11-04-2021, 09:03 AMJayWhy Wrote: This is blatant favoritism and it is absolutely disgusting to me. There has NEVER been something so cut and dry. The rules say this isn't allowed, any time this has happened before and gotten approved, the teams were forced to renegotiate. Yet now this time because it's a new guy in Toronto that you guys like, oh well let's not make it their fault. Let's reframe it to fuck over the new guy in Winnipeg, but ignore the new guy in Toronto's culpability.

This is the most ridiculous decision that could have been made. This ignores all precedent because you like one person more. What do I have to do to be allowed to make illegal trades? Make you cookies? Be shit at my job and go "i made a fucky wucky?" Horseshit. Absolute fucking horseshit.

I get it, Luke was the backbone of the HO and you'rea fucking coward who doesn't want people mad at you. But you've been in this role long enough to be able to fucking enforce the rules, and if you refuse to do so based on the very clear precedent, then you're failing at your job and spitting in our fucking faces.

11-04-2021, 10:03 AMRotticusScott Wrote:

11-04-2021, 09:03 AMJayWhy Wrote: This is blatant favoritism and it is absolutely disgusting to me. There has NEVER been something so cut and dry. The rules say this isn't allowed, any time this has happened before and gotten approved, the teams were forced to renegotiate. Yet now this time because it's a new guy in Toronto that you guys like, oh well let's not make it their fault. Let's reframe it to fuck over the new guy in Winnipeg, but ignore the new guy in Toronto's culpability.

This is the most ridiculous decision that could have been made. This ignores all precedent because you like one person more. What do I have to do to be allowed to make illegal trades? Make you cookies? Be shit at my job and go "i made a fucky wucky?" Horseshit. Absolute fucking horseshit.

I get it, Luke was the backbone of the HO and you'rea fucking coward who doesn't want people mad at you. But you've been in this role long enough to be able to fucking enforce the rules, and if you refuse to do so based on the very clear precedent, then you're failing at your job and spitting in our fucking faces.

lol complaining about favoritism while sucking off your former co-gm and calling the current commissioner a coward.

11-04-2021, 09:49 AMsköldpaddor Wrote:

11-04-2021, 09:44 AMRomanesEuntDomus Wrote: I'm not sure which aspect of the rulebook you are referring to exactly, maybe you can quote it here. But if a trade is deemed "illegal" for breaking the retention rules, isn't it technically irrelevant which team was the one trading away the player and which one took him on. Aren't both to blame here both because the rulebook doesn't specify in which direction a punishment is to be levied, and because both teams did get an advantage out of the illegal trade (Team A gets to pay less salary, Team B got higher trade value for their player because of the lower cap hit)?

Well that's my point - it's not in the rulebook. There's nothing to quote because there is no rule about punishing the receiving party for an asset that was illegally traded. There are some punishments specified for other types of illegal trades, though, and I think that is where you reasonably have to start here (even though like you said, and as I have mentioned in another post, I don't think this is exactly the same thing as trading a pick one does not possess due to the seemingly irrevocable nature of the trade).

Extrapolating from the "no trading picks you don't have" rule and making a judgment here seems like the right call to me (although I think there would have been grounds for a harsher punishment here using that as a starting point). But I don't think you can just say "okay we're going to start issuing punishments to both sides of illegal trades now even though we've never done that for any other illegal trade in the past"

11-04-2021, 10:03 AMRotticusScott Wrote:

11-04-2021, 09:03 AMJayWhy Wrote: This is blatant favoritism and it is absolutely disgusting to me. There has NEVER been something so cut and dry. The rules say this isn't allowed, any time this has happened before and gotten approved, the teams were forced to renegotiate. Yet now this time because it's a new guy in Toronto that you guys like, oh well let's not make it their fault. Let's reframe it to fuck over the new guy in Winnipeg, but ignore the new guy in Toronto's culpability.

This is the most ridiculous decision that could have been made. This ignores all precedent because you like one person more. What do I have to do to be allowed to make illegal trades? Make you cookies? Be shit at my job and go "i made a fucky wucky?" Horseshit. Absolute fucking horseshit.

I get it, Luke was the backbone of the HO and you'rea fucking coward who doesn't want people mad at you. But you've been in this role long enough to be able to fucking enforce the rules, and if you refuse to do so based on the very clear precedent, then you're failing at your job and spitting in our fucking faces.

lol complaining about favoritism while sucking off your former co-gm and calling the current commissioner a coward.

11-04-2021, 10:09 AMBuster Wrote:

11-04-2021, 10:03 AMRotticusScott Wrote: lol complaining about favoritism while sucking off your former co-gm and calling the current commissioner a coward.

https://simulationhockey.com/showthread.php?tid=118539

After this thread, you might want to sit this one out buddy.

11-04-2021, 10:14 AMRotticusScott Wrote:

11-04-2021, 10:09 AMBuster Wrote: https://simulationhockey.com/showthread.php?tid=118539

After this thread, you might want to sit this one out buddy.

The thread where we lost 2 out of the three draft picks because of the punishments HO handed down to us? Good one Buster!!

11-04-2021, 10:10 AMEvok Wrote: Where the part that a second infraction of this rule will result in the GM being fired? If infidel got it for the error of past gm, i don't see why its not included here @nour

Are we already out of the rulebook is law phase? Didnt last a second ...

11-04-2021, 10:16 AMBuster Wrote:

11-04-2021, 10:14 AMRotticusScott Wrote: The thread where we lost 2 out of the three draft picks because of the punishments HO handed down to us? Good one Buster!!

You’re not really that good at the whole arguing thing. That energy is better served somewhere else

11-04-2021, 10:18 AMRotticusScott Wrote:

11-04-2021, 10:16 AMBuster Wrote: You’re not really that good at the whole arguing thing. That energy is better served somewhere else

do u have any suggestions

11-04-2021, 10:19 AMBuster Wrote:

11-04-2021, 10:18 AMRotticusScott Wrote: do u have any suggestions

Yeah eat your own ass

11-04-2021, 10:20 AMslothfacekilla Wrote: I would like to applaud HO for bringing in the real life NHL punishment system where they spin a wheel to decide the punishment and no one knows what to expect.  This kind of realism is what makes this a premier sim league.

11-04-2021, 10:23 AMsköldpaddor Wrote: I feel like in the future we should have two threads for every HO decision - one for people who seriously want to discuss the merits and shortcomings of the decision, and one for the people who just want to call each other names. Just preemptively create a "Punishment X Official TD Thread" in the thunderdome as soon as you post the decision