That shouldn't have been vetoed. If you have reason to suspect collusion or if the trade is so unbalanced that you have reason to suspect collusion are the only real reasons.

A couple of years ago my league vetoed a trade because I included Dez instead of Megatron. I had originally offered Mega because I thought the name carried more weight, but the guy wanted Dez more. I chewed out everybody in the league for abusing the veto function, and they let it through. They tried to argue that they blocked the trade because they thought it made my team too strong. Which is bullshite. It turns out that I would have made it to the championship game if I had kept Dez because he blew up the last few weeks of the season. You never know what's going to happen. That's why you don't block trades just because you don't like them.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by zsav77

Member since Oct 2011

6069 posts

Posted on 9/6/16 at 8:06 am to Peazey

Exactly. That's what the guy who was receiving Stewart told the guy who was pushing for the veto. No collusion involved, no crazy unbalanced trade.

After it was vetoed, they argued in texts for a while until the guy whose trade got vetoed told the other guy "you know I would never veto a trade like that if you were the one receiving it". The guy who wanted the veto reluctantly agreed.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Mr. Hangover

New Orleans

Member since Sep 2003

34521 posts

Posted on 9/6/16 at 9:07 am to Peazey

quote:
They tried to argue that they blocked the trade because they thought it made my team too strong.

this is the worst reason to veto a trade IMO... if it's a fair deal, that's all that should matter.. someone tried to pull this BS one year in my league and i wasn't even involved in the trade and i spoke my mind heavily in the group text