Thread has been deleted
Last comment
You dont know if they still watch the stream BUT
they did cheat by watching the stream and cheating should not be punished by 10k ... thats nothing!
They should be banned for hallf a year at least! Or they will continue cheating.
as good of a team Vitality is, cheating should not be tolerated or everybody can start doing it!
4 replies
he is B.I.G fan
2 replies
nice iq xd
55 replies
53 replies
The stream was on by accident,nobody looked at it
31 replies
30 replies
yeah imagine having eyes in your back
29 replies
28 replies
"it was in front of them"
No it wasn't lol
16 replies
15 replies
yeah the coach, analyst and the manager ?
It's allowed + no connection to the stream sniping thing
14 replies
13 replies
no It's allowed.
+ the coach was behind the players and not watching the stream screen that was in the room behind them
12 replies
11 replies
the coach was behind the players and not watching the stream
the coach was behind the players and not watching the stream
the coach was behind the players and not watching the stream
the coach was behind the players and not watching the stream
the coach was behind the players and not watching the stream
the coach was behind the players and not watching the stream
8 replies
7 replies
6 replies
5 replies
Tehn throw your big jersey because big used jump bug in a major
3 replies
nt
hltv.org/news/21053/crouch-jump-bug-offi..
2 seconds of research
stop sharing trash
2 replies
the players agreed to not use it but still bug clan used it
1 reply
lost all respect for big fans
9 replies
8 replies
you look like a lot of things atm men))) not good things tho
7 replies
6 replies
what's the point of making a thread if you just ignore all the answers?
there is an official statement and you also ignore it, come on now
next time your big brain comes up with another awesome idea just keep it for yourself then
5 replies
4 replies
#52 bro
3 replies
2 replies
you made no point in your 'responses'
he came up with valid argumentsand you just started barking the same old stuff you've been barking all day, there was no proper response
1 reply
The stream was on a television in a room BEHIND them. It was on because the teams GM was previously watching the G2 vs Astralis match and they didn't turn it off when they went in for their match. There is a five min delay on the stream as well. You can clearly get all the information from RpK's instagram story from yesterday or the day before.
There was no cheating, there was a misunderstanding. Even the CEO of Vitality called them and had them turn it off when it was brought to ESIC and their attention.
Edit: BEHIND them, in another room entirely I should add.
5 replies
1 reply
2 replies
they players didnt even watch that wtf
there were just some guys in the back
13 replies
12 replies
maybe read the statement first
great to see big fans calling out for cheating, while they were the only ones who disagreed a gentlemen agreement in pgl krakow not using the bug haha
11 replies
10 replies
so you admit you have no proof that they stream sniped a delayed stream?
"they have no proof" they have the proof you idiot
idk you're full of bullshit "bro"
9 replies
8 replies
esic has all the footages bro, not just face cameras, but also cameras from an angle, where u see whats behind the pc monitors
also comms ofc, they clearly see when someone cheats dude
why so butthurt about vitality? you only saw the back room lobby, watching the stream, not the players..
6 replies
no i havent said that
if we think that i am a murder yeah send me to prison until i am proofen innocent!!
but if nothing happend dont send me to prison!
so ban Vitality until Proof is visible to everybody out there..
not just a statement but a real proof
i think a real proof aint possible so just ban them for half a year
5 replies
4 replies
3 replies
There's like 12 people in that room and no one noticed the giant TV playing the game, how can you be sure that no one watched the stream?
6 replies
5 replies
no
21 replies
20 replies
I've actually been through this before:
1) This is assuming guilt, which is an obvious sign of your bias. Enough said.
2) They found no malicious intent behind the stream being open. That isn't nothing, it's still breaking the rules and having the stream open, but it is not cheating.
3) This is a conspiracy.
4) As the ESIC themselves stated, the management of Vitality had turned on the stream (presumably for staff to view) within scope of the players themselves, thereby breaking the rules.
I'd like to make it clear that I do not support Vitality's actions, I support the ESIC's response in the given circumstances, and I believe their judgement and resultant punishment to be fair and just.
19 replies
18 replies
It was punished, what are you talking about?
The ESIC punished the management, which they found to be responsible for the stream being open. Since they found no malicious use of the stream content in the audio and VOD of the players, they received no punishment, as the offense is unrelated to them.
17 replies
1 reply
14 replies
Clearly you're too biased to understand a rational opinion.
They found that the stream being open was a management error, and that it had no bearing on the games where it had been open (hence, they found "no malicious intent" in the audio files). Thus, it makes no sense to ban people who never did anything wrong because people associated with them did.
What you're asking for would be the same as banning Skadoodle in the iBP scandal.
13 replies
"managemant error"
management is a part of the team
so the team should be banned!
There are clear rules and if they dont hold onto these rules everybody could just start using wallhack due to the punishment being a joke!!
And where is my opinion not rational??
somone cheated and should be banned! END!
I accept that you have another opinion but i dont agree with it
12 replies
I maintain my final point.
What you're asking for is to ban someone for an offense they are unrelated to the actual committal of, which is the same as banning Skadoodle in the iBP scandal. (This comes through in "management is a part of the team, so the [whole] team should be banned!")
Your third paragraph is simply ridiculous, and is an obvious strawman.
Your opinion isn't rational because you have made no actual attempt to counter-argue any point, and have simply repeated the same points which I have already given counter-arguments to.
To even further that your argument isn't rational, I've already given you the information that tells you there was no cheating found -- rule breaking and cheating are not one in the same. ESIC found that the stream had no bearing on the games where it was open ("no malicious intent"), therefore Vitality gained no advantage from it, therefore there was no cheating taking place.
8 replies
what i am asking for is to keep the given rules!
Because as soon as we start accepting cheating and declaring it as a "mistake" everybody can start doing it!
dude i am not the one not accepting a rational opinion....
cheating is not directly rule breaking ok. But rule breaking should be punsihed (10k is a joke)
or everybody starts breaking rules because it seems ok
7 replies
Once again, you've referred to it as "cheating", which I've already debunked. Again, the breakage of the rules was punished. Your second sentence is a strawman. Your final statement is simply an opinion from someone who is clearly biased. I've given a reason for what you view to be a "joke" punishment at #73.
6 replies
5 replies
4 replies
dude man... you are assuming they are not cheating so you are not very neutral...
10k is nothing absoluetely nothing man they could add 10k and still lough about it!
for breaking rules at least 6 figures should be punished!
This would be scary for other teams to use these things because the punishement is a real threat for some orgs
3 replies
Assuming innocence is what everybody who has a brain does. Claiming it is "not neutral" because you disagree with it doesn't make any sense, as in the vast majority of other cases, the rationality that led to my assumption of innocence is the common practice, and is considered a neutral view. What would make it a non-neutral view is if I assumed innocence for Vitality because they are Vitality, but then didn't apply the same view for other teams.
The rest of #110 continues on your assumption that they are cheating, which the ESIC determined they weren't. Your only evidence is speculation on your part, which you deem to have more weight than it does because you're biased.
2 replies
Assuming innocence is not the way to go..
#if we would do that our justice system would not work out.
Neutral would be saying ok we have the proof of them not communicating directly about it but we have no proof of them using the given info in any way (i explained it is impossible to find)
But we know that they did something not allowed and this leads to them getting punished so that others are not starting using this!
I understand what you mean when you say we have to give everyone the benifit of a doubt but this just makes the system weak and as i said so often!
it opens the door for other teams to abuse it!
1 reply
"if we would do that our justice system would not work out."
Assuming innocence (i.e. reasonable doubt favors the accused) is literally what the German and many other justice systems do. See a full explanation on this here: law.stackexchange.com/questions/40966/in..
You then move on to give what is inherently not a neutral position, as it assumes guilt of the players as you're assuming the players themselves have done something wrong when there is "no proof of them using the ... info in any way".
The management was punished for their actions, which were deemed to be of minimal harm (as there was no effect on the games at hand, as determined by ESIC).
I myself have explained some additional measures which would prevent what you're suggesting could happen in your final section, but as explained in all of the text prior to this, there is no relevance of that to this case, as this is not an abuse case, as per the ESIC.
This is basically saying that we should arrest all Americans if the president commits a crime. I mean, we're all a part of the same country right?
You're a fucking inbred clodpole. Vitality got punished. The players have no reason to be punished if they broke no rules.
Team broke rules = 10k fine
Players did nothing wrong = players don't get banned and there livelihood taken away from them.
It's pretty straight forward and common sense.
2 replies
1 reply
If one person does shit in a company, the whole company doesn't get punished you braindead moron. That's why people get fired.
Vitality broke the rules, so Vitality was punished. 10k
The players only REPRESENT Vitality. They do not own it, run it, own shares of it at all. So why punish people who have no control over the situation?
Players DO NOT need to be punished because of the actions of an Org.
ESIC confirmed they didnt watch the stream,retard.
9 replies
8 replies
6 replies
5 replies
4 replies
3 replies
Why did syrsoN not have his camera on when BIG won those tourneys last year? You don't know if he is cheating BUT, he does not have his camera on, and should not be punished for 10k that's nothing! syrsoN should be banned for a half a year at least! Or syrsoN will continue cheating. As good of an AWPer syrsoN is, cheating should not be tolerated or everybody can start having no camera!
2 replies
1 reply
It was a silly fib my young-one. I didn't want to make a point, but you fell for the trap.
pretty stupid for german hltv user?
2 replies
3 replies
1 reply
the players didnt watch
only the stuff man
chill
2 replies
1 reply
You are a man of justice
JOIN (Justice League)
esasiest bait of your life jermen))))
1 reply
+1 everybody fell for it lmao
banned lul
no
players playing with streams on, disgustang
It's the online era. Everyone can look at the stream if they really want to. If you're cheating you're not putting the fucking screen behind you are you?
I agree that it's retarded to put the stream on player cams but let's not pretend you couldn't easily stream snipe in 2020...
ESIC half asses the whole situation, should've been very strict and have zero tolerance since the very start of quarantine (players looking at phones etc).
Online cs is a joke compared to LAN.
8 replies
7 replies
suspicion of cheating =/= cheating
and they were even cleared and deemed innocent by ESIC after investigation, as written in the article
6 replies
5 replies
I agree about punishment for having the stream on, I'm just saying that they aren't cheaters since they're proven innocent by the ESIC (which checked comms and camera), and you're calling them cheaters which is false info.
4 replies
checking comms and cameras ok. But what if a they were able to see the screen (coach for example) and understood the setup so they were able to avoid the strats of the enemy!
ESIC tryed to proof them innocent but some thing are impossible to proof!
and when we say "unguilty until prooven" then we open something for cheaters to abuse
3 replies
Like I said in my initial comment, the ESIC (and TOs) should've handled the online era with an iron fist since the start of the online era so as to leave no room for breach of competitive integrity.
Unfortunately I think there are ways to cheat by stream sniping in online cs which can never be covered and monitored fully. Online CS is just shit.
2 replies
1 reply
hltv.org/news/30754/mibr-fined-by-flashp..
they chose to be lax since the start, it's their choice. Now they are forced to handle bitch weak punishments because they didn't commit to harsher ones first. It would be unfair otherwise.
I assume flashpoint followed the ESIC's advice since the punishment is the same for the same fault
Innocent until proven otherwise.
Too much salt makes you biased.
2 replies
1 reply
Irrelevant. ESIC found no evidence.
Yeah
Bet value
Amount of money to be placed
Winning
Odds total ratio
-
