Thudd Kassel Contract Issue

[br0_0ker]

Except we literally just established that it wasn't against the rules at the time. So... Why should it be changed retroactively?

Established how? Again, I'm waiting on a clarification on the purpose of rule D. 14. which was both said to prevent players from being over 399 TPE to have a $1M cap hit in year 4, and not, that it is only to prevent rookie from signing 4 year contracts. I maintain that there is a spirit of the rules in play here, and using the interpretation that it should only be the written letter of the law (when it was pretty clear the people involved were aware of exactly what they were doing, based on the discussion in the contract thread) to justify skirting this rule for whatever its purpose has the same effect as allowing the potential intent of this rule to be broken. But, I await clarification on the rule.

Look at it like this. If you create a player today and we don't have recreate tpe but we then institute recreate tpe 3 weeks later should you get recreate tpe added retrospectively to your build? You can only apply the rules as they are at that time.

If there is a separate rule that doesn't explicitly state what the rule changes, but for all intents and purposes has the same effect, should we not be making concessions to allow that to be added retrospectively, since there was some function already in place to handle that, and it is only the semantics of the rule that prevented it being applied in the first place? The issue here is not that there was something completely new instituted, it's that there was a rule that was potentially in place to disallow a certain circumstance, and because another condition was not explicitly stated then that condition was used to circumvent the disallowed circumstance.

None of this addresses the fact that HO unilaterally made a decision to overturn a valid, accepted transaction either... Which is another problem entirely.

I think we disagree on the validity of the transaction. The transaction took place 11/16 and it has been outlined in this thread that HO had a discussion on this some time 11/16 or 11/17, just missed making a public announcement. The parties involved (namely Philly GMs) seem to have not informed DD once they were aware of the situation (in this thread multiple other GMs have stated it was in their chat), so it is both on HO and Philly GMs for the general lack of communication and what transpired after.