|
Lots of people are coming out and basically blaming the foreign teams for destroying the base that Korean teams created. This is ridiculously bothersome. Do the Korean teams just ignore what is going on outside of their country? It's not 'their way or the highway.' Starcraft 2 is a global game. When they were talking about these verbal agreements of trust and friendship, they should have considered that the Korean teams are not the only teams out there.
It's just a very ethnocentric viewpoint that needs to stop. Korea may be the Mecca of SC, but that doesn't mean that they're the only place where it exists.
|
On July 22 2011 03:48 TheButtonmen wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:46 GreEny K wrote:On July 22 2011 03:41 Mr Showtime wrote:On July 21 2011 15:00 Milkis wrote:
Update: TSL Coach Lee Woon Jae explains his stance
Coach Lee Woon Jae of TSL talked with TeamLiquid, trying to clear up some of the misunderstandings while explaining the situation from his point of view:
"It's not just TSL, but most Starcraft II teams right now run on trust and faith instead of contracts.
I'm sorry, but that's just downright stupid. You should know that stuff like this is going to happen if you don't have contracts. This a business and a full time job for these players. Relying on "trust and faith" is quite idiotic to put it bluntly. Hopefully this is a good lesson to all teams and managers out there. That's just it, this doesn't happen in Korea. Then why does Kespa have such strict rules, why do Korean companies use contracts like everyone else? Stop generalizing them all into your idea of their culture.
Stop mixing games... BW is not SC2 and SC2 doesn't have problems with teams stealing each others players.
|
On July 22 2011 03:44 Falcor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:41 KingTony wrote:
GET EG IN GSTL NOWWWWWWWWWW
Seriously, if what the TSL Coach says about EG approaching players from other teams is true, EG in the GSTL would be hella drama exciting! because they have one player that can compete vs koreans....riiiiiite
lol now I'm hoping that EG puts together a team in korea composed of great code B players. I mean they seem to have a ton of money would it be that hard to persuade Sage or maybe even DRG (in my wildest dreams)?
|
On July 22 2011 03:43 Gnabgib wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:40 Snorkle wrote:
Welcome to big business. Also as I said before, the west needs to stop having big tournaments and paying players big money. Its ruining Esports. LOL.... are you serious? I mean... just... wow.
Your sarcasm detector needs serious work. I defend eg in the first part of my post that you don't quote and then you think that absurd statement is my actual view? Sigh. Ill put it plainly no contract means eg did nothing wrong. Puma on twitter said he talked to his team first. Big money and big tournaments outside of korea are the best thing that could happen to Esports. Hope that clears it up for you.
|
On July 22 2011 03:49 papaz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:47 FairForever wrote:On July 22 2011 03:43 zeru wrote:
Im wondering what the korean players association is saying about this, or if they even are saying anything at all. Because Korean players aren't stupid, each player knows he could be next to get an offer that is probably 10x better than what he's getting in Korea. My guess: PuMa gets virtually no salary, is a practice partner. Qualifies for NASL and wins. EG approaches him. Has part of his NASL winnings taken by TSL. Fair enough. Realizes he can have a higher base salary and probably 100% of prize money by switching to EG. What kind of player would not make that switch? The switch is fine. The way it happened isn't. Just because we like to compare this event to how corporates work and hire people from other companies doesn't make this sitatuation any better. It's a shame this had to happen from a non-korean team in this way.
I'm not commenting on the morals, personally I think EG could've (and should've) handled it better. But players benefit from this, EG benefits from this, TSL looks like a loser but that's probably because they don't pay well enough.
|
On July 22 2011 03:47 JinDesu wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:44 Angelbelow wrote:On July 22 2011 03:39 JinDesu wrote:On July 22 2011 03:31 SourD wrote:On July 22 2011 03:28 j3i wrote:On July 22 2011 03:22 Soap wrote:"It's not just TSL, but most Starcraft II teams right now run on trust and faith instead of contracts. So the korean SC2 scene is being run by amateurs, no wonder it isn't exactly thriving. This is new. The Korean sc2 scene being called amateurs. wow actually sc2 teams in korea atleast at the management level does seem to be a bit amateurish. little or no solid infrastructure built in.. ...really, what makes you say that? Is there something wrong with running on trust and faith? It worked for all the korean teams until a foreign team stepped in and basically ruined it. And for those people saying "contracts are necessary, oh they should have a contract, blah blah" - THIS event is the reason why sport associations require contracts and punish player poaching. Also, for those of you who say "oh in the west, we work based on money only, player poaching is totally normal" - if that's true, then why are there rules against player poaching? It's still wrong. In what sport or business would running a team on trust and faith work? If they really only run on trust and faith, then I think it was just a matter of time. If it wasnt EG it was gonna be someone else. I think TSL kept their players happy by giving them salaries but i think so somewhere along the line they lost their sponsors or their salary option for the players. Now half their team is gone. It's worked for them until now. And the reason why the whole playing field changed now is because a foreign team decided to do something that is normally considered disrespectful in ANY team sport.
Then it was never destined to work in the first place. I think its common sense, you play the game of trust and faith in a business and youre eventually going to get burned. We dont live in an ideal world where honor, trust, mutual respect exists. You either accept it and move or you reject it and remain in your own imagine perfect world. Neither mentally is wrong.
|
Now all we need is for Nestea, MC, and Slayersboxer to all quit their teams and take pay cuts to be on one super team. (i realize Boxer isnt the best T in the world... but he def has the biggest fan count and brings the most attention).
Would be exactly like the NBA. woot.
|
If TSL is underpaying its players then it would be wrong of them to be upset at this move. However, it would be interesting to know if TSL would be capable of matching or even bettering EG's offer. Overall, good for Puma for providing himself with more financial security, I wonder who he will be able to practice with now that he's no longer in the TSL house though. Will EG players go back to korea? Or will he just ladder alone?
|
On July 22 2011 03:47 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:43 zeru wrote:
Im wondering what the korean players association is saying about this, or if they even are saying anything at all. Because Korean players aren't stupid, each player knows he could be next to get an offer that is probably 10x better than what he's getting in Korea. My guess: PuMa gets virtually no salary, is a practice partner. Qualifies for NASL and wins. EG approaches him. Has part of his NASL winnings taken by TSL. Fair enough. Realizes he can have a higher base salary and probably 100% of prize money by switching to EG. What kind of player would not make that switch?
I think people are arguing about whether the business transaction was done properly or not, not really about if Puma made the right choice in going for more money. You always look out for yourself first.
|
I don't really know what to think of this. On the one hand I guess Puma is free to do as he chooses since he is not under contract, so I see no fault on his part. EG is also free to take on a player if they are not under contract....but EG had to know TSL would not like this, and they apparently don't take Korean-Foreign team relations seriously at all.
|
United States12607 Posts
On July 22 2011 03:48 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:46 [Atomic]Peace wrote:On July 22 2011 03:40 JWD wrote:On July 22 2011 03:34 TBO wrote:
does anyone know how common oral or even implied-in-fact contracts are in Korea? (I mean staying on a team for months, getting accomodation and food, maybe even a salary can very much be considered as a contractual relationship even without a contract in some countries as far as I know) I don't know what the law is in Korea, but based on my (pretty good) knowledge of U.S. contract law I would be very surprised if any court would recognize an implied contract here that would prevent PuMa from talking to other teams or switching to another team. U.S. courts are quite hostile to oral and especially implied contracts; the thinking is (and it's smart thinking) that if the parties really wanted to bind themselves, they would have written their terms out. And I mean, the argument that PuMa committed never to switch to another SC2 team by accepting payment for his services at TSL is pretty absurd on its face. Edit: [Atomic]Peace what you are missing (I am pretty sure, and with all respect) is that to recover on any implied contract here, TSL would need to show not only that there was an implied agreement to exchange food etc. for playing services but also that the agreement included a NCC preventing PuMa from doing what he did here. That's a big stretch, to say the least. I agree with your analysis. Like I said, I do not think the court would compel Puma to remain on TSL because there is nothing here that suggests a NCC. But I do think an argument could be made that TSL suffered damages because Puma has not played for them (loss of sponsorship, Puma took up some of the coaches time, etc). Essentially we can view this as a business who housed and trained an employee and then the employee moved to another company. Without a NCC the move is allowed, but the employer still suffered damages. I think TSL would be entitled to recover these damages from Puma. After all, if the coach spent 2 hours per day on Puma when he could have been training someone else, that represets a very real cost to the team. You are making a huge assumption - that PuMa had a breach of contract. You first need to establish that a contract existed.
This is correct. Even if TSL suffers from this it cannot recover without first establishing liability. Its best theory is for breach of contract, which means it must show a contract existed and that PuMa breached it. TSL can't recover just because it may have suffered damages as a result of PuMa's actions -- it needs to show that those actions were wrongful to be entitled to recovery.
We've become sort of sidetracked here 
I think the bottom line is just that, given what we know, TSL doesn't have any legal remedy against PuMa.
|
On July 21 2011 15:09 Tantaburs wrote:
I guess this is what JP was alluding to on SotG last night about EG being like the Yankees of SC2
Except that the Yankees win. The better analogy for EG would be the Mets.
|
On July 22 2011 03:50 eauxlune wrote:
Lots of people are coming out and basically blaming the foreign teams for destroying the base that Korean teams. This is ridiculously bothersome. Do the Korean teams just ignore what is going on outside of their country? It's not 'their way or the highway.' Starcraft 2 is a global game. When they were talking about these verbal agreements of trust and friendship, they should have considered that the Korean teams are not the only teams out there.
It's just a very ethnocentric viewpoint that needs to stop. Korea may be the Mecca of SC, but that doesn't mean that they're the only place where it exists.
Did you not read the first post and a lot of other comments?
Nobody is saying Korean players shouldn't join non-korean teams. The issue here is the way the switch happened.
You don't see a thread like this when Rain left TSL for a foreign team do you? Did you stop and think why that is?
|
On July 22 2011 03:49 Gheed wrote:
If Puma was never contractually on TSL, then why are they saying they "released" him? Is this some artifact of the translation, or just some passive-aggressive commentary on the situation? Seems to me like he just got a better deal and split because nothing was stopping him.
bingo
TSL should provide contracts to clide and alive as soon as possible unless TSL wants to get disbanded soon
|
Look forward to this being the end of Korean players switching teams as freely as before. Whether it's for better or worse they've now lost a bit of freedom and will probably be regulated until certain points in the year rather than anytime.
|
On July 22 2011 03:50 TBO wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:46 vojnik wrote:On July 22 2011 03:45 TBO wrote:On July 22 2011 03:43 FairForever wrote:On July 22 2011 03:40 JWD wrote:On July 22 2011 03:34 TBO wrote:
does anyone know how common oral or even implied-in-fact contracts are in Korea? (I mean staying on a team for months, getting accomodation and food, maybe even a salary can very much be considered as a contractual relationship even without a contract in some countries as far as I know) I don't know what the law is in Korea, but based on my (pretty good) knowledge of U.S. contract law I would be very surprised if any court would recognize an implied contract here that would prevent PuMa from talking to other teams or switching to another team. U.S. courts are quite hostile to oral and especially implied contracts; the thinking is (and it's smart thinking) that if the parties really wanted to bind themselves, they would have written their terms out. And I mean, the argument that PuMa committed never to switch to another SC2 team by accepting payment for his services at TSL is pretty absurd on its face. This is the crux. Unless TSL can show that PuMa had an oral agreement to stay for a determinable, finite and reasonable period of time (reasonable being something not like 50 years), there isn't even a way to start the argument. I agree that it would be hilarious to assume he committed to never switch teams, however he is leaving TSL in mid-season of GSTL, where he played games in. Usually if you play in a league you don't switch teams mid-season. Trickster. Fruitdealer? left on June 24th, TSL had first game of season on June 30th.
It doesn't matter. It may be disrespectful but the existence and participation of the GSTL has no effect on a potential contract (which IMO did not even exist).
|
On July 22 2011 03:50 TBO wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:46 vojnik wrote:On July 22 2011 03:45 TBO wrote:On July 22 2011 03:43 FairForever wrote:On July 22 2011 03:40 JWD wrote:On July 22 2011 03:34 TBO wrote:
does anyone know how common oral or even implied-in-fact contracts are in Korea? (I mean staying on a team for months, getting accomodation and food, maybe even a salary can very much be considered as a contractual relationship even without a contract in some countries as far as I know) I don't know what the law is in Korea, but based on my (pretty good) knowledge of U.S. contract law I would be very surprised if any court would recognize an implied contract here that would prevent PuMa from talking to other teams or switching to another team. U.S. courts are quite hostile to oral and especially implied contracts; the thinking is (and it's smart thinking) that if the parties really wanted to bind themselves, they would have written their terms out. And I mean, the argument that PuMa committed never to switch to another SC2 team by accepting payment for his services at TSL is pretty absurd on its face. This is the crux. Unless TSL can show that PuMa had an oral agreement to stay for a determinable, finite and reasonable period of time (reasonable being something not like 50 years), there isn't even a way to start the argument. I agree that it would be hilarious to assume he committed to never switch teams, however he is leaving TSL in mid-season of GSTL, where he played games in. Usually if you play in a league you don't switch teams mid-season. Trickster. Fruitdealer? left on June 24th, TSL had first game of season on June 30th. @JWD what I am pointing at is that TSL had to have reasonable believe that PuMa would finish the season for them. It's surely nothing which would uphold in court and imo it would be silly to go to court even if there was way better evidence.
[/QUOTE]
It doesn't matter. It may be disrespectful but the existence and participation of the GSTL has no effect on a potential contract (which IMO did not even exist).[/QUOTE]
guess you are right from a legal standpoint but can totally understand at how mad TSL is...
|
On July 22 2011 03:48 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:46 [Atomic]Peace wrote:On July 22 2011 03:40 JWD wrote:On July 22 2011 03:34 TBO wrote:
does anyone know how common oral or even implied-in-fact contracts are in Korea? (I mean staying on a team for months, getting accomodation and food, maybe even a salary can very much be considered as a contractual relationship even without a contract in some countries as far as I know) I don't know what the law is in Korea, but based on my (pretty good) knowledge of U.S. contract law I would be very surprised if any court would recognize an implied contract here that would prevent PuMa from talking to other teams or switching to another team. U.S. courts are quite hostile to oral and especially implied contracts; the thinking is (and it's smart thinking) that if the parties really wanted to bind themselves, they would have written their terms out. And I mean, the argument that PuMa committed never to switch to another SC2 team by accepting payment for his services at TSL is pretty absurd on its face. Edit: [Atomic]Peace what you are missing (I am pretty sure, and with all respect) is that to recover on any implied contract here, TSL would need to show not only that there was an implied agreement to exchange food etc. for playing services but also that the agreement included a NCC preventing PuMa from doing what he did here. That's a big stretch, to say the least. I agree with your analysis. Like I said, I do not think the court would compel Puma to remain on TSL because there is nothing here that suggests a NCC. But I do think an argument could be made that TSL suffered damages because Puma has not played for them (loss of sponsorship, Puma took up some of the coaches time, etc). Essentially we can view this as a business who housed and trained an employee and then the employee moved to another company. Without a NCC the move is allowed, but the employer still suffered damages. I think TSL would be entitled to recover these damages from Puma. After all, if the coach spent 2 hours per day on Puma when he could have been training someone else, that represets a very real cost to the team. You are making a huge assumption - that PuMa had a breach of contract. You first need to establish that a contract existed. That means you need a definitive length of time which PuMa was contracted to TSL. Unless they can use something circumstantial (eg. all other TSL players stay for 3 years requirement... that would be flimsy but at least a start) you can't say that PuMa had a contract for X amount of time.
Perhaps you can though. What if the coaches were working with him for the next season of GSL and they developed a plan for him to do well in that specific tournament. That might establish a time period in which Puma was expected to play for TSL, specifically though the end of the tournament. I think a court would find it suspect that he move to a different team and then play in that tournament, utilizing all the training that his previous team has given him.
|
On July 22 2011 03:47 JinDesu wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:44 Angelbelow wrote:On July 22 2011 03:39 JinDesu wrote:On July 22 2011 03:31 SourD wrote:On July 22 2011 03:28 j3i wrote:On July 22 2011 03:22 Soap wrote:"It's not just TSL, but most Starcraft II teams right now run on trust and faith instead of contracts. So the korean SC2 scene is being run by amateurs, no wonder it isn't exactly thriving. This is new. The Korean sc2 scene being called amateurs. wow actually sc2 teams in korea atleast at the management level does seem to be a bit amateurish. little or no solid infrastructure built in.. ...really, what makes you say that? Is there something wrong with running on trust and faith? It worked for all the korean teams until a foreign team stepped in and basically ruined it. And for those people saying "contracts are necessary, oh they should have a contract, blah blah" - THIS event is the reason why sport associations require contracts and punish player poaching. Also, for those of you who say "oh in the west, we work based on money only, player poaching is totally normal" - if that's true, then why are there rules against player poaching? It's still wrong. In what sport or business would running a team on trust and faith work? If they really only run on trust and faith, then I think it was just a matter of time. If it wasnt EG it was gonna be someone else. I think TSL kept their players happy by giving them salaries but i think so somewhere along the line they lost their sponsors or their salary option for the players. Now half their team is gone. It's worked for them until now. And the reason why the whole playing field changed now is because a foreign team decided to do something that is normally considered disrespectful in ANY team sport.
You are putting TSL on way to high of a moral code. We do not know how TSL treated its players. You can say there is a culture in Korea that allows them to run on trust and respect. That only works if both side feel the are benefiting from that. Are the players really feeling like the TSL coaching staff and business end was treating them properly? We don't know but including Puma that is 4 players in a month or two month span. That is usually a sign of something when a team can't hold players with "trust and respect".
|
On July 22 2011 03:51 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:49 papaz wrote:On July 22 2011 03:47 FairForever wrote:On July 22 2011 03:43 zeru wrote:
Im wondering what the korean players association is saying about this, or if they even are saying anything at all. Because Korean players aren't stupid, each player knows he could be next to get an offer that is probably 10x better than what he's getting in Korea. My guess: PuMa gets virtually no salary, is a practice partner. Qualifies for NASL and wins. EG approaches him. Has part of his NASL winnings taken by TSL. Fair enough. Realizes he can have a higher base salary and probably 100% of prize money by switching to EG. What kind of player would not make that switch? The switch is fine. The way it happened isn't. Just because we like to compare this event to how corporates work and hire people from other companies doesn't make this sitatuation any better. It's a shame this had to happen from a non-korean team in this way. I'm not commenting on the morals, personally I think EG could've (and should've) handled it better. But players benefit from this, EG benefits from this, TSL looks like a loser but that's probably because they don't pay well enough.
Team EG looks like a bunch of losers, but then again, when you have people like idra and incontrol representing you (anyone remember the pre-NASL incontrol incident or anything idra has ever said or done?), this was bound to happen. Shady breeds shady.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
