|
On July 22 2011 04:35 Amui wrote:
Even without a contract, it's extremely unprofessional to contact a player without talking to their coach/team managers first. This is my opinion, but Puma must've been mistreated or is just the majOr of korea because if TSL provided 10 months of food, board and training, he should at least have the decency to stick around and ask his coach, and try and get some sort of compensation from EG rather than leaving immediately.
Here's my imagination behind the scene:
PUMA: I'm thinking of joing EG because I want to be in more foreign tournaments
Coach: RESPECT MY AUTHORITEHHHH
|
On July 22 2011 04:36 legaton wrote:
Liquid - oGs: partnership. Everyone is happy about it.
SK Gaming - oGs: sponsorship for Nada and MC in foreign tournaments. Everyones happy about it
Fanatic - Rain: recruitment of a new player. Some critics against Rain for leaving GSL so abruptly. No critics to Fanatic.
FXO - Fou : buy-out after friendly negotiation. Everyone is happy about it.
EG - TSL/Puma: recruitment of a player behind his team's back, lies about Puma contacting them first. TSL/Korean community is pissed off.
People can claim "that's how capitalism work" all they want. Doesn't change the fact it is a shitty argument. Fanatic, Liquid, FXO, Sk Gaming are all pro structures working under free market conditions (aka capitalism). They had no problem negotiating their way through koreans team and players and founding acceptable agreements for all parties involved. What EG did just shows they have a short-sighted management and poor PR.
Thank you, this is exactly what I wanted people to understand. EG could have handled it better.
|
Any official statement or press release from EG yet?
also, sixjaxCliiide. when's it happening?
|
On July 22 2011 04:37 Nastiness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 03:31 DBOWNIZZ wrote:
My god, IF PUMA HAD A CONTRACT HE WOULD NOT BE ALOUD TO LEAVE TSL....THATS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT OF A CONTRACT, DUHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
User was warned for this post They break contracts all the time in counter-strike, with little to none aftermath. Esport is sucha phoony joke 
Don't see how esports is a joke because people within it break contracts. People outside esports break contracts all the time - they pay the consequences outlined in the contracts for doing so.
|
On July 22 2011 04:35 Amui wrote:
Even without a contract, it's extremely unprofessional to contact a player without talking to their coach/team managers first. This is my opinion, but Puma must've been mistreated or is just the majOr of korea because if TSL provided 10 months of food, board and training, he should at least have the decency to stick around and ask his coach, and try and get some sort of compensation from EG rather than leaving immediately.
Meh. If I was offered a better salary (and likely better living conditions) to do my job for another company I wouldn't feel a moral obligation to try to get my employer compensation for me leaving.
|
On July 22 2011 04:36 legaton wrote:
Liquid - oGs: partnership. Everyone is happy about it.
SK Gaming - oGs: sponsorship for Nada and MC in foreign tournaments. Everyones happy about it
Fanatic - Rain: recruitment of a new player. Some critics against Rain for leaving GSL so abruptly. No critics to Fanatic.
FXO - Fou : buy-out after friendly negotiation. Everyone is happy about it.
EG - TSL/Puma: recruitment of a player behind his team's back, lies about Puma contacting them first. TSL/Korean community is pissed off.
People can claim "that's how capitalism work" all they want. Doesn't change the fact it is a shitty argument. Fanatic, Liquid, FXO, Sk Gaming are all pro structures working under free market conditions (aka capitalism). They had no problem negotiating their way through koreans team and players and founding acceptable agreements for all parties involved. What EG did just shows they have a short-sighted management and poor PR.
no obviously TSL had no contract and they had no power over puma.
puma was free to leave anytime and he did that.
there is no reason for EG to speak with TSL as they had no power over him in any way.
|
On July 22 2011 04:29 JWD wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:26 Milkis wrote:On July 22 2011 04:23 JWD wrote: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. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_e-Sports_Players_AssociationThat article says that KeSPA was formed with the approval of the Korean Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, and that the Ministry is KeSPA's "Parent Organization". That comports with my understanding of KeSPA. Am I and the article both incorrect? Or maybe "Parent Organization" means nothing and there actually is no affiliation between KeSPA and the government (it is listed as an "NGO"). I would love to get more information on this.
KeSPA is just an organization formed to support growth of e-sports in korea. and it is "approved" by a government organization that is "Korean Ministry of Culture". KeSPA is not a government operated by any means. It it just approved by the government to do what it is doing.
|
On July 22 2011 04:38 Ome wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:37 Nastiness wrote:On July 22 2011 03:31 DBOWNIZZ wrote:
My god, IF PUMA HAD A CONTRACT HE WOULD NOT BE ALOUD TO LEAVE TSL....THATS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT OF A CONTRACT, DUHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
User was warned for this post They break contracts all the time in counter-strike, with little to none aftermath. Esport is sucha phoony joke Don't see how esports is a joke because people within it break contracts. People outside esports break contracts all the time - they pay the consequences outlined in the contracts for doing so.
He said "little to no aftermath", so maybe that's the distinction. That it isn't, or cannot be, enforced.
|
Argh if this creates another KeSPA in SC2 >.<
|
On July 22 2011 04:36 legaton wrote:
Liquid - oGs: partnership. Everyone is happy about it.
SK Gaming - oGs: sponsorship for Nada and MC in foreign tournaments. Everyones happy about it
Fanatic - Rain: recruitment of a new player. Some critics against Rain for leaving GSL so abruptly. No critics to Fanatic.
FXO - Fou : buy-out after friendly negotiation. Everyone is happy about it.
EG - TSL/Puma: recruitment of a player behind his team's back, lies about Puma contacting them first. TSL/Korean community is pissed off.
People can claim "that's how capitalism work" all they want. Doesn't change the fact it is a shitty argument. Fanatic, Liquid, FXO, Sk Gaming are all pro structures working under free market conditions (aka capitalism). They had no problem negotiating their way through koreans team and players and founding acceptable agreements for all parties involved. What EG did just shows they have a short-sighted management and poor PR.
Exactly, I would like an honest answer from EG about this.
|
On July 22 2011 04:38 Ome wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:37 Nastiness wrote:On July 22 2011 03:31 DBOWNIZZ wrote:
My god, IF PUMA HAD A CONTRACT HE WOULD NOT BE ALOUD TO LEAVE TSL....THATS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT OF A CONTRACT, DUHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
User was warned for this post They break contracts all the time in counter-strike, with little to none aftermath. Esport is sucha phoony joke Don't see how esports is a joke because people within it break contracts. People outside esports break contracts all the time - they pay the consequences outlined in the contracts for doing so.
Yeah but thats what im saying.. they dont pay any consequences.. and i doubt they will in SC2 either.
|
On July 22 2011 04:39 farnham wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:36 legaton wrote:
Liquid - oGs: partnership. Everyone is happy about it.
SK Gaming - oGs: sponsorship for Nada and MC in foreign tournaments. Everyones happy about it
Fanatic - Rain: recruitment of a new player. Some critics against Rain for leaving GSL so abruptly. No critics to Fanatic.
FXO - Fou : buy-out after friendly negotiation. Everyone is happy about it.
EG - TSL/Puma: recruitment of a player behind his team's back, lies about Puma contacting them first. TSL/Korean community is pissed off.
People can claim "that's how capitalism work" all they want. Doesn't change the fact it is a shitty argument. Fanatic, Liquid, FXO, Sk Gaming are all pro structures working under free market conditions (aka capitalism). They had no problem negotiating their way through koreans team and players and founding acceptable agreements for all parties involved. What EG did just shows they have a short-sighted management and poor PR.
no obviously TSL had no contract and they had no power over puma. puma was free to leave anytime and he did that. there is no reason for EG to speak with TSL as they had no power over him in any way. On July 22 2011 04:38 Ome wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:37 Nastiness wrote:On July 22 2011 03:31 DBOWNIZZ wrote:
My god, IF PUMA HAD A CONTRACT HE WOULD NOT BE ALOUD TO LEAVE TSL....THATS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT OF A CONTRACT, DUHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
User was warned for this post They break contracts all the time in counter-strike, with little to none aftermath. Esport is sucha phoony joke Don't see how esports is a joke because people within it break contracts. People outside esports break contracts all the time - they pay the consequences outlined in the contracts for doing so.
just was going to post this lol
|
|
|
On July 22 2011 04:36 legaton wrote:
Liquid - oGs: partnership. Everyone is happy about it.
SK Gaming - oGs: sponsorship for Nada and MC in foreign tournaments. Everyones happy about it
Fanatic - Rain: recruitment of a new player. Some critics against Rain for leaving GSL so abruptly. No critics to Fanatic.
FXO - Fou : buy-out after friendly negotiation. Everyone is happy about it.
EG - TSL/Puma: recruitment of a player behind his team's back, lies about Puma contacting them first. TSL/Korean community is pissed off.
People can claim "that's how capitalism work" all they want. Doesn't change the fact it is a shitty argument. Fanatic, Liquid, FXO, Sk Gaming are all pro structures working under free market conditions (aka capitalism). They had no problem negotiating their way through koreans team and players and founding acceptable agreements for all parties involved. What EG did just shows they have a short-sighted management and poor PR.
no obviously TSL had no contract and they had no power over puma.
puma was free to leave anytime and he did that.
there is no reason for EG to speak with TSL as they had no power over him in any way.
|
This thread has come full circle, same arguments on page 20, 50, 100, 150, 200... etc
|
On July 22 2011 04:40 zeru wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:37 Nastiness wrote:On July 22 2011 03:31 DBOWNIZZ wrote:
My god, IF PUMA HAD A CONTRACT HE WOULD NOT BE ALOUD TO LEAVE TSL....THATS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT OF A CONTRACT, DUHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
User was warned for this post They break contracts all the time in counter-strike, with little to none aftermath. Esport is sucha phoony joke Actually there was quite a shitstorm in the CS scene during the fnatic SK drama over delphan i think it was. fnatic and SK owners were talking shit over twitter, cs fans were raging pretty hard at SK for what they did im pretty sure.
Fan rage yeah, thats all its ever been. But no legal repercussions.
|
1351 Posts
I think we live in a bubble. The real world is a world of harsh cruelties and treason. This episode is like
comparing a family member who went to another country for a better life (Puma). And you guys are like comparing this situation as though EG kidnapped him and left a ransom note for TSL. Really, EG aren't geniuses, they just did what was in their best interest. They need to make a lot more moves, hopefully backed by Rich Corporations. I hope Samsung and Hyundai start Sponsoring SC2 teams as well for Korea. Sony for Japanese SC2 players.
|
On July 22 2011 04:36 legaton wrote:
Liquid - oGs: partnership. Everyone is happy about it.
SK Gaming - oGs: sponsorship for Nada and MC in foreign tournaments. Everyones happy about it
Fanatic - Rain: recruitment of a new player. Some critics against Rain for leaving GSL so abruptly. No critics to Fanatic.
FXO - Fou : buy-out after friendly negotiation. Everyone is happy about it.
EG - TSL/Puma: recruitment of a player behind his team's back, lies about Puma contacting them first. TSL/Korean community is pissed off.
People can claim "that's how capitalism work" all they want. Doesn't change the fact it is a shitty argument. Fanatic, Liquid, FXO, Sk Gaming are all pro structures working under free market conditions (aka capitalism). They had no problem negotiating their way through koreans team and players and founding acceptable agreements for all parties involved. What EG did just shows they have a short-sighted management and poor PR.
The problem is there are so many loose facts and misinformation, just because the TSL coach said EG approached puma 1st etc doesn't mean thats exactly what hapened, but for all we know it could be. I'm a bit confused as to where EG has even said that Puma approached them first, I havn't seen this anywhere so how are people jumping to a conclusion that this is what happened? Is there some EG response im not aware of?
|
On July 22 2011 04:31 Soap wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:26 [Atomic]Peace wrote:On July 22 2011 04:23 JWD wrote: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. KeSPA worked wonderfully to the players, in comparison to the current SC2 scene. The top BW salary is 10x more than of TSL, and that's from a 13 years old game. B-teamers don't make money on either game anyway.
The fact that top BW salaries are what they are is due to BWs popularity, not due to KeSPA. In fact, KeSPA is probably holding the salaries down. If top players were allowed to have agents I'm guessing they could negotiate for higher salaries.
|
On July 22 2011 04:39 JinDesu wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 04:38 Ome wrote:On July 22 2011 04:37 Nastiness wrote:On July 22 2011 03:31 DBOWNIZZ wrote:
My god, IF PUMA HAD A CONTRACT HE WOULD NOT BE ALOUD TO LEAVE TSL....THATS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT OF A CONTRACT, DUHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
User was warned for this post They break contracts all the time in counter-strike, with little to none aftermath. Esport is sucha phoony joke Don't see how esports is a joke because people within it break contracts. People outside esports break contracts all the time - they pay the consequences outlined in the contracts for doing so. He said "little to no aftermath", so maybe that's the distinction. That it isn't, or cannot be, enforced.
It certainly can be enforced if both parties signed the contract in good faith. You can take someone to court for breach of contract.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
