Ask The Commish: Do I Call Out Person Lying About a Trade Glitch?

By Reginald James
Reginald James

Two guys made a trade. Our trades go through, I get the call to reject in case of collusion. There are no league vetoes. The next day, I get a text from one of them complaining about a trade “glitch” and he wanted me to reverse it. He said the wrong player was selected, that he wasn’t expecting the player to be different on the board when he quickly hit accept. He didn’t realize the mistake until after. I instantly called bullshit. I was going to say no right back, but I didn’t say that, but I told him I’d look into it. The other guy showed me the texts of the two of them talking about the deal. So yeah, of course the other guy was lying. He totally confirmed the trade for the exact player that he asked for.


I told him the trade would stand and I wasn’t going to reverse it. I didn’t tell him that I had proof he was lying. I hate that he tried to get away with something like that, and personally that they thought I was going to be played like some kind of chump. So yeah I’m still pretty angry about it. I want to be cool about it, but I’m taking this kinda personally. Should I call him out publicly, make an announcement to the league about it, that I won’t accept this type of stuff again? I personally would like to do that but this is a new league, and I don’t want to come off as a jerk, and cause any other issues. I follow your work and you say that a new commissioner has to set the bar or expectations at the beginning so that’s another reason I feel I should publicly say something plus I’m pissed.



Yes, this episode needs to be addressed. You can’t let it pass just yet. The question is how you go about it. You do need to let the liar know, that you know, they lied. You absolutely, definitely, need to call them out on that. If it’s okay with the other guy, I’d show him the text pics. You can do that privately. I think you should, even though as an act of retribution, it might feel good to call him out publicly. I would also plan to replace this person next year.


I then would make a general announcement to the league about the topic, that once trades are accepted by both parties they will stand. You don’t have to mention names or reference any specific trades. Maybe the two of them kept it to themselves, and maybe no one else knows besides you. I doubt the liar went and told other members he lied and tried to pull a fast one to get out of the trade. However now, just in case there’s some other lying dope in your league, they just got the message too. You could also mix this announcement in with other comments or reminders (e.g., “Make sure players have the right designation for the IR slots!”  Then the whole communication becomes more of a general letter to the league.


Lastly, I would be sure to add specific language to the rules regarding trades in the off-season. You shouldn’t have to do that, but you shouldn’t have some bozo thinking they could get a trade flipped in that way either. If it’s written down, no one can say anything, so just go ahead and lock it in.



I’m allowing a player in my league to play Taysom Hill in either the QB or TE position. He can be played as both in our league. I’m getting grief by some, not all, that I am. They’re bugging me to make the decision as commissioner to require one position or the other, really as QB. I’m not going to do that, and I’m standing my ground. As long as he has both positions for him, then he should be allowed to be rostered in that way. What do you think?


Stand your ground. (1) I think a player should be playable at whatever designation they have, and (2), changing a rule, or in this case, position designations after the season has started, are a big no-no and shouldn’t be done. Sometimes there are exceptions, but this in my opinion, would’t be one of them.


The only thing I would say, is if you were ever inclined as a commissioner to make a decision like that - specfically to neuter a dual designation, no matter the player, then it would be something that should be decided before the season starts, and before the draft. Then, everyone knows what the deal is from the very start. Whether they like the decision or not, is not as important as you locking in what’s expected at the very beginning. Everyone will be operating under the same rules. For example, if you made the decision to lock in Taysom Hill as quarterback before your league drafted, then folks would then get to decide if he was worth drafting as a quarterback. Everyone would know they couldn’t take advantage of the dual designation from the jump.



Send your questions to The Commish: