|
Bearded Elder29903 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/iffXh3H.jpg)
Aspiring North American Challenger Series team Misfits, who feature veteran players Alex “Alex Ich” Ichetovkin and Alberto “crumbzz” Rengifo, reputedly made an approach to sign Team Liquid top-laner Diego "Quas" Ruiz during the off-season. This move was made without the knowledge of team management, who found out after hearing rumours about the move.
According to Riot’s rule 10.2.12, “No Team Member or Affiliate of a team may solicit, lure, or make an offer of employment to any Team Member who is signed to any LCS team, nor encourage any such Team Member to breach or otherwise terminate a contract with said LCS team.”
After learning of the approach Team Liquid’s co-owner Steve “liquid112” Arhancet has issued a complaint to Riot about the attempted poaching, and Riot is set to begin a full investigation to see if there was any wrongdoing. It’s not clear, however, if Riot will have any jurisdiction in the matter, as Misfits aren’t yet a Challenger team.
Wondering if there will be any consequences to Misfits as they're not Challenger / LCS team yet. Seems like they will dodge the bullet this time or Riot will just punish them in not being able to enter Challenger Qualifiers.
Statement from Liquid112 on the Quas acquisition:
I worked directly with GGLA on the Quas acquisition, this is not even close to the situation presented now. There was a substantial amount of money that was paid for the acquisition of Quas and it was handled professionally. This other organization, allegedly Misfits, directly interfered with contracts I have with my players by luring, soliciting and encouraging them to terminate their contracts. It's unethical behavior, but beyond that - there are legal rules regarding possible tortious interference of contracts - this isn't just about Riot rules.
Source
|
Korea (South)11232 Posts
My suggestion always was that teams are allowed to make offers at any time but they need to make the offer at the same time to the team and the player.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On May 17 2015 04:17 739 wrote:Show nested quote +Aspiring North American Challenger Series team Misfits, who feature veteran players Alex “Alex Ich” Ichetovkin and Alberto “crumbzz” Rengifo, reputedly made an approach to sign Team Liquid top-laner Diego "Quas" Ruiz during the off-season. This move was made without the knowledge of team management, who found out after hearing rumours about the move.
According to Riot’s rule 10.2.12, “No Team Member or Affiliate of a team may solicit, lure, or make an offer of employment to any Team Member who is signed to any LCS team, nor encourage any such Team Member to breach or otherwise terminate a contract with said LCS team.”
After learning of the approach Team Liquid’s co-owner Steve “liquid112” Arhancet has issued a complaint to Riot about the attempted poaching, and Riot is set to begin a full investigation to see if there was any wrongdoing. It’s not clear, however, if Riot will have any jurisdiction in the matter, as Misfits aren’t yet a Challenger team. Wondering if there will be any consequences to Misfits as they're not Challenger / LCS team yet. Seems like they will dodge the bullet this time or Riot will just punish them in not being able to enter Challenger Qualifiers.
There is no way that team is going to be banned from entering CS, even Riot can't be that controversial.
At worst, they're going to be fined, but that's it, especially considering that Curse poached Quas by themselves before.
Plus might be good wake up call for TL to raise salary of your best player, lol.
|
this just makes the poaching rules look really bad for the players
|
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want.
|
Even tho they can't be punished any possible agreement is invalid.
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want.
It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team.
|
On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team.
I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement.
|
in any case it's hard to tell what the Misfits problems are when they are the best in the league they play in, I didn't catch last nights games with Stixxay in, but when they had Intense I had felt it was bottom lane.
|
Stixxay/Alex hard-carried quite often. RF and Crumbz were quite hit and miss though. RF would either get stuck behind and do nothing or... get Irelia. Crumbz had a disaster of an Eve game but some solid tank games. Remilia is very impressive; if Jebus is good/the synergy is good, they'll look solid.
|
On May 17 2015 05:14 Chexx wrote:
My suggestion always was that teams are allowed to make offers at any time but they need to make the offer at the same time to the team and the player.
something like this seems reasonable. No poaching rules always seem weird to me o.o
also shouldn't the post cite a source D:
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
On May 17 2015 06:41 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team. I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement.
All LCS players have their contract end date posted on lolesports so it's impossible for teams not to know them. Obviously a team is going to stonewall them if the player is still contracted...that's kinda the point. If it's pre-season 6 and misfits approached a player then sure that's ok.
|
On May 17 2015 07:04 JBright wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 06:41 Numy wrote:On May 17 2015 06:33 JBright wrote:On May 17 2015 06:01 Numy wrote:
Yea I don't get it personally. If a team wants to talk to a player they have to ask the team first and if the team says no that's it? Seems a little dumb. I kind of get it mid season but if it's in the off periods it should be a "transfer window" where players/teams are free to shop around if that's what they want. It doesn't really make sense when Quas' contract ends in November. If they want Quas, they would have to buy out his contract so there's no point leaving out the team. I'm talking more about the order of things. How can a team know to buy out a contract if they can't talk to the player? That's the puzzling part. This isn't an attempt to poach a player from your opposition mid season, this is out of season talking to a player to see if they interested then I'm guessing if they are interested talk about buying out a contract. I don't get why it's the other way around. Doesn't make sense to me. The only logic I can't see if that it protects the team from teams offers better contracts and buyouts to players, this way a team can effectively stonewall overs from talking to a player regardless of the players wishes unless the team/player wants to suffer Riot judgement. All LCS players have their contract end date posted on lolesports so it's impossible for teams not to know them. Obviously a team is going to stonewall them if the player is still contracted...that's kinda the point. If it's pre-season 6 and misfits approached a player then sure that's ok.
I'm not sure if I'm not getting my point across or you are just ignoring it. I'm saying a team can't possibly know if a player wants to be bought out unless they talk to said player so knowing date of contract end is rather pointless. Talking to a contracted player shouldn't be wrong in the off season. Most big sports have transfer windows where players/teams can shop around if they want even though they are contracted. That is what I'm saying. Being able to completely shut out a player under the whole term of the contract seems really terrible for the players.
Anyway I just think it's highly odd that this period of time adheres to the anti-poaching rules. Actually now that I think about it CLG got in shit for poaching Zion/Scarra in pre-season 5 so it looks like there is no period of time that the anti-poaching isn't active. Means if someone is under contract you can't talk to them?
|
On May 17 2015 05:17 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2015 04:17 739 wrote:Aspiring North American Challenger Series team Misfits, who feature veteran players Alex “Alex Ich” Ichetovkin and Alberto “crumbzz” Rengifo, reputedly made an approach to sign Team Liquid top-laner Diego "Quas" Ruiz during the off-season. This move was made without the knowledge of team management, who found out after hearing rumours about the move.
According to Riot’s rule 10.2.12, “No Team Member or Affiliate of a team may solicit, lure, or make an offer of employment to any Team Member who is signed to any LCS team, nor encourage any such Team Member to breach or otherwise terminate a contract with said LCS team.”
After learning of the approach Team Liquid’s co-owner Steve “liquid112” Arhancet has issued a complaint to Riot about the attempted poaching, and Riot is set to begin a full investigation to see if there was any wrongdoing. It’s not clear, however, if Riot will have any jurisdiction in the matter, as Misfits aren’t yet a Challenger team. Wondering if there will be any consequences to Misfits as they're not Challenger / LCS team yet. Seems like they will dodge the bullet this time or Riot will just punish them in not being able to enter Challenger Qualifiers. There is no way that team is going to be banned from entering CS, even Riot can't be that controversial. At worst, they're going to be fined, but that's it, especially considering that Curse poached Quas by themselves before. Plus might be good wake up call for TL to raise salary of your best player, lol.
I really don't see how Riot could fine Misfits.
|
On May 17 2015 05:46 Slusher wrote:
this just makes the poaching rules look really bad for the players
Poaching rules are always an advantage for teams that want to keep players and disadvantage for players since it limits their options and leverage. I have always been against them.
|
Apparently Curse poached Quas from a team in the first place...
Seems a bit hypocritical.
|
It was GGLA. They were in the NA CS with Quas/Bischu/Otter and I think a few days into 2013 Winter CS he left GGLA to join Curse. Seems the League started on the 7th of Oct and he left on the 14th of Oct. That effectively killed the teams chances of doing well in the league as he was their main carry and they got Yazuki who hadn't played league in awhile. There has also been that drama with the Aphromoo squad that got announced and dropped. Liquid is just flinging shit like he's a saint when he's not. Sigh I miss the old TL so much. Naz wouldn't say this kind of rubbish.
I hope Regi swoops in, slaps Liquid around with a fat wad of cash and takes Quas while Nick Allen watches. Think this may be the first time I root for TSM to do something lol
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tapping_up
It's usual for this to be banned by sports league rules. Just another example of LCS following "proper" sports in their examples.
Given that most contracts in the LCS are quite short, I don't see how it really harms the players. For example, Piglet's contract is only until 7th October 2015, and many other players have contracts just for one full season (until October 2015).
It would be pretty dumb for a player to sign a contract longer than that given the fact that you can be relegated from the LCS. If a team really does want a player before the end of the season, they can communicate that to the contract owner (the team), and not by going directly to the player.
When you consider that Riot have overall control of the LCS, there is an option for players who are having significant issues with their contracts as a form of arbitration, so I don't see how the rules against tapping up particularly harm the players.
|
Regarding communication between teams and players to find out interests, in practice it's supposed to be through backchannels (talking with the player's associates, for example). Or through paper trail-less methods like just so happening to run into each other in real life at some event. It involves not being an idiot leaving behind a record (hint: with online communication, there's always a record).
Poaching/tampering rules tend to be difficult to enforce in traditional sports, as you basically have to be dumb about things to get caught. I'm getting this idea that because the vast majority of the people involved in e-sports grew up immersed in a way of life heavy with computer/internet usage, they are predisposed to behave in ways that give themselves less plausible deniability.
For that matter, how did this even surface in the first place? Someone messed up, either on the side of Misfits or on the side of Quas. It has to be emphasized, if both sides were competent about this, no one will be any the wiser.
|
On May 17 2015 08:10 Saradin wrote:
For that matter, how did this even surface in the first place? Someone messed up, either on the side of Misfits or on the side of Quas. It has to be emphasized, if both sides were competent about this, no one will be any the wiser.
I mean it's possible that Quas wasn't interested and reported it or something right
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
