Official State of the Game Podcast Thread - Page 1947

On December 15 2011 06:32 Velr wrote:


Which is IPL to blame for.
It's not GOM's fault when other tournaments don't enact their rules.

Oh and forfeiting is not the same as actually playing but losin gon purpose.

On December 15 2011 06:00 Longshank wrote:
Tournament rules never cover every possible scenario. By Tyler's logic they shouldn't be able to revoke the invite had he peed on the floor since their rules does not cover it. The could have pressed charges and have him pay up but they could not kick him out of the league.

Do I have to explain why this is a fucked up argument?

On December 15 2011 03:37 Liquid`Tyler wrote:

i dont know what punishing naniwa by revoking the code S spot he earned accomplishes that couldn't be accomplished in any other way.

i have already discussed this issue with a lot of knowledgeable and experienced people and one of the points that is pretty much universally agreed upon is that the organization running the competition is in the best position to prevent this from happening. they prevent it from happening by removing any possibility for inconsequential games and by making sure players know in advance that they will be required to try their hardest in every match in order to participate in their event. the most effective way of preventing it is certainly not making an example out of the guy who did it ignorantly. no one has ever suggested that.

gomtv decides to act on a very vague rule with a very severe punishment, why? naniwa's offense was not clearly defined going into the tournament and there was no hint at what the punishment would be at all. i can't read the original korean, so i can't speak with complete confidence, but it seems to me like the application of the rule they cite is quite a stretch based on the translation. and they just make up a punishment when someone breaks it. they're very far removed from proper and effective use of a system of rules and penalties. they certainly were not compelled by their own rules to do what they did. so using this rule is an excuse to punish him.

what this move accomplishes business-wise is to make everyone working with them fear them. if you do anything that they don't expect, anything that they weren't clear on or didn't bring up at all, and it works against them, then you should expect a very severe response from them. even if they set you up to do something that's bad for them, they'll still not say anything beforehand and if you go ahead and do something that's bad for them, they retaliate harshly.

imo the standard good business philosophy is to cover your ass as much as possible. and when a business fails to do so, it minimizes damages and learns and fixes the problem for the future. if you are the big kid on the block and you wanna be a bully, then yeah you can be careless and when something goes wrong, don't admit fault and then slap the other guy down and make everyone hate him. if they really think that's optimal, then i'll admit that i don't know everything they know about their own business, so i can't press that too hard. all i can say is it's very improbable that that is optimal. and even if it is optimal for their own business, it's not optimal for the industry. so even if you do want to shield them with "they're just doing what they think is best for their business" i still lose 3 respect points for them.

if they owned up to their mistake and stood by naniwa, then i think this is a situation where it's quite possible to use propaganda (not in an evil deceptive way, but legitimate propaganda to get the masses to understand your decision and agree with it) to make themselves look good, make naniwa look good (which they want because he's in their league and he's one of the few foreigners, extra valuable to them) and make their league look stronger than ever heading into the new year. but no, they're apparently incapable of that (either because of incompetence or emotions).

edit: apparently the conduct rule wasnt used in the official explanation. if that's true, then it's even worse. they went from having a rule that, when stretched, barely is reasonable, to having no rule and just a spontaneous penalty.

On December 15 2011 07:42 Bozotclown wrote:
Why would anybody want to see a shitty meaningless game that two players would only pretend to care about. Naniwa did me as a viewer a huge fucking favour. I haven't got time to spend watching meaningless and poor quality matches to show how "professional" they are.

On December 15 2011 07:47 1Eris1 wrote:



If you didn't want to watch it, couldn't you have just turned the stream off?

I agree completely. It's easy to demonize NaNiWa, from a fan's perspective. We wanted to see that game. I wanted to see that game. It sucks that we didn't get to, but, we can all agree: that game was pointless. NaNiWa made a bad decision, but how different was this from him doing a proxy 2-gate? Or from doing a 4gate?

On December 15 2011 07:34 CruelZeratul wrote:
So did the 2on2's happen?

On December 15 2011 08:05 SCbiff wrote:


The game was NOT pointless. I wish people would quit saying that. You wanted to see it, I wanted to see it, and a whole bunch of other people, people that are (indirectly) paying Naniwa, wanted to see it. Yes, this game was not going to influence tournament standings, but it was far from "pointless."

On December 15 2011 08:12 Bozotclown wrote:
Fuck the blizzard cup, it had no meaning at all. The players are not going to fucking play well in a meaningless game, its pointless anyway you look at it. If you want to see two players play a game neither of them care about you are a moron.