circumvent the rules. You cannot argue the fact that I had no intention of dropping Perron, you're simply ignoring this fact and neglecting the most important aspect. Consider a young male, 18, gets caught having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend. By your standards he'd be labelled a sexual predator and sent to prison for the rest of this life. In reality, the judge would look pass the direct wording of the law and seek the intent of it, to protect children from harmful predators. Now please stop being the fucking weasel that you are and stop this petty complaint. This means nothing to me, this is not a defense it's an excuse, and the 'sexual predator' parallel is a poor one. This is a fantasy hockey league. Sure, Derrick made the logical choice to add him to your roster page but this does not exempt you from not following procedure. How are we supposed to know what's what when GM's neglect to confirm and declare transactions? If this ruling goes in your favor that's just telling the whole league to stop announcing farm transactions because Robyn got away with it. Say someone drops a borderline prospect and somebody claims him, that manager can then say "Oh, he was obviously going to the farm ala the Robyn clause." That's even if the manager originally thought of outright dropping him, but since he sees there's interest in this prospect he'll claim foul and say "Hey you can't steal him from me! I wanted him on my farm!" That's the precedence this is setting. That's not how it works. Be clear and concise with your transactions and you won't have a problem. You made a mistake, learn from it and move on. |
|
|
|
Post by Robyn - Flames on Feb 19, 2009 15:32:35 GMT -5
This means nothing to me, this is not a defense and the 'sexual predator' parallel is a poor one, this is a fantasy hockey league. It wasn't intended as a parallel, merely a simple example of the point I was making. This is a fantasy hockey league. How are we supposed to know what's what when GM's neglect to confirm and declare transactions? Agreed, and I've apologized for my error. You're suggesting I neglected to confirm the transaction when asked, which is not the case. If this ruling goes in your favor that's just telling the whole league to stop announcing farm transactions because Robyn got away with it. Say someone drops a borderline prospect and somebody claims him, that manager can then say "Oh, he was obviously going to the farm ala the Robyn clause." That's even if the manager originally thought of outright dropping him, but since he sees there's interest in this prospect he'll claim foul and say "Hey you can steal him from me! I wanted him on my farm!" That's the precedence this is setting. Are you suggesting that a GM would attempt to take advantage of a loophole in the rules to negatively impact another team? In the future, if any GM attempts to use the 'Robyn Clause' to take advantage of your players, simply refer to this: Now please stop being the fucking weasel that you are and stop this petty complaint. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Feb 19, 2009 16:28:33 GMT -5
Agreed, and I've apologized for my error. You're suggesting I neglected to confirm the transaction when asked, which is not the case. I'm not suggesting anything like that. Should we all ask each other when players are dropped if said player is actually being dropped or is being sent to the farm? No, we shouldn't have to do that. You should take the initiative to declare what you're doing to the league. Furthermore, if we did implement 'asking' it's a no win situation for the manager asking and a free pass for the other manager to be lazy. You admit to being wrong yet still believe the player is rightfully yours. Why? If you retain the rights for being negligent I would be negatively impacted by losing my #6 waiver priority. Is that fair? I did nothing wrong. I followed the rules, I was under the impression you simply dropped David Perron and I can't see why I would think anything otherwise. Should I be assuming? Are you suggesting that a GM would attempt to take advantage of a loophole in the rules to negatively impact another team? A manager not using every means possible to improve his team is a manager who isn't trying hard enough. |
|
|
|
Post by Robyn - Flames on Feb 19, 2009 16:48:24 GMT -5
It's too bad only God himself can put the waiver priority back into its proper sequence.
Also, stop trying so hard.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Feb 20, 2009 1:28:46 GMT -5
Thanks for the overwhelming amount of league feedback. I'll see if i can't sift through it all and see what the consensus is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark - Bruins on Feb 20, 2009 11:37:12 GMT -5
you're welcome, commish!
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil - Blue Jackets on Feb 21, 2009 8:25:22 GMT -5
Nos is right and Robyn is lazy and wrong. This was the whole point behind signing Voracek a couple weeks ago. Apparently, my words were not heeded.
The ruling is crap. Nothing is ambiguous in the rules. Posts need to be made regarding Farm Transactions. We even have special sections of our team pages for those. This is dumb and I'm tired so, that is all.
Phil for Prezodint
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Capitals on Feb 21, 2009 17:25:26 GMT -5
Been outta town for a few days on Vacation in Gaitlinburg TN. 1st ive been able to check on all this...If I'm catching everything right then its pretty straight forward by the rules. Perron goes to Nos
|
|
So exciting.
You better make that pick or trade it! I'm excited to see if we can use up all the draft picks this year.