A Different Perspective on The NaNiwa Controversy - Page 14

There are (for the most part) three kinds of situations in which players usually throw matches, or don't put forth maximum effort. There's Scenario A, in which throwing the match would be in the player's own best interests (example: Stephano vs. BratOK at Assembly Summer 2011, in which both players did their best to the lose the match because they each wanted to avoid facing Sen in bracket play). There's Scenario B, in which the match is meaningless for the player himself, but has meaning for his opponent and/or a third-party (example: IdrA vs. White-Ra at the IPL3 Finals, in which IdrA forfeited because he had already qualified for bracket play - which was seeded randomly - and wanted to get some rest). And then, there's Scenario C, in which the match is truly meaningless, and throwing it would be due purely to the fact that the player (for whatever reason) doesn't put forth the time and effort required to play for real (example: NaNi's probe rush vs. NesTea, which sparked all of the recent community discussion and commentary, including this blog).

Scenarios A, B, and C all happen, regularly, in professional sports. At the end of almost every regular season in leagues like the NFL, NBA, NHL and Major League Baseball, there are teams that have the opportunity to determine their first-round playoff opponent, or to prevent a certain team from qualifying for the playoffs, by tanking a couple of games (Scenario A). And, during absolutely every regular season in such leagues, there are teams who are eliminated from playoff contention well before the season is over, but still have to play out their schedules in full - including games against other teams who are still in the playoff hunt (Scenario B). And, lastly, also every regular season in such leagues, there are games late in the schedule between teams who have both already been eliminated from playoff contention (Scenario C).

Now, to be fair, there's a difference between throwing a match, and not putting forth maximum effort, and just not playing well - and that difference is subject to a massive gray area. Professional sports teams often bench their best players in the final game of the regular season, if they've already made the playoffs and their playoff opponent has already been determined. Does that mean that they're throwing the game? Most would say, no. But, what about a sports team that does have something to gain by losing its last game of the season, and starts its best players, but they all happen to have off days? Did the team throw the match? Did the players not try as hard as they could've? Or did the the team try hard, but just not play well? That's a much more complex question, with no uniform answer.

Additionally, while most would agree that flat out throwing a match isn't a good thing, things get much murkier when the subject shifts to effort and passion. Is it necessarily unacceptable, dishonorable or disrespectful to the sport for a team or player to not put forth maximum effort, every game or match? Again, that's a complicated question, and it has no blanket answer. For a highly-paid player or team that's phoning it in on a regular basis, many would say the answer is yes. But, if two last-place MLB teams are facing off on the last day of the regular season, should both sides really be expected to play their hearts out? Many would say, no.

--

The bottom line is that players and teams - in all professional sports - regularly find themselves in Scenarios A, B, and C. And they correspondingly - in all professional sports - throw matches; don't try their hardest on every occasion; and play poorly at convenient times. Furthermore, in most of these situations, it's not even possible to discern which of those three (or what combination thereof) is truly the case - let alone to try and determine, with any level of certainty, whether or not what's happened is unacceptable, or dishonorable, or disrespectful to the sport and its community. Essentially, for the vast majority of situations like these, there are two massive layers of subjectivity standing in the way of any objective conclusion or analysis. That's why you very rarely see league officials involve themselves in such matters.

But if that's the case, then what's the point of this very, very long - sorry... it's just my style - write-up? I stated at the beginning of this blog that NaNiwa's decision to probe rush NesTea was absolutely unacceptable; that I believe everyone in our community should view it as unacceptable; and that I support GOM's decision to levy punishment on NaNi (the severity of the punishment is a different subject altogether). Yet, I've basically used the past five paragraphs to make the argument that... well... that it's not really possible to put together a definitive argument about situations like this one; that they're all just part of professional sports.

So, what's my point?

My point is that in all of the scenarios, examples, and hypotheticals I've outlined above, the player or team - at the very least - still did its job, put on a show for the spectators, and delivered a quality product to its respective league. All of them, of course, except for the one we're all so feverishly discussing.


Direct, community-to-industry revenue is the single, most important aspect of both the short- and long-term stability and growth of eSports. The StarCraft 2 community's willingness and enthusiasm to support its teams, players, and tournaments - by watching ads on their streams, buying their merchandise, and purchasing their subscriptions and season passes - has contributed, more than any other factor, to the amazing growth we've seen over the past year and a half. The term "ecosystem" is a buzzword as of late for those of us on the business side of the industry, because we all recognize the fact that in order for eSports to keep growing and find stability, the industry needs to become more self-sustaining, and less reliant on outside income, like corporate sponsorships.

In line with this, selling subscriptions and season passes is, obviously, crucially important to GOM.TV's business model. And ultimately, the quality of their product is defined by the entertainment value of their matches. So, when one of the world's most famous players, in an exciting grudge match (regardless of the players' records in their group), decides to probe rush in front of thousands upon thousands of spectators, many of whom are paying subscribers, he's single-handedly denying GOM a quality product to deliver to its consumer base. That is, simply, unacceptable. It is, objectively, bad for everyone who cares about eSports.

On December 16 2011 00:47 Velr wrote:


Uhm, ok?


And you are supporting everyone throwing their matches left and right because they don't feel like playing no matter the audience or anythign?...

On December 16 2011 00:50 Stringy wrote:


Ok. Just to make sure we are on the same page. As long your amused you don't care if you've just been tricked or deceived into that joy... doesn't matter how or why, so long as your being amused?

I guess ignorance really is bliss.

edit: nice ninja edit

On December 16 2011 00:45 Fjodorov wrote:
The people who agree with GOMs decision obviously think that this was the right way to handle the "throwing game" issue. So this is a rule and a principle you agree should be used in a global event. I expect all of you to demand very harsh punishments for anyone who does anything similar in any global/international tournament after this. The main arguement seems to be the one of sportsmanship and professionalism. That means that whether the game is broadcasted or not shouldnt matter and the size of the tournamens is not important either. The principle you claim to stand for now you must defend after this, regardless of the player, team, nationality.

On December 16 2011 01:10 Velr wrote:
A broadcasted game is a game that fans will and can see.
A not broadcasted game will never be seen and therefore the fans don't get "robbed" of a game?

On December 15 2011 23:11 GMarshal wrote:

Boxer disagrees.
+ Show Spoiler +
In fact when asked, most Korean progamers will tell you that they play for the fans.

Anyway, on topic, this is a great blog, huge props to EGAlex for taking the time to write it.

On December 16 2011 01:16 Grettin wrote:

What i read & heard, Naniwa asked GOM to forfeit the game, but GOM didn't allow it. Thus the outcome we've discussing now.

I would ask you to consider holding players to higher standards of professionalism; and to also consider the fact that it's not GOM's responsibility to cater their format solely to suit players. GOM's job (as is the case with any professional sports league) is to provide a quality product to its viewers, while providing its competitors with fair, reasonable playing conditions, and the Blizzard Cup's format balanced these factors acceptably. Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist.

On December 16 2011 01:16 Fjodorov wrote:


So if the game is broadcasted it is bad sportsmanship and unprofessional but without the broadcast its not. Amazing way of living up to the principles and values everyone is praising and demanding.