|
On July 22 2011 04:22 MonsieurGrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:22 [Atomic]Peace wrote:On July 22 2011 04:19 LegendaryZ wrote:
I'm concerned about the effects this event is going to have. Some people seem to believe that this kind of thing is somehow positive for eSports and will help it grow because players will have more power to guarantee themselves better conditions. I disagree with this and believe that it may very well negatively affect the eSports scene.
Up until this point, the Starcraft 2 scene has largely been run on trust and cooperation. This is what has allowed for the relative lack of regulation within teams and across leagues. EG in this instance has essentially abused that trust and taken advantage of it by poaching a player at a foreign event. You can certainly fault TSL for lacking foresight and not mandating a contract, but this type of naivete is pretty much what many people praised about the SC2 scene. We like to bash KeSPA for its heavy regulations and control over players, but that's exactly what people faulting TSL are arguing should be the norm while at the same time not wanting such a regulatory body to come into fruition.
I'm afraid that a KeSPA-like organization or at least that type of atmosphere is going to be created in response to this, effectively forcing players into contracts and heavily regulating their freedoms in an effort for teams to ensure the protection of their investments. While what EG has done here isn't necessarily wrong, it can't be denied that they've effectively "changed the game" as far as the way teams and players interact goes and the statement that Manager Lee made about measures being put into place in order to prevent this from happening in the future is an immediate indicator of that. The sweet and innocent SC2 scene that we've known so far has all of a sudden become serious business with all of the atmosphere of distrust that comes with it.
It may make the scene more legitimate and closer to the real sports leagues that we see today, but I wonder if that's what we really want for SC2. After all, KeSPA was undeniably an effective organization whose methods, while somewhat ruthless, are tried and true in the business sense (EG would have never been able to pull this on one of their teams or players). Honestly though, when you consider this, don't we want teams to be a little bit more naive and trusting if only for the sake of the players? KeSPA2 will only happen in the players themselves accept it. And I think they wont, given the treatment of players under KeSPA. I really hope they don't.
Even if they accept it in Korea, such an organization would never happen in the US. And there's just as much money to be had by players (if not more) in the US.
|
A governing body is not necessary to rule situations like this, all it takes is a competent manager to put early termination penalties on an actual contract.
What it is useful for is to ensure a stable scene for sponsors to invest into.
The current SC2 leagues are run by the broadcaster. If GOM loses interest, it ceases to exist.
If OGN/MBC decide to focus on something else, the sponsors still have KeSPA to talk to and work out a solution.
|
United States12607 Posts
On July 22 2011 04:22 [Atomic]Peace wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:19 LegendaryZ wrote:
I'm concerned about the effects this event is going to have. Some people seem to believe that this kind of thing is somehow positive for eSports and will help it grow because players will have more power to guarantee themselves better conditions. I disagree with this and believe that it may very well negatively affect the eSports scene.
Up until this point, the Starcraft 2 scene has largely been run on trust and cooperation. This is what has allowed for the relative lack of regulation within teams and across leagues. EG in this instance has essentially abused that trust and taken advantage of it by poaching a player at a foreign event. You can certainly fault TSL for lacking foresight and not mandating a contract, but this type of naivete is pretty much what many people praised about the SC2 scene. We like to bash KeSPA for its heavy regulations and control over players, but that's exactly what people faulting TSL are arguing should be the norm while at the same time not wanting such a regulatory body to come into fruition.
I'm afraid that a KeSPA-like organization or at least that type of atmosphere is going to be created in response to this, effectively forcing players into contracts and heavily regulating their freedoms in an effort for teams to ensure the protection of their investments. While what EG has done here isn't necessarily wrong, it can't be denied that they've effectively "changed the game" as far as the way teams and players interact goes and the statement that Manager Lee made about measures being put into place in order to prevent this from happening in the future is an immediate indicator of that. The sweet and innocent SC2 scene that we've known so far has all of a sudden become serious business with all of the atmosphere of distrust that comes with it.
It may make the scene more legitimate and closer to the real sports leagues that we see today, but I wonder if that's what we really want for SC2. After all, KeSPA was undeniably an effective organization whose methods, while somewhat ruthless, are tried and true in the business sense (EG would have never been able to pull this on one of their teams or players). Honestly though, when you consider this, don't we want teams to be a little bit more naive and trusting if only for the sake of the players? KeSPA2 will only happen in the players themselves accept it. And I think they wont, given the treatment of players under KeSPA.
What's your basis for the bolded statement (I'm legitimately curious; not a knock)? I haven't ever heard that KeSPA was created or ever promulgated rules with the consent of the players. My understanding is that KeSPA is an organization founded and controlled by the Korean government and the team sponsors, not the players.
Edit: a post from Milkis (below) indicates that my understanding of KeSPA is inaccurate, in that the organization does not have government connections. Fact checking underway.
Edit 2: based on stuff I've learned in this thread it seems that KeSPA has government connections (it's government-approved or possibly run under an arm of the Korean government, and may receive money from the government). But there is no direct evidence that KeSPA is "controlled" in part by the Korean government.
|
EG, what do you say to TSL's accusation that you lied? Where is your secondary damage control team for the damage control team?
|
doesn't really matter to me. I'm not rooting for either side. seems like Puma did what was in his best interest which is money. EG is spending money for a good player. I think in the long run, it will hurt PUma. But he is probably enjoying the money, that is Puma. there's been much worse Foreign takeovers or poaches of Korean or asian corporations by American pigs like GM. I've witnessed much worse than this irrelevant affair.
|
On July 22 2011 04:16 Wuster wrote:
Just recently FXO approached fOu organization to organization with none of this drama involved, even though they could have tried to poach all their best players (and probably would have succeeded considering how many players have left fOu in the last year).
Just to clarify, fOu approached FXO management as they were "moving out" of the fOu house. See last week's state of the game (I think?? don't quote me as a source but it WAS mentioned by the fxo staff on a podcast)
|
On July 22 2011 04:22 shawster wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:20 GreEny K wrote:On July 22 2011 04:18 shawster wrote:
so i'm in the middle of the shitstorm but i gotta ask something, i can't really form an opinion
so from what i've read so far, puma was approached by eg directly and this was questionable.
but why is giving a player a lucrative contract in any way stealing a player? why couldn't the korean team give him a offer that matches EG's offer? if TSL wasn't able to match it and puma went to EG that wouldn't be unethical or anything, it's just one team wanting a player more than another team.
unless the shitstorm is about how the management could've stopped puma from leaving and they weren't able to. maybe it's my western state of mind that tells me that if one team pays more the team should get it. You came in really late to this argument, this has already been discussed multiple times. People can't agree on if it is right or wrong to do something like that. oh so people are arguing over whether it's right for a player to go where the money is? or is it about how foreign teams shouldn't confront the player without talking to the team? still kinda lost
yes and yes. TSL provided shelter, training, food for 10 months. No contract, but some would think that Puma has implied obligations to TSL in regards to loyalty. Puma jumps ship for $$$ and people are debating whether that can be considered acceptable.
|
On July 22 2011 04:19 LegendaryZ wrote:
I'm concerned about the effects this event is going to have. Some people seem to believe that this kind of thing is somehow positive for eSports and will help it grow because players will have more power to guarantee themselves better conditions. I disagree with this and believe that it may very well negatively affect the eSports scene.
Up until this point, the Starcraft 2 scene has largely been run on trust and cooperation. This is what has allowed for the relative lack of regulation within teams and across leagues. EG in this instance has essentially abused that trust and taken advantage of it by poaching a player at a foreign event. You can certainly fault TSL for lacking foresight and not mandating a contract, but this type of naivete is pretty much what many people praised about the SC2 scene. We like to bash KeSPA for its heavy regulations and control over players, but that's exactly what people faulting TSL are arguing should be the norm while at the same time not wanting such a regulatory body to come into fruition.
I'm afraid that a KeSPA-like organization or at least that type of atmosphere is going to be created in response to this, effectively forcing players into contracts and heavily regulating their freedoms in an effort for teams to ensure the protection of their investments. While what EG has done here isn't necessarily wrong, it can't be denied that they've effectively "changed the game" as far as the way teams and players interact goes and the statement that Manager Lee made about measures being put into place in order to prevent this from happening in the future is an immediate indicator of that. The sweet and innocent SC2 scene that we've known so far has all of a sudden become serious business with all of the atmosphere of distrust that comes with it.
It may make the scene more legitimate and closer to the real sports leagues that we see today, but I wonder if that's what we really want for SC2. After all, KeSPA was undeniably an effective organization whose methods, while somewhat ruthless, are tried and true in the business sense (EG would have never been able to pull this on one of their teams or players). Honestly though, when you consider this, don't we want teams to be a little bit more naive and trusting if only for the sake of the players?
Wtf are you talking about? All of a sudden Sc2 is about honor and duty instead of playing the game, apparently the biggest reason we all enjoy Sc2, at least until now, was its naivete? What kind of garbage is this? Besides, this does not demonstrate the need for a KESPA type situation at all, it demonstrates that teams ought to pay more attention and perform due diligence when it comes to their relationships with players. Teams can be business savvy and protected from players steals without some huge governing body, it's called simply contract law.
|
On July 22 2011 04:24 Sein wrote:
EG, what do you say to TSL's accusation that you lied? Where is your secondary damage control team for the damage control team?
What bothers me the most are the tweets coming from EG's team manager:
SirScoots SirScoots
I see esports journalism continues its fine tradition of no fact checking! Bravo! Bravo! /me rolls eyes
11 hours ago
@thedevilshorse @OrangeMilkis Actually, I was not talking about them either...everyone assumes to "know" everything these days. 
11 hours ago
@thirnaz umadbro?
9 hours ago
@ZinZio what does laughing at your comment do then? 
3 hours ago
@ZinZio Then you should not be so quick to judge without hearing all the facts eh? Just a thought or take jabs and hate instead I guess.
3 hours ago
|
On July 22 2011 03:43 JinDesu wrote:Show nested quote +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. Except that this method WORKED FOR THEM until a FOREIGN TEAM took a player. Relying on "trust and faith" in a society that highly prides honor and family is not idiotic.
Yeah go tell the CEO's of the Hyundai companies, Samsung, KIA, and LG then talk about them priding themselves in honor and family in business practices. You generalize Koreans too much and the conventional wisdom that has existed is changing.
|
5003 Posts
On July 22 2011 04:23 JWD wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:22 [Atomic]Peace wrote:On July 22 2011 04:19 LegendaryZ wrote:
I'm concerned about the effects this event is going to have. Some people seem to believe that this kind of thing is somehow positive for eSports and will help it grow because players will have more power to guarantee themselves better conditions. I disagree with this and believe that it may very well negatively affect the eSports scene.
Up until this point, the Starcraft 2 scene has largely been run on trust and cooperation. This is what has allowed for the relative lack of regulation within teams and across leagues. EG in this instance has essentially abused that trust and taken advantage of it by poaching a player at a foreign event. You can certainly fault TSL for lacking foresight and not mandating a contract, but this type of naivete is pretty much what many people praised about the SC2 scene. We like to bash KeSPA for its heavy regulations and control over players, but that's exactly what people faulting TSL are arguing should be the norm while at the same time not wanting such a regulatory body to come into fruition.
I'm afraid that a KeSPA-like organization or at least that type of atmosphere is going to be created in response to this, effectively forcing players into contracts and heavily regulating their freedoms in an effort for teams to ensure the protection of their investments. While what EG has done here isn't necessarily wrong, it can't be denied that they've effectively "changed the game" as far as the way teams and players interact goes and the statement that Manager Lee made about measures being put into place in order to prevent this from happening in the future is an immediate indicator of that. The sweet and innocent SC2 scene that we've known so far has all of a sudden become serious business with all of the atmosphere of distrust that comes with it.
It may make the scene more legitimate and closer to the real sports leagues that we see today, but I wonder if that's what we really want for SC2. After all, KeSPA was undeniably an effective organization whose methods, while somewhat ruthless, are tried and true in the business sense (EG would have never been able to pull this on one of their teams or players). Honestly though, when you consider this, don't we want teams to be a little bit more naive and trusting if only for the sake of the players? KeSPA2 will only happen in the players themselves accept it. And I think they wont, given the treatment of players under KeSPA. What's your basis for the bolded statement (I'm legitimately curious; not a knock)? I haven't ever heard that KeSPA was created or ever promulgated rules with the consent of the players. My understanding is that KeSPA is an organization founded and controlled by the Korean government and the team sponsors, not the players.
Kespa has nothing to do with korean government wtf.
KeSPA originally started the same way as SC2 kespa did fyi.
|
On July 22 2011 04:23 JWD wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:22 [Atomic]Peace wrote:On July 22 2011 04:19 LegendaryZ wrote:
I'm concerned about the effects this event is going to have. Some people seem to believe that this kind of thing is somehow positive for eSports and will help it grow because players will have more power to guarantee themselves better conditions. I disagree with this and believe that it may very well negatively affect the eSports scene.
Up until this point, the Starcraft 2 scene has largely been run on trust and cooperation. This is what has allowed for the relative lack of regulation within teams and across leagues. EG in this instance has essentially abused that trust and taken advantage of it by poaching a player at a foreign event. You can certainly fault TSL for lacking foresight and not mandating a contract, but this type of naivete is pretty much what many people praised about the SC2 scene. We like to bash KeSPA for its heavy regulations and control over players, but that's exactly what people faulting TSL are arguing should be the norm while at the same time not wanting such a regulatory body to come into fruition.
I'm afraid that a KeSPA-like organization or at least that type of atmosphere is going to be created in response to this, effectively forcing players into contracts and heavily regulating their freedoms in an effort for teams to ensure the protection of their investments. While what EG has done here isn't necessarily wrong, it can't be denied that they've effectively "changed the game" as far as the way teams and players interact goes and the statement that Manager Lee made about measures being put into place in order to prevent this from happening in the future is an immediate indicator of that. The sweet and innocent SC2 scene that we've known so far has all of a sudden become serious business with all of the atmosphere of distrust that comes with it.
It may make the scene more legitimate and closer to the real sports leagues that we see today, but I wonder if that's what we really want for SC2. After all, KeSPA was undeniably an effective organization whose methods, while somewhat ruthless, are tried and true in the business sense (EG would have never been able to pull this on one of their teams or players). Honestly though, when you consider this, don't we want teams to be a little bit more naive and trusting if only for the sake of the players? KeSPA2 will only happen in the players themselves accept it. And I think they wont, given the treatment of players under KeSPA. What's your basis for this statement (I'm legitimately curious; not a knock)? I haven't ever heard that KeSPA was created or ever promulgated rules with the consent of the players. My understanding is that KeSPA is an organization founded and controlled by the Korean government and the team sponsors, not the players.
There are two major differences between BW and SC2: (1) the players know how bad KeSPA worked out for them and they might resist it this time and (2) the players have two secondary markets with at least as much money (US and Europe). BW players got kind of screwed because you had to stay in Korea and put up with KeSPA in order to have a career. But in SC2 you can have a career in US and Europe.
|
On July 21 2011 15:00 Milkis wrote:
TSL Coach Lee Woon Jae explains his stance
"It's not just TSL, but most Starcraft II teams right now run on trust and faith instead of contracts. Because of many similar occurances [to Puma's case], we plan to make contracts mandatory
No big deal to set up a small piece of paper from now on. I just hope they don't go too far.
Even teenage leisure football players get simple contracts over here. They are just about a few topics. Like switching the team only at the end of the season. Mid season the other team has to pay a transfer fee the current club demands.
And sometimes a little about money. Like getting 30€ for a goal and if they get a yellow/red card, forget to bring their running shoes to the training or miss a match without exculpation they have to donate a little into to clubs cash box.
That's it.
Should be enough, should be no problem to sign and should be good for the scene as the teams can rely on their players. They don't have to fear every day that someone might get an offer and leave the week after.
|
On July 22 2011 04:21 TedJustice wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:20 GreEny K wrote:On July 22 2011 04:18 shawster wrote:
so i'm in the middle of the shitstorm but i gotta ask something, i can't really form an opinion
so from what i've read so far, puma was approached by eg directly and this was questionable.
but why is giving a player a lucrative contract in any way stealing a player? why couldn't the korean team give him a offer that matches EG's offer? if TSL wasn't able to match it and puma went to EG that wouldn't be unethical or anything, it's just one team wanting a player more than another team.
unless the shitstorm is about how the management could've stopped puma from leaving and they weren't able to. maybe it's my western state of mind that tells me that if one team pays more the team should get it. You came in really late to this argument, this has already been discussed multiple times. People can't agree on if it is right or wrong to do something like that. Wasn't the problem that they didn't even give TSL a chance to convince puma to stay before making their offer?
This hasn't been confirmed by any news source. In truth, I have no idea where this came from and, although it IS possible, there's nothing that indicates EG made a take-it-or-leave-it-without-talking-to-anyone offer.
|
On July 22 2011 04:25 PHC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:24 Sein wrote:
EG, what do you say to TSL's accusation that you lied? Where is your secondary damage control team for the damage control team? What bothers me the most are the tweets coming from EG's team manager: SirScoots SirScoots I see esports journalism continues its fine tradition of no fact checking! Bravo! Bravo! /me rolls eyes 11 hours ago @thedevilshorse @OrangeMilkis Actually, I was not talking about them either...everyone assumes to "know" everything these days. 11 hours ago @thirnaz umadbro? 9 hours ago @ZinZio what does laughing at your comment do then? 3 hours ago @ZinZio Then you should not be so quick to judge without hearing all the facts eh? Just a thought or take jabs and hate instead I guess. 3 hours ago
Lol there we go with one sidedness, did you read what thimaz said? you can't just post one side of a conversation
|
On July 22 2011 04:02 Maghetti wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:39 Ome wrote:On July 22 2011 03:36 Ownos wrote:
What part of "contacting the original team regarding a transfer is a natural courtesy" do people not get? This isn't about contracts! Do competing businesses in the real world contact each other as a courtesy and let them know they're trying to hire their good workers from each other? I seriously doubt any business in South Korea calls up their competition and lets them know beforehand that they are going to offer one of their workers a package to come work for them. If that's not the case in the SC2 teams, that's unfortunate, but very naive of the team managers. Businesses are amoral. They do only what is profitable. What is supposed to prevent them from acting unethically is things like, for example, a thread of angry people on a forum. We're the regulators in this mattter. Often, things that are good business, are things people should be mad about.
"Do competing businesses in the real world contact each other as a courtesy and let them know they're trying to hire their good workers from each other?"
They don't contact each other, which doesn't mean it's an ok thing to do. I posted it earlier in this thread, I worked (in Sweden) for a global company (more than 100k people), #1 in its field a few years ago. One of our main competitors was doing bad for a couple of years in a row, they started calling our employees directly offering them the same salary they had in our company + xx% if they'd agree to just come over. As soon as our manager got informed about it, he called the other company's manager and that shit was soon terminated because if you enter that kind of game, there's no limit to where it would end : salaries would go crazy, working teams would be completely unstable since anyone could leave at any time, nobody would trust the next guy to be there the next day, everyone would look at the next guy as a possible competitor, etc...no company can run that way for a long period of time. There's no law against workers going from one company to another (well there are but lets not get into that) but that's exactly where ethics get into the game, business ethics, personal ethics, and ethics are probably different from one country to another. I don't know how the deal went but EG and/or Puma seem to have done something wrong to upset the TSL coach (and some of the players ?) so it'd be good to have more detailed info to know what went wrong about the deal. Having a contract or not having one can make a huge difference in the western world but I don't know about Korea and the e-sports scene. We shouldn't judge them based on our (western) standards; and if they are different, it was a mistake from EG not to know about them/take them into account (or you just say "screw them, they gotta adapt to our rules, not the other way around, which is usually the western way to do things). And no, businesses are not amoral. People are (or aren't).
|
(semi contradiciting myself throughout, bear with me)
I think people who are talking about breach of contract etc is missing the point. I mean sure he's talking about making contracts mandatory but that is only because of the way EG went about it. And in such a terrible manner too. Of course should they ask the original team first. If they would've asked obviously TSL probably would've said no but then every party would be involved and then PuMa can make his decision from there.
I mean there didn't seem to be a contract in the first place so it wouldn't matter that much from a negotiating aspect but still it's good manner to atleast tell the original team what's up. But yeah it seems to be getting more and more business like so obviously contracts probably will be brought in to the whole scenario, purely from that business aspect.
|
Not quite sure why people are so freaking out about this...
Well now Idra has some competition on his own team!!!
|
![[image loading]](http://www.imageurlhost.com/images/kultd9e8dyu48ylx6t8x.jpg)
I guess I was just confused. I thought they gained a new sponsor. Turns out...
|
What I'm most curious about with all of this, will Puma be attending MLG Anaheim flying the EG flag and destroying the open bracket? I doubt we'll hear anything until that point from EG, because why the hell would they have to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
