Not sure there is much else to say here. My reading of the rule was that an indirect trade would be a series of trades that were connected such that the intent of the overall transaction would be to move an asset from one team to another owned by the same person. Thus it would not appear to cover the situation where a draft pick was part of a big trade and then some time later was traded to the other team, because the intent behind the 2 trades was not to move the pick from FTW to HOU.
I do have to say that I am saddened that a number of the more senior members of the league have such little faith in my judgment that to them any alternative reading of the rule than theirs is patently inconcievable. The unavoidable implication being that I let Eric and Tom break the rules for the incredibly valuable FTW pick.
If someone else would like to take over as Commissioner, please step up. You absolutely don't have to agree with my decisions and I welcome dissent and discussion. But the incivility that I've seen on this topic, over a draft pick that quite obviously to everyone was not some miraculous asset that Tom had prearranged to move from one team to the other is beyond the pale.
If someone believes, hey, this seems to be in violation of the rules, what's up with that, and further that they disagree with my reading and that there needs to be a bright-line rule, I am very happy to have that discussion. I don't care for being attacked as breaking the rules. And if anyone thinks that the Commissioner is breaking the rules or failing to uphold them to the best of their ability, then we need a new Commissioner.
Thanks to Eric and Tom for restructuring the trade and avoiding the immediate issue.
Tom I wouldn't let it bother you so much. As you well know this league has always been hyper-sensitive to such things. I always thought it was a nuerotic rule anyway. In fact as I was telling Eric, the other league I'm in doesn't even bother with prohibiting such trades. The commissioner approves the trade as long as it stands on it's own merit. Any question is debated by a committee of three "wise men" whose decision is final. ARBA has had a long stable run with you as commish. And we all know no one else wants the job. Eric and I restructured the trade not because we thought the others were right, but because we knew it would continue to be made into such a big deal. It was easier to restructure and move on than to continue the debate. Besides, in the end it just really didn't matter that much to me.
Right, well, ok, it seems I really shouldn't read the message board while I have the flu on Christmas. I promise never to let it happen again.
For future reference, I have been persuaded that it is the Will of the League that the "indirect" reference be interpreted to prohibit the movement via trade of any asset of a team to another team owned by the same person during the same offseason, regardless of the type of asset (eg player or pick). I will be enforcing the rule in accordance with this interpretation unless / until a contrary rule passes in the future.
