Saturday October 11 2008
Counter-Strike
Official Design Partner
Story Header

Counter-Strike: From the desk of BSL: Do we need rules?

By: Jonas Alsaker Vikan - Published February 15, 2008 at 12:48 AM EST - Writer Archive
Jonas Alsaker Vikan examines the need for rules in eSports following ESWC’s controversial decision not to give MYM's 1.6 team the berth to this year’s tournament.


Rules are rules.

The statement is often put to us when we as children demand something that is unreasonable... for our own good, exceptions are not made no matter the whaling we put family and parents through to have our way. In the adult or sporting world, the rules regulate how teams, players and organizations operate.

The point of having rules is to ensure stability and create an even playing field. A playing field where established professionals and happy amateurs can coexist without status creating foregone conclusions should disputes arise.

This week, Meet Your Maker’s claim to a 2008 ESWC auto berth has sparked interest... and debate. However, ESWC’s rules are very clear on this issue. Rule 11 in the rights and duties part of section 3.0 of the tournament rules state the following as the rights of each club / team / organization that enter into their tournament: Creation and management of teams, Property of their team’s sportive results and performances.

This means that you play in the tournament not as an individual that can state individual claims but as part of the unit or organization you represent.

There are grounds for appeal.

While rules should be our framework, they should also have leeway for the most auspicious cases. Cases like this one. PGS did not want to recruit a new team when the old one left but they are left with a berth to the biggest 1.6 tournament of the year. Now, they could elect to send their managers, organizers and staff writers to the tournament to have a jolly good time.

It would be a mockery of our sport but a mockery which is perfectly within their rights as the winning organization in 2007. One could argue that the purpose of rules is to avoid travesties like this. And yes, it is to a point, but not at the cost of someone’s legitimate right to exercise under the existing rules. PGS would become the spite of the eSport world and community should they decide to abuse their right…

…effectively putting them out of business at the same time.

Should they chose to pick up a team with ESWC as a dangling carrot, it has to be considered as water under the bridge, in light of the right the players won for the organization. I truly want to see “Neo”, “kuben”, TaZ”, “LUq” and “loord” try to repeat their awe-inspiring victory from this summer. However, players can never be allowed to be more in control than the organizations that ultimately float their bills and cannot be allowed to take the spoils of victory with them in a legitimate (or illegitimate) transfer to another team or organization.

Where I come from you do not change the rules just because the way they apply to a situation is not convenient at the time – or contrary to popular opinion.

That’s inviting pandemonium.

Pandemonium that, case in point, destroyed WCG Seattle where individual interpretations of common rules squashed hopes of fair and square crowning of a gold medalist. ESWC President Matthieu Dallon addresses this issue in a statement emailed to Gotfrag:

"We have no objections in discussing and / or refining our rule sets. However, we cannot do so at the exact moment when a rule is to be applied" stated Dallon.

This means that no matter how passionate we the fans of electronic sport are about giving the five players that won the cup a free pass, we have to adhere to the same rules that governed the tournament in question. In that case the rules are clear as glass. It may suck but it is only through a rational and cerebral approach to issues like this one that the sport can truly progress and transcend the pimple faced keyboard warriors we’ve all been.

While hearts are racing to see “Neo” in action again it is easy to lose sight of the bigger issue – the future of competitive gaming and electronic sports.

Matthieu Dallon also cleverly recognizes this, whether it was intended as a point in his statement or not. He wrote, "This issue is complex and we believe global reflection on the subject of clubs and their status in electronic sports is fundamental – both for our organization and for the sport."

And who are we kidding anyway?

The Polish team will qualify for San Francisco.

In a world where things change by the split second, it is about the only thing you can bank on in 2008.

User Comments

- 24 Comments

» This story has had 24 comments posted since February 15, 2008 at 12:48 AM EST.

Latest Poll