This is an appeal of a violation of Rule IV(E)(1) by user ZootTX which was not published since it carried no punitive punishment; however, it remains appealable.
The Rule reads: “If an ISFL player retires during the off-season, that player will play one final season, and the user is free to recreate, thus having two players in the league for the retired player's final season without violating the anti-multi provision.”
ZootTX retired his player, Zee Rechs, on August 27. Immediately over the following days, Zoot posted final regression, and then accepted a contract for the player’s final year in the league.
Head Office blocked this contract stating that it was longstanding precedent that a user cannot re-sign a player after retirement because the player surrenders control of the player at retirement. They cited precedent from early in the league’s years (<S12) that there is no record of and a similar scenario in July 2020 concerning re-signing a retiring player during an expansion draft year, which was ultimately upholding the prior precedent.
During its discussion, Appeals Team uncovered additional precedent in May 2020 where Head Office permitted a retired player to enter free agency and re-sign with a different team after making his retirement post. Given this May 2020 incident is a fact pattern that arguably is permissive of *greater* player autonomy compared with re-signing with your existing team post-retirement, Appeals Team overturns the decision from Head Office to keep the application of relevant and recent precedent consistent.
Because Head Office stated they will be amending the rules to clarify this even before this appeal occurred, Appeals Team has declined to interpret Rule IV(E)(1) further since this will be addressed in the rules moving forward and any interpretation of this rule now will soon be moot.
The vote on this decision was unanimous.
The Rule reads: “If an ISFL player retires during the off-season, that player will play one final season, and the user is free to recreate, thus having two players in the league for the retired player's final season without violating the anti-multi provision.”
ZootTX retired his player, Zee Rechs, on August 27. Immediately over the following days, Zoot posted final regression, and then accepted a contract for the player’s final year in the league.
Head Office blocked this contract stating that it was longstanding precedent that a user cannot re-sign a player after retirement because the player surrenders control of the player at retirement. They cited precedent from early in the league’s years (<S12) that there is no record of and a similar scenario in July 2020 concerning re-signing a retiring player during an expansion draft year, which was ultimately upholding the prior precedent.
During its discussion, Appeals Team uncovered additional precedent in May 2020 where Head Office permitted a retired player to enter free agency and re-sign with a different team after making his retirement post. Given this May 2020 incident is a fact pattern that arguably is permissive of *greater* player autonomy compared with re-signing with your existing team post-retirement, Appeals Team overturns the decision from Head Office to keep the application of relevant and recent precedent consistent.
Because Head Office stated they will be amending the rules to clarify this even before this appeal occurred, Appeals Team has declined to interpret Rule IV(E)(1) further since this will be addressed in the rules moving forward and any interpretation of this rule now will soon be moot.
The vote on this decision was unanimous.
![[Image: zayn_gm_sig.jpg]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/786326101051179088/799689657322831962/zayn_gm_sig.jpg)
![[Image: equ0zVD.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/equ0zVD.jpg)
Eleven Kendrick-Watts, #13 WR ![[Image: 54619_s.png]](https://signavatar.com/54619_s.png)
