The third veto does not count, you have to post a reason. According to the rules
"Any veto must provide a detailed, factually based basis for that veto. Reasons for a veto would include but are not limited to factors such as statistical comparison, contract status, age, injury history, talent level, organizational makeup, past trade history, and/or collusion."
Therefore that veto doesn't count. If we are not following the rules all hell breaks loose.
Did anyone read the other two vetoes?
?? They contradict one another. One says the mets did not get enough, the other says miami. What does that mean?
This means both are getting screwed and both are taking advantage of the other. Makes sense, which equals a
Fair TradeBoth managers have obviously proven themselves in the league.
I approve the trade