IBC

Tullar would like to know if Fuentes is eligible to play. The Cardinals placed him on the restricted list because of personal reasons, and he is unlikely to return this year.

I don't recall precedent here. Is there some?

Not that I know of. We've usually allowed restricted list players to play, but that was for three or four game stints. I don't really recall us ruling on a player placed on restricted list for good.

He won't be back with the team due to sand in his vagina so I'd say no

I'm torn, on the one hand I'd say err on the side of caution and allow him to play since he's not hurt. On the other "Fuentes will not count against the 40-man roster while on the restricted list and won't be paid." which basically means he's not an active player. I guess my ultimate decision is that him being out long term should end his IBC season as well.

Dodgers wrote:I'm torn, on the one hand I'd say err on the side of caution and allow him to play since he's not hurt. On the other "Fuentes will not count against the 40-man roster while on the restricted list and won't be paid." which basically means he's not an active player. I guess my ultimate decision is that him being out long term should end his IBC season as well.

Out

Have I mentioned that I hate this injury/roster stuff? I was thinking that, given what JP said about the short term restricted list guys, my vote would be to let him play, but then you can draw the only-half-valid parallel that we allow guys who are injured for a few days to play, but in September if we know that a guy is too injured to play for a long period, we disallow him.

I guess I'll say he should be out, but my stronger opinion is that I still think that exco shouldn't be making these calls.

Out

Looks like he'll be out, then.

I told Tullar he's out, and this is his reply:

"Wow. Pretty harsh. Since this family issue could be resolved at any time, it's not all that different than being on the bereavement list. I assume I have the right to take it to a league vote?"

Which is fine with me.

Pirates wrote:I told Tullar he's out, and this is his reply:

"Wow. Pretty harsh. Since this family issue could be resolved at any time, it's not all that different than being on the bereavement list. I assume I have the right to take it to a league vote?"

Which is fine with me.

I think it's fine, but we want to try to set some sort of overarching precedent/guideline, right? I fear a patchwork of our rulings and league votes is going to be more and more all over the place, and that would be the last thing we'd want.