Rule Changes, Disputes, and Contingencies

Rule Changes

Offseason Rule Changes

Offseason rule changes are proposed, debated, and voted on as a package in one streamlined rulemaking process during the offseason. The manner in which such process takes place is prescribed by the Commissioner. Offseason rule changes may be proposed to the league by any GM and are adopted by a majority of teams voting for or against such changes. At the conclusion of the official rulemaking process, the Commissioner may also announce subsequent rulemaking processes, as necessary, in the offseason.

In-season Rule Changes

In-season rule changes are strongly disfavored, but may be instituted so long as no team objects. However, this requirement does not apply in the case of ambiguity, where the Rules Board will craft a rule.

Decisions Crafted by the Rules Board

Decisions crafted by the Rules Board due to ambiguity are automatically incorporated into the Rules, whether they occur during the season or in the offseason.

Commissioner Relief

The Commissioner may provide relief to teams in situations where a roster mistake or misunderstanding of the Rules: 1) has no impact on the outcome of any LDB matchups, 2) severely hinders a team's ability to compete in either the short or long-term, and 3) is brought to the Commissioner's attention promptly.

Rules Board

Before the beginning of the season, the Commissioner will appoint three GMs and two alternates to the Rules Board, which is charged with resolving disputes between teams and ambiguities in the LDB Rules. Co-GMs may not both serve on the Board. Board members that are interested parties in a dispute over the rules must recuse themselves from deciding such disputes. Board members with the appearance of being interested parties may recuse themselves at their discretion.

When drafting a decision, the Rules Board should consider the goal of these Rules: to mirror the decisions faced by Major League Baseball teams while recognizing the needs of a fantasy baseball league. Where emails exchanged among the league demonstrate a consensus as to purpose behind a specific Rule or set of Rules, that should be considered in interpreting the Rules. If the explicit text of a Rule can only be read in one way, it should be read accordingly; any mid-season change to an unambiguous Rule should come by league vote. If the Rules are ambiguous or do not address an issue, the Board should craft a rule designed to best fulfill the goals and intent of the league, but should be mindful of the need to avoid harming or benefiting any individual team or subset of teams that has relied on a valid interpretation of the text of the Rules or would otherwise be affected in a way distinct from the rest of the league. Above all, the Board should be guided by common sense and its understanding of what makes LDB the most functional and the most fun, rather than legalistic or formalistic nuances.

Actual Disputes

When such a dispute arises, a team requesting a ruling should present the question to the League, and the Rules Board will craft a resolution within a reasonable time.

= Preemptive Rule Interpretations

An owner who faces a gray area in the Rules may request an interpretation of that rule in advance. When requesting a rule interpretation may give away a tactic that relies on surprise, requests may be made in secret, but the resulting ruling will be announced within a week of the decision. When relevant, pre-emptive interpretations will be usable as precedent.

Contingencies

Data Loss, Unavailability, and Inaccuracy

Given the complexity of LDB and the fact that CBS cannot completely accommodate all of the nuances of the game, owners should expect some reasonable low level of data loss, unavailability, and inaccuracy. When such a case arises, the Commissioner will fashion a fix that he feels best furthers the intent of these Rules and the spirit of the league. The Commissioner may allow the Rules Board to decide how to address such a situation. See In re Robinson Cano's Contract Status, 2012 LDB 1 (Feb. 16, 2012).

Incapacitated GMs

Should a GM become incapacitated, unable, or unwilling to manage his or her team, the team will be taken under receivership by the league. During receivership, the league shall collectively manage the team so as to maintain competitive balance within the league. The Commissioner will announce the means by which such a team will be collectively managed.

In the case of an incapacitated GM or GM unable to manage his or her team, if that GM has any chance of regaining the ability to manage within six months or by the next first of March, whichever is longer, the team shall remain in receivership for that period of time. However, if a GM is definitely unable to return, the Commissioner may turn over the team to a new GM as he sees fit.

In the case of a GM unwilling to manage his or her team, the team remains in receivership for as long as the Commissioner sees fit, until it is turned over to a new GM.