|
On December 15 2011 22:04 EGalex wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 21:40 Chromodoris wrote:
I also wonder, where's the line drawn for you between not trying their hardest and throwing the game? If he had done a proxy 2-gate would it have been ok with you? A 4-gate? It's not as if he did not have a chance of winning with the probe rush, it's extremely unlikely but it's still plausible.
In champions league last week Bayern had already advanced. They were facing Manchester City who were at third place in the group. Bayern played that game with a horrible line up. They did not even use their b-team. Manchester City won the game of course and that put Napoli who had second place in a rough spot. Is that not throwing the game? I'd say that Bayern had a smaller chance of winning vs Man city with that line up than Naniwa had to win vs Nestea. You can't say that they always tries. Naniwa's probes tried, but Naniwa didn't. The players in Bayern tried but the coach didn't. There's no difference, stuff like this happends all the time in pro sports. It's not really my place to weigh in on where the line is; I make no subjective assertions on this subject in the OP. In fact, my point is entirely that this kind of subject matter is unbelievably subjective. It's not really up to me to decide what would or wouldn't have been sufficient. What did happen was certainly insufficient, but to comment any further than that would be purely my subjective opinion.
What makes what happened "certainly insufficient"? To say that something has clearly crossed that line, you must have some idea where it is.
If your point is that it is a subjective issue, what is it subject to? That might give us a clearer perspective of the circumstances. If we are going to come down on someone for crossing a boundary, lets work together to find out what that boundary is.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
I 100% agree with everything Alex said. Let's say Arsenal & Manchester United had a poor season and were 10th & 11th respectively in the Premier League with 1 game to go against each other. Whoever wins gets that 10th spot and a little extra cash from the league, but other than that they're not fighting for anything (no european spots, no relegation struggle). As a viewer I would be absolutely livid if one team proceeded to sit their collective arses on the grass after the kick-off, and not play. They have a duty as a professional team & players to show up and give everyone a game. Yes it would be ideal if both teams used the fact that they're playing against their rival to close out the season as a motivation to do their best, but I would understand if some or even the majority of the players on the field weren't due to their poor season. That still doesn't give them any excuse to just throw the game. The amount of shitstorm they would bring on themselves is unfathomable.
It is clear that Naniwa did not realise what his status as a professional gamer entailed. You sometimes have to put aside your own emotions & needs and just do your damn job. I hope he has learned from this and returns as a professional and not just a 'progamer'.
|
Nice to see what Alex has to say on the subject. Particularly interesting given his role with the top North American team and his relationship with IdrA. Very well written and raises a lot of good points, of which I tend to agree with most of them.
Thanks for putting this out there, Alex.
|
On December 15 2011 22:10 thopol wrote:
What makes what happened "certainly insufficient"? To say that something has clearly crossed that line, you must have some idea where it is.
If your point is that it is a subjective issue, what is it subject to? That might give us a clearer perspective of the circumstances. If we are going to come down on someone for crossing a boundary, lets work together to find out what that boundary is.
I've given this a lot of thought but I don't think you can ever define the line. You can't find the boundary. You can however spot outliers. A lot of people come up with gray area examples as a counter to outliers - they're not the same. We are able to tell when we're sure someone is giving it their earnest and we are able to tell when someone doesn't try at all. It's not possible to determine where the line is and effectively use it for any sort of policy. As such the policies need to be directed at the outliers where everyone can agree no effort was made to win.
|
On December 15 2011 21:07 Ninjahoe wrote:
You are certainly a very smart man and this is very well written.
However, if the team you support have NO CHANCE at all in winning their final game of MLB (unless their opponants are equally unmotivated, wich would only generate a really poor match), will you go watch it? Would you really want to see a game, where you know that your team won't stand a chance, because their competitive morale is so low from the past seasons poor results?
I know I wouldn't, and that's why I don't feel betrayed or upset about what NaNi did.
You're not really a fan, then are you? So if that's your logic, you obviously did not watch Naniwa vs Nestea because he's out of the tournament anyway right? You're such a great fan. You're basically a bandwagon fan. Why would you not support a team, who is already down and out, just to make them even feel more down when their fans are not there? Are these seriously your thought patterns? I notice alot of Swedes are with Naniwa's decision. They're obviously biased, nationalistic opinions.
What you even said was totally off tangent in the first place. The thing is people DID watch Naniwa vs Nestea and were anticipating a great game, but didn't happen and lead to this huge controversy which will not die because people DID watch it. Please think before you type. I suggest this to anyone who thinks Naniwa is a saint because you are 100% wrong.
|
On December 15 2011 22:10 thopol wrote:
What makes what happened "certainly insufficient"?
I spend my whole OP addressing this question  .
To say that something has clearly crossed that line, you must have some idea where it is.
I'm sorry, but this statement just isn't accurate. You can make an argument for something fitting into one of two binary extremes (i.e. acceptable/unacceptable) without making any claims about the area between them.
(I never said anything about a logical construct involving a line; if anything, the space between acceptable and unacceptable is most certainly a spectrum or gray area)
If your point is that it is a subjective issue, what is it subject to? That might give us a clearer perspective of the circumstances. If we are going to come down on someone for crossing a boundary, lets work together to find out what that boundary is.
I think that you're misinterpreting the word "subjective" - by describing certain issues as "subjective," I'm making the point that they have no definite, empirical answers, or objectively right/wrong analyses, but rather, that they're very much matters of personal opinion.
|
On December 15 2011 22:12 Telcontar wrote:
I 100% agree with everything Alex said. Let's say Arsenal & Manchester United had a poor season and were 10th & 11th respectively in the Premier League with 1 game to go against each other. Whoever wins gets that 10th spot and a little extra cash from the league, but other than that they're not fighting for anything (no european spots, no relegation struggle). As a viewer I would be absolutely livid if one team proceeded to sit their collective arses on the grass after the kick-off, and not play. They have a duty as a professional team & players to show up and give everyone a game. Yes it would be ideal if both teams used the fact that they're playing against their rival to close out the season as a motivation to do their best, but I would understand if some or even the majority of the players on the field weren't due to their poor season. That still doesn't give them any excuse to just throw the game. The amount of shitstorm they would bring on themselves is unfathomable.
It is clear that Naniwa did not realise what his status as a professional gamer entailed. You sometimes have to put aside your own emotions & needs and just do your damn job. I hope he has learned from this and returns as a professional and not just a 'progamer'.
yeah lets say that. and now we can talk early on about the carling cup, noone of them would play their best players in there, and therefore would not give the fans the real show.
and for the fact that they are rivals. they never want to loose agianst eachothers. and its not that little extra . and every income in football is important. we all know that that have intresst in that game.
and they will might get relegation if they just sit on the pitch. cos its not allowed in football.
they will play their b-squad mixed with u18 sqaud with some key players on the bench.
thast exactelly what naniwa did. he took a B strat cos its not important.
|
So if you think this about Naniwa, what about EG.dota refusing to play at SMM loser bracket and misery throwing all the 1v1 games at G-league?
|
On December 15 2011 22:14 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 22:10 thopol wrote:
What makes what happened "certainly insufficient"? To say that something has clearly crossed that line, you must have some idea where it is.
If your point is that it is a subjective issue, what is it subject to? That might give us a clearer perspective of the circumstances. If we are going to come down on someone for crossing a boundary, lets work together to find out what that boundary is. I've given this a lot of thought but I don't think you can ever define the line. You can't find the boundary. You can however spot outliers without any issues. A lot of people come up with gray area examples as a counter to outliers - they're not the same. We are able to tell when we're sure someone is giving it their earnest and we are able to tell when someone doesn't try at all. It's not possible to determine where the line is and effectively use it for any sort of policy. As such the policies need to be directed at the outliers where everyone can agree no effort was made to win.
Yes, exactly. Beat me to it, two posts earlier .
|
On December 15 2011 22:17 matiK23 wrote:
I notice alot of Swedes are with Naniwa's decision. It's obviously biased.
wait what. before and in the naniwa games. i thought i saw the chat goes NaNi Make america proud! nani is american?
ow so all the non american players is americans til they mess up?
just had to take this rofl out of the americans
|
On December 15 2011 21:48 GodZo wrote:
I'm sorry but I can't defend GOM.
While i respect your opinion, opinions and posts like these are pointless unless you state your reasons why so..
On December 15 2011 22:21 LaoShuAiDaMi wrote:
So if you think this about Naniwa, what about EG.dota refusing to play at SMM loser bracket and misery throwing all the 1v1 games at G-league?
That was simply to boycott the tournament. Tournament org made a horrible decision(s) and thus EG team didn't bother to continue.
+ Show Spoiler +There was bigger issues than boycottin the tournament by EG's DOTA team. If you followed the tournament or read about it, you know what i'm talking about.
e. Well, Alex also posted about this couple post under.
|
On December 15 2011 22:17 matiK23 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 21:07 Ninjahoe wrote:
You are certainly a very smart man and this is very well written.
However, if the team you support have NO CHANCE at all in winning their final game of MLB (unless their opponants are equally unmotivated, wich would only generate a really poor match), will you go watch it? Would you really want to see a game, where you know that your team won't stand a chance, because their competitive morale is so low from the past seasons poor results?
I know I wouldn't, and that's why I don't feel betrayed or upset about what NaNi did. You're not really a fan, then are you? So if that's your logic, you obviously did not watch Naniwa vs Nestea because he's out of the tournament anyway right? You're such a great fan. You're basically a bandwagon fan. Why would you not support a team, who is already down and out, just to make them even feel more down when their fans are not there? Are these seriously your thought patterns? I notice alot of Swedes are with Naniwa's decision. They're obviously biased, nationalistic opinions. What you even said was totally off tangent in the first place. The thing is people DID watch Naniwa vs Nestea and were anticipating a great game, but didn't happen and lead to this huge controversy which will not die because people DID watch it. Please think before you type. I suggest this to anyone who thinks Naniwa is a saint because you are 100% wrong.
Scuse me?
I would still support my team, I would however not go and pay to watch a game i knew weren't going to be good anyway.
Your logic makes no sense at all, and i'd beg for you to rethink what you just said, and come back when you can discuss like an adault.
You can twist and turn nationalities as much as you want, f.ex. Hey, I see you are american, you are obviously biased because you hate NaNi for calling MLG a joke tournament.
I never said NaNi is a saint, nor do I think what he did was even close to good. I do however feel that it's not that big of a deal that has been made out of it for the reasons I previously stated.
And yes, I did sit and were excited about the game, because I wanted naniwa to show all haters out there that he is indeed a truly great player. This doesn't mean that I were offended by not seeing this, but more relived that the tension in this rivalry wasn't relived after a half-assed try, and everyone would keep bashing, saying Providence were a fluke.
You sir, need to think before you post.
|
On December 15 2011 22:21 LaoShuAiDaMi wrote:
So if you think this about Naniwa, what about EG.dota refusing to play at SMM loser bracket and misery throwing all the 1v1 games at G-league?
That happened without the knowledge or consent of EG management.
I think it was absolutely unacceptable, and I am not at all happy with the way it represented the EG brand. I have told the players as much. It has been a hot topic of discussion internally within our company.
Ultimately, it's our job to make sure our players behave professionally, so saying "we didn't know about it and we didn't approve of it" is, to be fair, an excuse. We failed to manage our players appropriately in that situation.
Still, having communication problems with our DotA players is quite different from engaging in hypocrisy. I think that the former (which is what happened) is pretty excusable, while the latter (which isn't the case) would be much worse.
With that said, I also think it's fair to point out that boycotting a match is quite different from throwing a match, but I don't want to derail the conversation.
|
Great write up Alex. Thanks.
|
i'd be really curious to know how i'd react if i had bought that premium ticket-thingy - for now i still think that the shitstorm unleashed by the controversy was very much so worth the upset. as i stated in some other thread, i found this to be really entertaining. in addition, i would like to thank you for the amount of elaboration you seem to have put into that blog, it adds to the amount of entertainment i did gain from this one single game.
|
I agree with most of Alex' statement and I must say that his statement is not at all that different from the one I heard from other players and otherwise notable community figures, just more elaborate (I like elaborate)
So thanks for the writeup, it gives some good insight.
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.
Reading this it is totally and completely baffling that GomTV created a tournament format that allows the Naniwa/Nestea scenario to happen and happen pretty easily.
Alex talks about professionalism. I do agree with that the players are professionals and should behave as such, but the same thing should be expected of the tournament organization and structure.
When a Bo3 or Bo5 is played, and one player is 2-0 or 3-0 against the other player, the other games don´´t get played. Because, even if it´s Flash vs Jaedong or even when it´s the grudgematch of the century. This is because we agree and have agreed on the fact that these games have no meaning whatsoever.
How weird is it then that the same thing is expected of a player when this Bo5 is played against not 1 but different players
GomTV have put themselves in a great position to be shot in the foot like they did because at the end of the day, they´re selling entertainment in the form of a competative SC2 tournament. When the tournament, or parts of the tournament are no longer competative, you cannot expect any entertainment to derive from it.
Sure you can berate the competitors if no entertainment is reaped from your efforts. But they themselves must realize that a competitor can only be expected to prodcuce entertainment when put in a competative enviroment.
|
I have been reading posts like this from the very beginning. Even one thing has to be said, none were this well articulated. Its hard to disagree with the post and I will try to articulate why.
But the thing that annoys me the most about this situation is how shallow and political are all the posts. There are facts that cannot be mediated by ignoring them and it creates this whole pitchfork mistrust between viewers.
Does this happen in regular sports? Yes, person would be real dummy, if they said it does not.
Does the stated fact have any direct correlation? Well besides the obvious elephant in the room, being the sponsorship, there is not a single correlation.
Why is there no correlation? Well, because everything is stated on a clear business model before anything even starts. Every professional organization in Europe and probably in US too has rule sets to provide better options.
Does that mean that GOMTV failed to do a professional job? 100% yes. There is the issue of Koreans depending on platitudes likes honor and misconceptions (Professional sportsman is not a sportsman) and they fucked up again.
I was interested in EGAlex opinion because this could have happened to EG with all the business around Puma too. they(Obviously this is a different party. There is no evidence GomTV was a part of the incident with Puma) realized they fucked up there too and created (This was pretty much clearly stated) the whole pitchfork reaction from korean side of things.
I am quite disappointed that there is no reaction to the fact they decided to punish him through means they didnt have, then they change the tunes twice. (Ban/NotBan). Does that mean Alex does not care much about leagues bending their rules to punish something (That yes it needs to be punished), by breaking the whole idea of law based society? The rule they tried to enforce at first was broke by nearly all the Code S/GSL players from the very beginning of Starcraft 2 at GOMTV and did not even have correlation with what naniwa did.
EDIT: If the post was compartmentalized my point still stands, because we cannot do that. We cannot ignore the snakes in the room, because there is an elephant.
PS: Yes MLG has a part of rule set that would prohibit naniwa from throwing the match
EDIT 2: What would be really interesting situation, when Naniwa would be an actual douche bag. Because then he would not accept any blame and this would have to be a real issue, not just a blown up mistake.
(He clearly isnt and anyone calling him money hungry whore and etc is stupid)
|
Thanks a lot Alex. Really REALLY good write up and comparisons. I completly agree with the post. Thanks for posting.
|
After reading so many angry oneliners, it's good to read something reflected showing more than one side or a simple black-and-white viewpoint. Very good post, Alex.
|
I agree with what you wrote almost entirely. However, I don't think it's fair to divorce the discussion from GOM's reaction.
Very few people think Naniwa shouldn't be punished at all. I think a fair number of people find GOM's reaction to be disproportionate to the severity of the offense.
It is completely unacceptable that "Providence didn't actually count for Code S seeds" only becomes publicized as rationalization for a penalty levied against Naniwa. Most everyone, including MLG writing staff, were under the impression that the entire 2011 season from Columbus onward provided the Code S seeding. And by denying Naniwa the seed, GOM certainly implied that it existed. Even if they can legally interpret the vague wording of the agreement as "only tournaments with championship pools count", the fact that they are publicizing it only after they wanted to punish Naniwa is completely unethical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
