Should The Commissioner "Correct" For This Instance Of Tanking?

[FantasyFreak]

I voted "No," but that was before I carefully read through the options.

The tanking owner asked the commish, and although not in plain English, was essentially given permission by the commish to do what he/she did. The tanking owner should get a talking to about the spirit of tanking, but he/she didn't do anything actually wrong since to this point there are no anti-tanking rules AND he/she ran it by the commissioner.

The commish is who is in the wrong here. You should have strict anti-tanking rules in place, and even if you don't, his response was lazy and did not in any way discourage the tanking owner from tanking.

You should proceed with the current draft order, but implement an anti-tanking rule to be effective from here on out.

My favorite anti-tanking measure is PP (possible points).

I am curious though, what if the owner did not run it by the commish at all? There still aren't any anti-tanking rules, but if he/she did not run it by the commish, then would it be OK to change the draft order? Just wondering.

This needs to be determined on a case by case basis.

[_yeti]

You got some issues, Turco, I think you need some counseling
To help your a** from bouncing off the walls when you get down some

I hope you get to read this letter, I just hope it reaches you in time
Before you hurt yourself, I think that you'll be doin' just fine
If you relax a little, I'm glad I inspire you, but Turco
Why are you so mad? Try to understand, that we do want you as a fan
I just don't want you to do some crazy s**
I seen this one s** on the forum a couple weeks ago that made me sick

[turcorox911]

I voted "No," but that was before I carefully read through the options.

The tanking owner asked the commish, and although not in plain English, was essentially given permission by the commish to do what he/she did. The tanking owner should get a talking to about the spirit of tanking, but he/she didn't do anything actually wrong since to this point there are no anti-tanking rules AND he/she ran it by the commissioner.

The commish is who is in the wrong here. You should have strict anti-tanking rules in place, and even if you don't, his response was lazy and did not in any way discourage the tanking owner from tanking.

You should proceed with the current draft order, but implement an anti-tanking rule to be effective from here on out.

My favorite anti-tanking measure is PP (possible points).

I am curious though, what if the owner did not run it by the commish at all? There still aren't any anti-tanking rules, but if he/she did not run it by the commish, then would it be OK to change the draft order? Just wondering.

This needs to be determined on a case by case basis.

That's fair. I think a warning for the first infraction is a good procedure to follow. I don't think it's obvious NOT to tank or deliberately lose games, because I have played in leagues where it is fine. Everyone has different values and experiences, so a warning is probably a good first step, followed by clearly writing anti-tanking rules out.

[turcorox911]

You got some issues, Turco, I think you need some counseling
To help your a** from bouncing off the walls when you get down some

I hope you get to read this letter, I just hope it reaches you in time
Before you hurt yourself, I think that you'll be doin' just fine
If you relax a little, I'm glad I inspire you, but Turco
Why are you so mad? Try to understand, that we do want you as a fan
I just don't want you to do some crazy s**
I seen this one s** on the forum a couple weeks ago that made me sick

Just saw this now. Thanks man. School has been keeping me busy. How you doing in fantasy? You got any good rookies this year? What you think of Amari to the Cowboys?

[turcorox911]

Tanking comes up here periodically and rather than go down the road of the "tanking vs. no tanking" argument is pointless as you are going to get 2 positions: a) it is a "strategy" and b) it is completely wrong. I am on the side of "b" and it is generally easy to prove (unlike collusion) and leagues where I've commissioned I would issue one warning. After that they get the boot.

Your situation, however, is not a "tanking vs. no tanking" one, it is rather than the commissioner screwed up (your first full paragraph). He gave that owner carte blanche to whatever he wanted to with his lineup, including starting inactive players. There is nothing that should be done to this owner as he followed the direction of the commissioner. It is a horrible precedent (not to mention a bad commissioner). Moving forward if the league wants to prevent tanking you need rules about the very things he was waffling about.

So do you think tanking is so wrong that you don't even need rules prohibiting it?
Is it so wrong that it should be understood that owners are simply just not allowed to do it?

[FantasyFreak]

Bumped 3 times in a row, it hasn't been touched in 3 months, now he's responding to the 3rd post in a 4 page thread? Time to lock it, IMO.