|
On August 27 2012 06:05 rd wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 05:50 Salazarz wrote:On August 27 2012 05:47 Sandermatt wrote:On August 27 2012 05:40 Salazarz wrote:
Btw, using the logic of eSF fanboys (sorry, I can't think of any other way to call it), eSF players are now being forced to go against their wishes with their boycott - after all, they have said multiple times in the past that playing in OSL and playing against KeSPA players in general is something they really look forward to doing, and want to do. But when eSF decides to boycott OSL despite players saying they want to play in it prior to these events, it's the players themselves deciding what's best for them in the long run. When the KeSPA players said they'd like to compete in GSL when possible and then KeSPA pulls out of GSL4, it's KeSPA forcing players to do shit they don't want to. Hmm!
Because Kespa represents the players employers and not the players. Kespa will ban the players if they join a tournament they do not agree. eSF has no sanction tool. And eSF have been fine in joining any other tournament than GSL. eSF is also fine with playing in OSL and Kespa playing in GSL. Something KeSPA cannot say. I'm pretty sure Coca, Byun, and Naniwa (to name a few) might disagree with you whether eSF / Gom have a 'sanction tool' or not. The thing about KeSPA 'refusing to play in GSL flat out' is bullshit. All they did was they won't play in season 4 - there is no real reason to read further into that. First of all, ESF and GOM are separate entities. Second of all, the players you listed were either "sanctioned" by their team, or by GOM. ESF had nothing to do with either. Also, stop comparing ESF to KeSPA as they are different kinds of representative bodies. One represents players, the other represents sponsors. Pretty EZ to understand. Apparently you need to read further into the consequences of 'not playing in season 4.'
Yeah, just like OGN and KeSPA are separate entities.
As for your second 'point', it doesn't really change anything. The point is players do what they are told by the people in charge; sure you could argue that eSF is managed by people who are closer to e-sports etcetc, but the fact remains that players do what they are told, just like under KeSPA. The different between the two organizations isn't nearly as big as you seem to believe - eSF is pretty much a baby KeSPA.
|
|
|
On August 27 2012 06:10 BgSBendeR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 06:08 Ljas wrote:On August 27 2012 05:58 BgSBendeR wrote:
The only reason GSL / eSF wants KeSPA players to participate now is quite simple. They want to prove that they're best currently in SC2. KeSPA players are still playing BW, by S5 of GSL they would have fully transitioned to sc2 and it will be much harder to prove that they're the best and so, if they fail to beat the KeSPA players then, I'm pretty sure they'll become irrelevant in Korea since KeSPA will have the best players. How is this in any way a reasonable argument when GSL players were allowed to participate in the OSL? Half KeSPA, half eSF/GSL players.. KeSPA players have a much higher chance at actually winning the OSL compared to the GSL where its like 10:2 eSF/GSL : KeSPA ratio..
So they are not joining because they actually wanted to join even more??? By the time the OSL finishes they would all have had the chance to make it to Code S (one season Code A, if they make it they can play in Code S takes the same time like an OSL). If KeSPa went out and said they will only participate if the GSL gave them more seeds, they would have received much less rejection. Also GSL might even have found a way to make it work to let more Kespa players join.
|
Personally, I believe that Kespa having tight management of their players is a good thing. We all saw what happened at WCS: MC, MVP, & Hero dropping out of the tournament to play in another tournament. It my opinion, that looked very unprofessional, considering the fact that those 3 spots should have been given to 3 other players who really wanted to participate.
|
On August 27 2012 06:13 Yorbon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 06:12 Salazarz wrote:On August 27 2012 06:05 rd wrote:On August 27 2012 05:50 Salazarz wrote:On August 27 2012 05:47 Sandermatt wrote:On August 27 2012 05:40 Salazarz wrote:
Btw, using the logic of eSF fanboys (sorry, I can't think of any other way to call it), eSF players are now being forced to go against their wishes with their boycott - after all, they have said multiple times in the past that playing in OSL and playing against KeSPA players in general is something they really look forward to doing, and want to do. But when eSF decides to boycott OSL despite players saying they want to play in it prior to these events, it's the players themselves deciding what's best for them in the long run. When the KeSPA players said they'd like to compete in GSL when possible and then KeSPA pulls out of GSL4, it's KeSPA forcing players to do shit they don't want to. Hmm!
Because Kespa represents the players employers and not the players. Kespa will ban the players if they join a tournament they do not agree. eSF has no sanction tool. And eSF have been fine in joining any other tournament than GSL. eSF is also fine with playing in OSL and Kespa playing in GSL. Something KeSPA cannot say. I'm pretty sure Coca, Byun, and Naniwa (to name a few) might disagree with you whether eSF / Gom have a 'sanction tool' or not. The thing about KeSPA 'refusing to play in GSL flat out' is bullshit. All they did was they won't play in season 4 - there is no real reason to read further into that. First of all, ESF and GOM are separate entities. Second of all, the players you listed were either "sanctioned" by their team, or by GOM. ESF had nothing to do with either. Also, stop comparing ESF to KeSPA as they are different kinds of representative bodies. One represents players, the other represents sponsors. Pretty EZ to understand. Apparently you need to read further into the consequences of 'not playing in season 4.' Yeah, just like OGN and KeSPA are separate entities. No, they are not. OSL is organised by kespa. Read liquipedia 2 article on kespa.
Are you trolling?
|
On August 27 2012 06:11 Berceno wrote:
I don't care if gom die, KESPA have really good tournaments and the best players, gom have an osl sustitute tournament and a 120p stream
This seems to be KeSPA's opinion too.
|
On August 27 2012 06:14 BlazeFury01 wrote:
Personally, I believe that Kespa having tight management of their players is a good thing. We all saw what happened at WCS: MC, MVP, & Hero dropping out of the tournament to play in another tournament. It my opinion, that looked very unprofessional, considering the fact that those 3 spots should have been given to 3 other players who really wanted to participate.
Actually, Hero's situation was discussed between Team Liquid and GOM prior to the start of the tournament. Both sides agreed that it's better for Hero to participate then drop.
|
Man if you guys got a dollar everytime you wrote a biased as fuck, baseless, pro KeSPA post, with pretty much nothing but logical fallacies, and trying way to hard to pick at others post. Then you'd be fucking millionaires!
User was warned for this post
|
On August 27 2012 06:15 achan1058 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 06:14 BlazeFury01 wrote:
Personally, I believe that Kespa having tight management of their players is a good thing. We all saw what happened at WCS: MC, MVP, & Hero dropping out of the tournament to play in another tournament. It my opinion, that looked very unprofessional, considering the fact that those 3 spots should have been given to 3 other players who really wanted to participate. Actually, Hero's situation was discussed between Team Liquid and GOM prior to the start of the tournament. Both sides agreed that it's better for Hero to participate then drop.
Indeed, but just the fact that the option was available is pretty retarded.
|
On August 27 2012 06:14 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 06:13 Yorbon wrote:On August 27 2012 06:12 Salazarz wrote:On August 27 2012 06:05 rd wrote:On August 27 2012 05:50 Salazarz wrote:On August 27 2012 05:47 Sandermatt wrote:On August 27 2012 05:40 Salazarz wrote:
Btw, using the logic of eSF fanboys (sorry, I can't think of any other way to call it), eSF players are now being forced to go against their wishes with their boycott - after all, they have said multiple times in the past that playing in OSL and playing against KeSPA players in general is something they really look forward to doing, and want to do. But when eSF decides to boycott OSL despite players saying they want to play in it prior to these events, it's the players themselves deciding what's best for them in the long run. When the KeSPA players said they'd like to compete in GSL when possible and then KeSPA pulls out of GSL4, it's KeSPA forcing players to do shit they don't want to. Hmm!
Because Kespa represents the players employers and not the players. Kespa will ban the players if they join a tournament they do not agree. eSF has no sanction tool. And eSF have been fine in joining any other tournament than GSL. eSF is also fine with playing in OSL and Kespa playing in GSL. Something KeSPA cannot say. I'm pretty sure Coca, Byun, and Naniwa (to name a few) might disagree with you whether eSF / Gom have a 'sanction tool' or not. The thing about KeSPA 'refusing to play in GSL flat out' is bullshit. All they did was they won't play in season 4 - there is no real reason to read further into that. First of all, ESF and GOM are separate entities. Second of all, the players you listed were either "sanctioned" by their team, or by GOM. ESF had nothing to do with either. Also, stop comparing ESF to KeSPA as they are different kinds of representative bodies. One represents players, the other represents sponsors. Pretty EZ to understand. Apparently you need to read further into the consequences of 'not playing in season 4.' Yeah, just like OGN and KeSPA are separate entities. No, they are not. OSL is organised by kespa. Read liquipedia 2 article on kespa. Are you trolling? Oops, read wrongly. Sorry.
|
On August 27 2012 06:14 BlazeFury01 wrote:
Personally, I believe that Kespa having tight management of their players is a good thing. We all saw what happened at WCS: MC, MVP, & Hero dropping out of the tournament to play in another tournament. It my opinion, that looked very unprofessional, considering the fact that those 3 spots should have been given to 3 other players who really wanted to participate.
Hero planned to forfait WCS, he was approached by the tournament that he could play until he qualifies and then drop out. MC/MVp might nnot have been very professional, but having KeSPA is too high of a price to pay to avoid that.
|
On August 27 2012 06:16 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 06:15 achan1058 wrote:On August 27 2012 06:14 BlazeFury01 wrote:
Personally, I believe that Kespa having tight management of their players is a good thing. We all saw what happened at WCS: MC, MVP, & Hero dropping out of the tournament to play in another tournament. It my opinion, that looked very unprofessional, considering the fact that those 3 spots should have been given to 3 other players who really wanted to participate. Actually, Hero's situation was discussed between Team Liquid and GOM prior to the start of the tournament. Both sides agreed that it's better for Hero to participate then drop. Indeed, but just the fact that the option was available is pretty retarded.
I disagree on that. It's better for the teams and individual sponsors have more freedom of what tournaments to back, so sponsors will compete with each other.
|
On August 27 2012 06:14 BlazeFury01 wrote:
Personally, I believe that Kespa having tight management of their players is a good thing. We all saw what happened at WCS: MC, MVP, & Hero dropping out of the tournament to play in another tournament. It my opinion, that looked very unprofessional, considering the fact that those 3 spots should have been given to 3 other players who really wanted to participate.
I hope they get sanctioned by GOM for poor sporstmanship. Naniwa was forced to play unnecessary game and these players gave freewins and nothing?
|
On August 27 2012 06:19 Too_MuchZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 06:14 BlazeFury01 wrote:
Personally, I believe that Kespa having tight management of their players is a good thing. We all saw what happened at WCS: MC, MVP, & Hero dropping out of the tournament to play in another tournament. It my opinion, that looked very unprofessional, considering the fact that those 3 spots should have been given to 3 other players who really wanted to participate. I hope they get sanctioned by GOM for poor sporstmanship. Naniwa was forced to play unnecessary game and these players gave freewins and nothing?
There is no way Hero gets sanctioned as said before GOM approached him with this suggestion.
|
On August 27 2012 06:12 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 06:05 rd wrote:On August 27 2012 05:50 Salazarz wrote:On August 27 2012 05:47 Sandermatt wrote:On August 27 2012 05:40 Salazarz wrote:
Btw, using the logic of eSF fanboys (sorry, I can't think of any other way to call it), eSF players are now being forced to go against their wishes with their boycott - after all, they have said multiple times in the past that playing in OSL and playing against KeSPA players in general is something they really look forward to doing, and want to do. But when eSF decides to boycott OSL despite players saying they want to play in it prior to these events, it's the players themselves deciding what's best for them in the long run. When the KeSPA players said they'd like to compete in GSL when possible and then KeSPA pulls out of GSL4, it's KeSPA forcing players to do shit they don't want to. Hmm!
Because Kespa represents the players employers and not the players. Kespa will ban the players if they join a tournament they do not agree. eSF has no sanction tool. And eSF have been fine in joining any other tournament than GSL. eSF is also fine with playing in OSL and Kespa playing in GSL. Something KeSPA cannot say. I'm pretty sure Coca, Byun, and Naniwa (to name a few) might disagree with you whether eSF / Gom have a 'sanction tool' or not. The thing about KeSPA 'refusing to play in GSL flat out' is bullshit. All they did was they won't play in season 4 - there is no real reason to read further into that. First of all, ESF and GOM are separate entities. Second of all, the players you listed were either "sanctioned" by their team, or by GOM. ESF had nothing to do with either. Also, stop comparing ESF to KeSPA as they are different kinds of representative bodies. One represents players, the other represents sponsors. Pretty EZ to understand. Apparently you need to read further into the consequences of 'not playing in season 4.' Yeah, just like OGN and KeSPA are separate entities. As for your second 'point', it doesn't really change anything. The point is players do what they are told by the people in charge; sure you could argue that eSF is managed by people who are closer to e-sports etcetc, but the fact remains that players do what they are told, just like under KeSPA. The different between the two organizations isn't nearly as big as you seem to believe - eSF is pretty much a baby KeSPA.
I never argued OGN and KeSPA weren't separate, and I sympathize with OGN that they're the one losing in all of this. But I hold KeSPA responsible for it.
ESF isn't remotely as powerful as KeSPA when it comes to how they can discipline their players. ESF doesn't hold the priorities of the sponsors above the players. ESF doesn't hold the licenses of their players which they can take away for disobeying a ban and completely pull the rug from their competitive career. ESF can't really force their players to do anything as the player could just leave and find greener grass. Theres a huge difference.
|
On August 27 2012 06:17 achan1058 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 06:16 BlazeFury01 wrote:On August 27 2012 06:15 achan1058 wrote:On August 27 2012 06:14 BlazeFury01 wrote:
Personally, I believe that Kespa having tight management of their players is a good thing. We all saw what happened at WCS: MC, MVP, & Hero dropping out of the tournament to play in another tournament. It my opinion, that looked very unprofessional, considering the fact that those 3 spots should have been given to 3 other players who really wanted to participate. Actually, Hero's situation was discussed between Team Liquid and GOM prior to the start of the tournament. Both sides agreed that it's better for Hero to participate then drop. Indeed, but just the fact that the option was available is pretty retarded. I disagree on that. It's better for the teams and individual sponsors have more freedom of what tournaments to back, so sponsors will compete with each other.
Sponsers will compete with each other regardless. Anytime rival teams players play each other, sponsers are competing. So, saying a player should be able to drop out tournament A to join tournament B so "sponsors will compete with each other" is plain ridiculous.
|
United States23455 Posts
On August 27 2012 06:11 Berceno wrote:
I don't care if gom die, KESPA have really good tournaments and the best players, gom have an osl sustitute tournament and a 120p stream
I am happy you don't run the Starcraft scene, Berceno.
|
On August 27 2012 06:20 rd wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 06:12 Salazarz wrote:On August 27 2012 06:05 rd wrote:On August 27 2012 05:50 Salazarz wrote:On August 27 2012 05:47 Sandermatt wrote:On August 27 2012 05:40 Salazarz wrote:
Btw, using the logic of eSF fanboys (sorry, I can't think of any other way to call it), eSF players are now being forced to go against their wishes with their boycott - after all, they have said multiple times in the past that playing in OSL and playing against KeSPA players in general is something they really look forward to doing, and want to do. But when eSF decides to boycott OSL despite players saying they want to play in it prior to these events, it's the players themselves deciding what's best for them in the long run. When the KeSPA players said they'd like to compete in GSL when possible and then KeSPA pulls out of GSL4, it's KeSPA forcing players to do shit they don't want to. Hmm!
Because Kespa represents the players employers and not the players. Kespa will ban the players if they join a tournament they do not agree. eSF has no sanction tool. And eSF have been fine in joining any other tournament than GSL. eSF is also fine with playing in OSL and Kespa playing in GSL. Something KeSPA cannot say. I'm pretty sure Coca, Byun, and Naniwa (to name a few) might disagree with you whether eSF / Gom have a 'sanction tool' or not. The thing about KeSPA 'refusing to play in GSL flat out' is bullshit. All they did was they won't play in season 4 - there is no real reason to read further into that. First of all, ESF and GOM are separate entities. Second of all, the players you listed were either "sanctioned" by their team, or by GOM. ESF had nothing to do with either. Also, stop comparing ESF to KeSPA as they are different kinds of representative bodies. One represents players, the other represents sponsors. Pretty EZ to understand. Apparently you need to read further into the consequences of 'not playing in season 4.' Yeah, just like OGN and KeSPA are separate entities. As for your second 'point', it doesn't really change anything. The point is players do what they are told by the people in charge; sure you could argue that eSF is managed by people who are closer to e-sports etcetc, but the fact remains that players do what they are told, just like under KeSPA. The different between the two organizations isn't nearly as big as you seem to believe - eSF is pretty much a baby KeSPA. I never argued OGN and KeSPA weren't separate, and I sympathize with OGN that they're the one losing in all of this. But I hold KeSPA responsible for it. ESF isn't remotely as powerful as KeSPA when it comes to how they can discipline their players. ESF doesn't hold the priorities of the sponsors above the players. ESF doesn't hold the licenses of their players which they can take away for disobeying a ban and completely pull the rug from their competitive career. ESF can't really force their players to do anything as the player could just leave and find greener grass. Theres a huge difference.
What makes you think eSF doesn't hold priorities of the sponsors above the players? In fact, the most recent events at WCS prove the opposite.
KeSPA can't force their players to do anything as the player could just leave and find greener grass, too - what makes you think otherwise?
|
the GSL format is really bad. Remove code A and I have no doubt that KeSPA will allow their players to participate.
The whole Code A for 1 season then you get to play in Code S is fucking retarded.
|
On August 27 2012 06:21 BlazeFury01 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 06:17 achan1058 wrote:On August 27 2012 06:16 BlazeFury01 wrote:On August 27 2012 06:15 achan1058 wrote:On August 27 2012 06:14 BlazeFury01 wrote:
Personally, I believe that Kespa having tight management of their players is a good thing. We all saw what happened at WCS: MC, MVP, & Hero dropping out of the tournament to play in another tournament. It my opinion, that looked very unprofessional, considering the fact that those 3 spots should have been given to 3 other players who really wanted to participate. Actually, Hero's situation was discussed between Team Liquid and GOM prior to the start of the tournament. Both sides agreed that it's better for Hero to participate then drop. Indeed, but just the fact that the option was available is pretty retarded. I disagree on that. It's better for the teams and individual sponsors have more freedom of what tournaments to back, so sponsors will compete with each other. Sponsers will compete with each other regardless. Anytime rival teams players play each other, sponsers are competing. So, saying a player should be able to drop out tournament A to join tournament B so "sponsors will compete with each other" is plain ridiculous.
Oh, I meant to say tournament. Anyways, sponsors aren't really competing against each other in KeSPA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
