YIKES (AGAIN)!!! SHIFTING SANDS -- Dose #2

[STEPHENANDERSON 2]

I am going to ask one last question.... yeah right.

Since I am in not in compliance with the 24 rule by 2, I have to:

1. Drop Sisler after the AD..... and he is not available to anyone the whole year.
2. I have to get in compliance with the 24 rule, while staying in compliance with everything else.

What, if by chance, because of the letter limitations, I cannot get into compliance. Do I get the 500K penalty every series. :shock:

That would be fun

[modmark46]

I think compliance issues will become greater and greater as the season progresses. As this draft went, so will go the season, in terms of frustration and difficulty. That's my guess, and I'm sticking to it, anyway. :twisted:

[uncle ny]

[quote:88c0de7efe="spicki17"]central filled. password is: unclesux[/quote:88c0de7efe]

As if i needed more incentive to kick all of your whiny asses!

[Mr Baseball World]

At least I didn't guess the password when I was trying last night. :shock:

[uncle ny]

sir wockenfog,

I’ve happily avoided reading all of the beefing, bellyaching, ********, carping, complaining, droning, fussing, griping, grousing, grumbling, howling, kicking, mewling, moaning, sniveling, sobbing, wailing, and whimpering from those facing penalties before the first pitch. And I'd rather not read the myriad of redundant and repetitive posts now. I pray that you will accommodate me by answering a simple, three part question:

Are there any players off limit to the teams during waivers or otherwise?

If so, are the off limit players only off limit to the player whose foul created the situation?

If there are players simply off limits to all (which I think is somewhat unfair but will accept), who are they?

Humbly submitted,

Your sucking uncle

[FoggyOne]

Are there any players off limit to the teams during waivers or otherwise?

jimmie foxx, Hornsby, and georgse sisler UNAVAILABLE TO ALL

If so, are the off limit players only off limit to the player whose foul created the situation? see above

If there are players simply off limits to all (which I think is somewhat unfair but will accept), who are they? see above

[pacoboy]

Uncle, yes the "UNAVAILABLE TO ALL" is unfair - my apologies.

It was simply a type-o on my part and not my intent (the words "can never ACQUIRE again" should have read "RE-ACQUIRE"). In my mind I knew what it was but did not specifiy clearly. Only the old/origional "alphabet" gang would have known....of which there is only 1 or 2 in this league.

However, it was not discovered on my part until Bigmahon was initially penalized.....and at that point I was not about to say "HOLD IT, I'M RE-WORDING THE RULE !"

....thus, it is what it is.

[STEPHENANDERSON 2]

Anyone want to play "Wheel of Fortune". I need to buy a vowell... maybe a "U", and I need to guess another letter.. maybe a "Y" or a "V". Just let me know. 8)

[uncle ny]

[quote:095bb39265="pacoboy"]Uncle, yes the "UNAVAILABLE TO ALL" is unfair - my apologies.

It was simply a type-o on my part and not my intent (the words "can never ACQUIRE again" should have read "RE-ACQUIRE"). In my mind I knew what it was but did not specifiy clearly. Only the old/origional "alphabet" gang would have known....of which there is only 1 or 2 in this league.

However, it was not discovered on my part until Bigmahon was initially penalized.....and at that point I was not about to say "HOLD IT, I'M RE-WORDING THE RULE !"

....thus, it is what it is.[/quote:095bb39265]

If it's not what you meant to say I don't think anyone would mind having you correct it. Clearly those who erred shouldn't be permitted to re-acquire, but I don't think altering the rule to what you intended is out of the question. They're great players who shouldn't be off the table to those who had nothing to do with them to this point.

I suspect everyone would agree. And if you rephrase now surely we'll all check in before the waivers run Saturday afternoon.

[bigmahon]

I certainly have no problem making Hornsby available to everyone else but me. I agree that we should revert to the intended spirit of the rule. I don't see how it benefits anyone not to do so. :?