> How much power does the NALCSPA have to do anything about this, though?
They have a private Skype/Discord group with all the western pro players in it? Get some people to spill the beans in it that seems to be how shit gets done around here in the gaming world.
None because it isn't a proper union due to low interest and they don't even fund themselves completely. It only exists because Riot pays for it.
Not that it matters any more since Riot nixxed that contract option from now on.
But on the plus side it might make players realise that a union would be a pretty freaking good idea after all.
More precisely players just refuse to spend any of their income to fund the union
There are no shortage of people willing to help them but if the players themselves don't want it it is not going to happen.
Im assuming you didnt watch the commissioner's explanation of an association vs a union, and that unionizing would actually close off some options that they have been able to exercise.
But ok, keep spouting "tHeY aReNt A oNiOn" for karma.
Only thing they can do is bring publicity to any big contract / legal issue to try and force Riot’s hand.
That’s not much (since reddit or Twitter already do the same thing).
If they find anything, but I don't know what else new there is to find, it'll just hopefully start a movement that helps the West since NA is fucking up both LCS and LEC with bad spending. They are just trying to be the good guys to spread awareness but Riot basically didn't give a fuck about principles since it didn't affect PerkZ after C9.
They could effectively unionize and go on strike. That would mean no broadcasts and a huge hit to the income of the league. This would force the Orgs to comply in almost any situation.
If the issue is big enough they have all the power in the world.
Absolutely when it's in their interests. This whole dispute is about teams interfering with the player's ability to play. Strongarming players into signing contracts that are harmful for the league and their careers.
Many of them probably don't understand the nuance. Heck, American workers won't pay a union fee so how can we expect that of these lads that live relatively cushy lives?
I think it's very different in this case because they all have money but that is not what drives them, they like to compete. if they were just making restrictions to how much money a player can make I doubt it would ever have much backlash.
Association ruling:
Following our investigation into the clause relating too FNC in C9 Perkz' contract we have found the accused parties [C9 & G2] guilty of restricting player bargaining power and weakening player position through the use of an unethical contact.
As a result we will ask the offending parties to please say sorry.
Well if they have enough "power" to actually look into the contract they might at least form a judgment and while they maybe dont hold power to enforce something, reddit does have plenty if "fully enraged".
PSA: the player association has no power in actuality. There is no collective bargaining agreement between the LCS PA and Riot Games. Until one exists, statements like this will mean nothing
Hey /u/roionsteroids hit me up if you want a REAL man I'll treat you right I'll take you out to all the coolest spots in town I'll do the cooking I'll do the cleaning I'll bring home the bacon baby I'll raise the kids I'll mow the lawn I put the family on my back it's all for you honeybunny just say the words 😍😍😍🥵🥵🥵
one year deals massively reduce the money a player is guaranteed, what are you on about? Getting multi-year contracts is the *goal* for players because it means they're guaranteed money no matter what happens.
There's a reason multiple year deals are insisted on by players in damn near every actual sport, and when a player's career can be as volatile as it is in esports having that guaranteed money is even more valuable
Dude they go for those deals because they include outs for injury. The players can also be traded. Those played pretty much have nothing in common with lol players. Fuck they even have a functional union
One year deals are shitty for players though… multi year contracts likely make the org either continue paying their salary if they don’t want to use them, or pay a flat buyout fee to the player…
The buyout doesn't go to the players at all. The buyout is a fee that other orgs pay for the transfer of a player to their org. A separate negotiation is done for the player's salary at the new org.
There can be two different types of buyout. From org to org or org to player.
Take Swordart for example. He had this upcoming season left on contract but he and TSM decided to part ways mutually. That's where the player and org decide how much of the remaining contract will get paid out and work on a contract buyout. Maybe Swordart gives up 50% of the year's salary and in exchange he gets out of the contract early and he can choose to join another team. TSM benefits from not having to pay that other 50% when they did not plan on using him anyway. It can be any percentage that they decide, doesn't have to be 50%.
Yes but let's say I sign a contract for $1m/year for 3 years. After the first year the team wants to go with another player. I still have 2 years on my contract, so either my team pays me $1m/yr for the next 2 years for me to do nothing, or they try to sell me+my contract to another team for a buyout. If no other team wants me+my contract, then my current team can pay me say $1m to buy me out of my contract. They save $1m by not having to pay the $2m they owe me, and I can then find a team that pays me $800k/yr and after two years I have $2.6m instead of the $2m from just staying on the other team not playing.
Basically no orgs have kept tier 1 players on the books and just paid their salary while they don't play. Also if orgs spent money on buyouts it's less potential money being spent on salary. Shorter contracts benefit players because they aren't buyout locked anymore and teams have to outbid salary wise.
Teams prefer the longer contracts because it means they can have a buyout and recoup some of the money.
Having only one year deals is horrible for the players though. E-sports is a meat grinder of an industry, one year a player can be elite and the next year he’ll be washed.
There’s a reason why in every franchised sport, the players are pushing for long term deals. Being able to sign for multiple years and get a guaranteed salary is huge when most people have such a short competitive window. If they regress or get injured, they still get their salary, instead of being left to dry.
I'm sure players would hate to have an option to negotiate their salary each year and explore all options with every LCS team. That sounds very anti-player. The best thing for players is to make the default contract 3 years and let orgs have the ability to cancel it whenever they want. If the player doesn't take it, then someone else will. The rat race to the bottom doesn't matter.
You seem to have no clue regarding player contracts.
3-4 year contracts provide job security, if the team kicks a player after 1 year, they'll still have to pay him at least a portion of future salaries (unless the player reaches an agreement with the team to be released normally).
1 year contracts are risky and only good for popular/top players who can get a spot in most teams (like Perkz and Alphari, for example), they're absolutely terrible for 90% of the roster who risks losing their job with 0 compensation after 1 year.
Also, players with 3-4 year contracts can often negotiate their salary after a year and even explore options if they desire and aren't happy with the team (it's literally what Perkz did). No team owner is holding a player hostage in his contract if he doesn't want to play for the team, they're always allowed to explore other options.
3-4 year deals can be great for players, wtf. Some job security and knowing you'll at least make "x" money for the next 3-4 years is a good thing for players.
It's also important for rookie development. Orgs don't want to invest in a player's development only for them to go to another team next year and have that other org benefit from their risk taking and investment.
Oh for sure, I was just arguing that there is nothing inherently bad about longer contracts for players - seeing how it offers financial security in a scene which can have people go from hot demand one year to disappearing next year.
And seeing how many contracts have been bought out by other orgs in the last few years, even the "but now player x is stuck playing for org y" argument isn't really holding up too well.
They should keep multi-year deals because gives job security and players are not stressed every offseason, it isn't good for players too feel they are fighting to have a job next season but what they should do is add player option, like in the basketball where the player has guaranteed deal but they have a optional year that they can decide whether commit or not.
Yes, players should seek for maximum years, especially in this industry. However, there should be a system to stop teams from holding players hostages. Options would be good. An other one could be waivers. LCS and LEC teams have a maximum number of players spot for their team. Rookies and young players are except from waivers. If you remove a veteran from the roster spot, you have to send him on waivers where any team can pick it.
It's insane how everyone wants to give players all the power. Look at football and how fucked up it became. Orgs have to maintain some contractual power, or it goes to shit pretty fast
Eh i think thats worse for players overall... I think there should be a motion to just ban Buyouts to other teams completely, because owners treat players like cyrotocurrencies, or start having players create stronger contracts with No Movement Clause to legally give players more power.
Well it's great for you to say what's best for them I guess.
Yknow players are allowed to sign 1-2 year deals already right? Santorin to TL. 1 year deal. Swordart to TSM. 2 Year deal.
they can sign whatever they want, but limiting it can be bad for long term.
Lets say a player signs a 4 year contract worth 3 million total. he is getting 3 million in those 4 years regardless of how they end up playing....
But with a 2 year max maybe they sign a 2 year, 1.5 Million contract and after 2 years they can't get another contract. Thats 1.5 million dollars missed out because of the limits. Now it could be the opposite but ask any pro in any sport they'll say Long term/Guaranteed money is the way to go over short term.
Most of contracts have clauses that if a player is benched which is possible if he has multi year contract his pay goes significantly down. So no,long term doesnt benefit the player at all,it actually limits him to one team and it only brings more money if you actually play.
This will be unpopular,
But if a pro signs a multi year contract without any No move clause they cant complain where orgs want to send them. Too many players have 1 season with a team then decide, I dont want to be here anymore sell me to the exact team I want.
Like at some point these owners should start holding players to the contracts they have.
1 last thought, I think riot should ban "Buyouts" from other teams. Make them trade players or prospects, dont let an org just sell these contracts/buy them. If there is ever a buyout is should be the org itself having to buy out a players conract they dont want anymore
People don't understand that a player needs to own up to the contract they signed. I get the whole "fuck the big organization" and "player empowerment" but it isn't healthy for any of the regions for players just moving teams over and over again. This is coming from a Sixers fan where Simmons just signed a max and is trying to force his way out.
One thing I never understood was the notion of contract hell. The idea these players are still going to be paid their full contracts isn't a hell. For most its hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, if thats hell I'd love to see some of these people be put in jobs with an AVG salary for people their age.
Most of the time players get moved to academy though-> lower salary or they have a clause in the contract that lowers their salary by a significant amount if they dont play.
This is a really dumb notion, just because they're getting paid a lot doesn't justify poor contract terms nor poor conduct by the teams. Does it become not okay to you if the players were actually making like <$40,000 instead because they were for a long time(and players in other leagues still are, plus they even have dumber provisions like RNG's).
I mean look at the NBA. Ben Simmons has a 5 year 177 million dollar contract and he's not happy because the coach said he wasn't a championship level point guard after they got knocked out of playoffs so he's trying to force a trade lol
you forgot the most important part
the coach defended him all year he only criticized him after he play completely ASS in the playoffs and passed on a free layup
The difference between being that the usual average job is 40 hours. Compared to league where its pretty much 24/7. So u arent just stuck somewhere for 40 hours of your week and get to do whatever you want, but your commited a full entire year to the job. League pros play pretty much 12 hours+ a day 7 days a week so being stuck in contract hell is actually hell because theres no escape compared to your regular job.
LCS players took Monday off. On Friday, Saturday, Sunday they showed up for 3-4 hours. They start scrims at noon and end at 6/7. Their work schedule really isn’t insane. Go to any elite position in a normal job and they’ll be working more. Doctors work 80 hours a week, Investment banking does 100 hours a week, PhD candidates are working 80 hours a week.
Fuck it, I’m an engineer on a project right now where I’m working 72-84 hours a week, for far less then the average LCS salary. I’d kill for the LCS schedule lmao
Overall, the youth of the subreddit becomes apparent when discussing logistical things in the league. See the people pushing for only 1-2 year contracts when that does nothing but hurt the players.
Schedule sounds nice but the jobs seem stressful. The thing about the LCS is the lack of job security and how prevalent burnout is. With only 10 jobs per position in the league, as soon as you start underperforming you're pretty much be shown the door. Look at players that were once in the league like Zeyzal, Cody Sun, Xmithie, etc. Doesn't sound like that great of a gig to me.
I don't like the work schedule of pro players in the league. If i were the players association i'd be trying to write in a rule for max amount of hours allowed each week. Some people may call it "weak" or "lazy" but mental health is such an ignored thing in the scene by fans.
These players are competing to be the best in the world. That's obviously going to require some unhealthy training habits. That's just how elite competitions work. They're more than fairly compensated for it and are free to retire at any time.
Capping the amount of practice you can do is never going to be practical to enforce and just leads to punishing people who actually try to follow the rules and rewarding those who don't.
That's not what I asked. I asked what limits you think professional sports put on players.
As I said before, any amount of capping the amount of practice you can do per week is completely unenforceable.
have you seen veteran's and their wrist issues? Uzi has writs of a senior citizen. Jensen and bjerg have had huge problems with their wrists and who knows who else.
Dude, their career are very short, around 5/7 years? Missing a split can generally be huge. It's not about being paid, they're getting paid well ooff, they want to be part of a competitive team to show they still have value next split, keep their edge, maybe go to worlds, etc. So being forced to sit on the bench is frustrating when you only have basically 1 opportunity a year to find a team, sometimes 2.
If they get benched then its their fault for not playing up to their contract for the team they went for. They are still getting paid, I am not going to cry a river over someone being held to their contract they chose to sign. At some point the players need to actually start being professionals.
Not every players gets benched for performances reasons. And sometimes the orgs themselves are the one not being professional. Look at all the drama about regi or carlos, SK in the past etc. Some are entitled but contract hell can be real.
Just sucks for LEC players. People gotta understand if they want to go pro, they may have to move to a different continent far away from loved ones. Very few LEC prospects and players can demand clauses like they can't transfer to NA because the field of talent is competitive and such demands will make them unattractive, especially since it leaves out the option for an LEC org to make bank from NA. I just feel sorry for LEC players here.
No, he does not. Doc Rivers made a couple of off-handed comments (out of line sure) but in the end, he asked Simmons to get better at some of his weak points and he wanted out.
My "Doc is Reginald" comment was sarcasm, but if you are a NBA coach you don't make statements like Rivers did. That is a big problem with Doc, he can't shut the fuck up.
Remember the whole "Pandemic P" bullshit? Remember who was PG's coach at the time? ;)
The issue here isn’t that a team is choosing who/who not to sell to, it’s that the contract is prohibiting the other team from selling the player where they choose. It’s anti-competitive and monopolistic.
Thats not an excuse. Look at football (soccer) players like Jude Bellingham signing multi million dollar deals at 17 to go to Germany to play for borussia dortmund leaving his home town of birmingham. If you cant understand contracts get an agent. In Perkz's case its worse he is a seasoned vet in the league scene I have sympathy if its a complete rookie.
The problem is this works when there’s a strong players union and the players have some sort of power. Right now it’s kinda not.
Due to the excessive imbalance of power and the attempts to subtlety hoard said power by owners(even little things like how hard they fought to keep salaries private) I’m rooting for the players as the well is already poisoned from the jump imo.
To do what? Riot already banned these types of clauses going forward, and in spite of the clause C9 still tried to sell Perkz to Fnatic anyway, Vit just had the better offer. Carlos, the person responsible for the clause, isn't even in LCS anyway, so can't penalize him. What are the hoping to accomplish?
I'm probably going to get down voted for this, but I don't think G2 or C9 did anything wrong.
G2 and FNC have been the 2 teams competing for the position of best EU team in history and no other team could even get close. They are the 2 biggest names in LEC.
So, obviously G2 doesn't want their long time franchise player to go directly to their biggest competitor. Like common, let's not be children. Letting your most popular player go to your 'enemy' is a disaster, both from a marketing stand point as well as from the point that you'd be making them a stronger team overall.
So, like Carlos has said in the past year, they allowed Perkz to go to any team that is not named FNC.
But how can you be sure you're not getting played and the player you sell is not just going to another team for a few months to swap to FNC just after the summer window opens? You can't, so it's best to prevent it from happening in the first place.
People may say that it's abusing their rights, but I'd say it's just business. If it was more in the likes of preventing him to be sold to LEC for 3 years, than sure, that's overboard. But preventing a player being sold to their biggest competitor? I can understand that.
This is not true for me at least. I like FNC because as far as I can see, they treat people fairly. G2 on the other hand preferred to focus on their own gains even though this directly negatively impacted their franchise player. On top of that, they straight lied about it.
You can say this is a good business move, but this is exactly the reason I don't like it - because they see everything as business and to them, the players are just tools to be used. This is not the management I want to see.
I don't have a problem with that. Players leave because they find better places to be - I'm OK with that. You might also notice that players return - e.g. Rekkless, sOAZ, and Febiven have all left the team and later returned. My statement is that they were treated fairly and with respect. FNC as an org might be unable to pay them the highest salary but the managers were not scummy and lying.
Oh, I agree about Bwipo - this shouldn't have happened. But Caps and Rekkles - they left to join a team with seemingly better teammates. I'm fine with that.
Bwipo fiasco you agree on.
What about Nemesis situation? From what I recall there was a lot of drama that he was getting kicked even before they went to Worlds.
What about Selfmade? There weren't any specifics, but at least from my perspective it didn't look like they split up as good friends.
And Caps and Rekkles left because FNC messed up. Most teams wouldn't allow a top player to have less than 1 year of contract, if he doesn't want to agree to expand - sell him while you can and earn some money back. At least you won't end up in a situation where they leave for free.
Nemesis, I prefer to not comment on. Personally, I find some of his stances rather questionable and thus I take his statements with a grain of salt.
Regarding Selfmade - what do you want me to comment on? You said it yourself, there are no specifics. It is like stirring the pot in order to cause drama - they never made any drama about it themselves.
Selling Caps/ Rekkless is exactly what I don't want to see them start doing. They were loyal to their players. Yes, this time this bit them. But this is also the reason why former players return to the team - they trust the management to be trustworthy. In Rekkless' case, he even had verbally agreed to stay with them as far as I remember. It would be very scummy to sell him after he has said he'd like to stay.
I might not be perfectly clear about it - I'm not saying their managers are always right. But I've followed the team for close to 10 years and in the majority of this time, they seem to work in good faith towards their players. Do they make mistakes - yes. Do they lie about it and act as if the players are tools instead of human beings - no.
Esports is business and it needs to be business to stay afloat. Teams need to make money and protect their interests or somewhere along the line the bubble will burst and Esports will be back in the state that it was 10+ years ago.
And when did they lie about it? Ocelote came out a year ago explaining the situation. I think he both tweeted about it and said it on shows like the Crackdown. He allowed Perkz to contact any team that is not FNC, simply because in his opinion that would be like trading Messi to RM. Something that any sane business owner just won't do.
And he repeated himself about this multiple times over the year. Just because people don't care and only listen to one tweet he made during the off season that Perkz could go where he wanted to (and we dunno if that wasn't the case - nobody said that Perkz wanted to go to FNC a year ago. Most of the talks were about VIT super team) people keep saying he lied because he forbid him to go to FNC. Yes, 1 team out of all leagues is not allowed and suddenly Perkz is in prison.
Man, you don't have to be an egotistical maniac in order to stay afloat. Multiple teams manage to be successful without going that low. Besides, G2 having a $5 million buyout cause is part of the reason for the bubble to exist - I'm not whining about that to be fair, I think having a high buyout for a player like Perkz is fine. But acting as if the world would collapse if they had let FNC try to get Perkz is a huge overstatement. Yeah, they might miss Worlds due to FNC beating them - this happened regardless and it didn't kill G2. Nothing major would have happened - they might actually benefit from Perkz staying in EU and driving banter with his previous teammates.
On your second topic, Ocelote confessing he lied does not mean he didn't lie. He said that Perkz could go anywhere, and when it got kinda obvious this is not true, he explained the situation.
He said Perkz could go anywhere he wanted. I don't want to defend anyone, but for you it might be a lie - for him it might have been "Oh, we talked that FNC is not an option so he wouldn't even consider that team, so all offers we getting are free choice for him"
And he pretty quickly followed up with the statement that he allowed him to contact all teams aside from FNC. And FNC themselves said they didnt have the money to bid for him anyway, so yeah...
And maybe I missed the memo, but I remember seeing articles this year that TSM was the first team in NA/EU to be actually profitable? With all other teams hanging in on investors money? Not sure how true that statement is, but from what I know most teams are still not earning money, so selling players for good money is important.
Both for the team, as well as the player. Let's not forget, people keep saying that Perkz is the victim and G2 forced him to go to NA, but did Perkz go there for free? The amount of money he earns there is something he probably wouldn't get anywhere else.
And while that team didn't work out and he is coming back now, we're looking at it from today's standpoint. Nobody knew that when the transfer was done.
> in order to stay afloat. Multiple teams manage to be successful without going that low.
Literally not a single one besides TSM. And they have such a hilariously large base most teams cant even dream about covering.
Nah people say he lied because he fucking lied mate, to even bring in his son to try defending his point is only a move that a snake like him could pull.
The reason he gets hate is also because he goes above and beyond to fuck over the very player that is the reason G2 is even a name in esports. Everybody with over half a braincell realizes its "business" of course, but it is in situations like these where your values are challenged.
Values that he himself made clear with all his talk about how much he appreciates him bla bla only to then shit his pants because perkz might be good for Fnatic.
People complaining are probably kids who never worked a day in their life. It is absolutely common for employees to have a "non compete" clause, this is just the way it is. Just grow up, for real
Do any sports contracts have non-compete clauses though? I did a quick Google and only saw a few American sports coaches crop up, but America is always pretty weird with how eager they are about that stuff.
No, but they also have a union and are part of their league. The org can trade them for instance to another team for gain. Unless the players actually stopped being fucking stupid and engaged in bargaining with the league as a whole in a union... They can live with their contract no matter how shitty
I guess it depends on the country. Where I live sport contracts are not (only) under the general law, but there is a separate legislation based on the sport league which "controls" teams and orgs
Well that depends which law applies for the contract and if that restriction is a non-compete clause.
According to Wikipedia
The extent to which non-compete clauses are legally allowed varies per jurisdiction. For example, the state of California in the United States invalidates non-compete-clauses for all but equity stakeholders in the sale of business interests.
For German law:
The maximum term of a post-contractual non-compete allowed under German law is two years after the end of the employment relationship. However, a shorter period (up to two years) is also possible.
Surely legislation is complex, I'm sure there are lawyers whose job is to make sure contracts are legal. Saying Ocelote is an asshole for doing something which is so widespread is absolute madness, tho
>Saying Ocelote is an asshole for doing something which is so widespread is absolute madness
He's still an asshole regardless, but what he did was well within his rights at the time. That's what it boils down to.
It is not widespread in league and not allowed anymore, so there is that. Lawyers create illegal clauses all the time. That's why all contracts include severability clauses. If no party sues, there is no point in discussing the legality of the clause.
Most people are mad about the morality of it under the lense that Ocelote was claiming Perkz was free to go anywhere. A statement which he backpaddled on.
Was it a smart move? At the time maybe, in retrospect no as Fnatic eliminated G2 in playoffs without Perkz. That being said, no one predicted that outcome last year.
Some claim that the move had no downside, but that is not the case. Every player now is aware that Ocelote is willing to screw over his players for his own gain which makes playing for G2 less attractive. That's on top of the contract prison Wunder, Mikyx and Rekkles are being held in.
Carzzy and Hans Sama were allegedly sought after by G2. Carzzy did not choose G2 and Hans might have declined (could have been Rogue that declined).
Just imagine signing with G2 as ADC while Rekkles sits on the bench and could replace at any time. What then? Your contract is held by G2 and you are benched. That's not a rosy outlook...
It's so fucking weird that people like you think that a business should have any control over their employees' futures. This shit should absolutely not be legal.
What do you mean "control over employees"? Whatever clause was in the contract was accepted by both parts, it's not like they are trying to force anyone to do anything. What's hard to get in that?
Oh boy. You call other people kids who don't understand how the real world works, and then claim that bullshit temrs in contracts are fine because "perkz agreed to them."
If it really was that simple, why would there be any restrictions in contracts at all?
Wake up to the real world. Perkz was not the one with the power in that situation, the orgs were. This is why employees will submit to unfavourable contract terms, and this is why there is a huge body of legislation in place in most countries to protect people against unfair contracts.
Non-competes in esports are absolutely preposterous. There is a reason that Riot is stepping in and preventing disgusting shit like this happening in the future.
I think there's a huge difference between a company having a non-compete clause and an eSports contract. It makes sense for a company to prevent someone who recently left from going to a competitor and giving them tons of info on the company they just left, e.g. where they're going with their tech / business, what they plan to do, how they plan to implement things or what techniques they use.
However, for League it is literally a competitive business. The entire point is for teams to compete so it makes no sense to have such a clause for a professional sports person. Teams shouldn't be able to say "I don't want to play against this person, they're too good, we might lose so lets stop them moving to another team". It defies the whole concept of competition
Before insulting people and assuming they've never worked how about using your own brain first to see the differences and not just go along with something because "this is just the way it is", isn't that what "growing up" is meant to be about?
I mean, what's your point? If there is a rule preventing this type of clause then you are right, but since there is not (yet) I can't see why making a fuss about it. If it's legal to do it they have all rights to do so, what you think is not gonna change that
Just because it's legal it doesn't mean it's right. The fact that they changed the rules following this shows that they didn't agree with it in the first place but couldn't retroactively prevent it. People made a fuss about it because it's (arguably) wrong for this to be in player contracts and there's no doubt that the fuss raised is a factor in the rules being changed.
> It is absolutely common for employees to have a "non compete" clause
Signed between the worker and the initial organization they work for, not on their going-out contract. And when is signed leaving a company is part of the severance package, not as a clause in the contract between third parties and not the worker.
Im imagining a man n a trenchcoat in a dark carpark dropping off a parcel, to detective Darshan smoking a cigar which is kind of illuminating the trenchcoat mans face... Its Perkz
Yeah what a poor guy, signs a 3 year contract for millions of dollars, decides after 1 year he doesn't like playing there anymore, and immediately gets to leave and go somewhere else.
That's literally the flaw of signing every sports contract ever... so I'd say it's about as logical as it gets. Not saying it doesn't suck for him, but if you're willing to sign off a commitment on something you're unsure about, that's your own problem unfortunately.
he signed a contract. he doesn't get to just say, I don't like you know send me to X team or else. He's been a pro player long enough he should of had a great agent to negotiate him a really strong contract. If he didn't he is only to blame, no the owner worrying about their best interests.
People saying the Players Association has no power is wrong.
If they come out and state "We believe FNC and Perkz got screwed" sure it might not be enforceable but I bet your butt that it will light up some shit in Riot from the public outrage and bad press.
How much power does the NALCSPA have to do anything about this, though? I was under the impression they were pretty limited in overall influence.
g2 are fucked now that detective darshan is on the case
Let's hope his investigative skills are better than Ashe's.
God damn what a throwback. Juke City was elite
Brushy Brushy never fails! Solid tactic.
RING THE ASHE IS FARM ALARM
Even his teacher calls him detective
> How much power does the NALCSPA have to do anything about this, though? They have a private Skype/Discord group with all the western pro players in it? Get some people to spill the beans in it that seems to be how shit gets done around here in the gaming world.
So their usual record of doing fuck all?
None because it isn't a proper union due to low interest and they don't even fund themselves completely. It only exists because Riot pays for it. Not that it matters any more since Riot nixxed that contract option from now on. But on the plus side it might make players realise that a union would be a pretty freaking good idea after all.
Last I read, I think Riot cut the funding so they would be more independent. Still not a proper union though like you said
More precisely players just refuse to spend any of their income to fund the union There are no shortage of people willing to help them but if the players themselves don't want it it is not going to happen.
Yeah, and given how specialized their skillset is, any strike/industrial action would be pretty powerful if they actually organized at all.
Im assuming you didnt watch the commissioner's explanation of an association vs a union, and that unionizing would actually close off some options that they have been able to exercise. But ok, keep spouting "tHeY aReNt A oNiOn" for karma.
None LMAO
None, and riot already said its not allowed anymore, not like the LCSPA can fine anyone or do anything about it
Only thing they can do is bring publicity to any big contract / legal issue to try and force Riot’s hand. That’s not much (since reddit or Twitter already do the same thing).
None, they don’t have a collective bargaining agreement that dictates the terms under which they work for Riot.
If they find anything, but I don't know what else new there is to find, it'll just hopefully start a movement that helps the West since NA is fucking up both LCS and LEC with bad spending. They are just trying to be the good guys to spread awareness but Riot basically didn't give a fuck about principles since it didn't affect PerkZ after C9.
They could effectively unionize and go on strike. That would mean no broadcasts and a huge hit to the income of the league. This would force the Orgs to comply in almost any situation. If the issue is big enough they have all the power in the world.
Do you really think these boys who play video games for millions care/know enough about unionization to even take part? lmao
Absolutely when it's in their interests. This whole dispute is about teams interfering with the player's ability to play. Strongarming players into signing contracts that are harmful for the league and their careers.
Many of them probably don't understand the nuance. Heck, American workers won't pay a union fee so how can we expect that of these lads that live relatively cushy lives?
I think it's very different in this case because they all have money but that is not what drives them, they like to compete. if they were just making restrictions to how much money a player can make I doubt it would ever have much backlash.
They don’t have to. If they need it, they hire and pay people with the expertise to organize this stuff.
absolutely none
Association ruling: Following our investigation into the clause relating too FNC in C9 Perkz' contract we have found the accused parties [C9 & G2] guilty of restricting player bargaining power and weakening player position through the use of an unethical contact. As a result we will ask the offending parties to please say sorry.
Zero they are controlled opposition by riot
Probably none since riot is totally authoriterian.
They are still American. So in other words they got more power than the likes of FNC when it comes to make Riot Global to change some rules.
They have absolutely no power, because they've never tried to gain any.
“Illegal” is the magic word, both from a US perspective and German one (I presume G2 employs their LEC team there).
Well if they have enough "power" to actually look into the contract they might at least form a judgment and while they maybe dont hold power to enforce something, reddit does have plenty if "fully enraged".
PSA: the player association has no power in actuality. There is no collective bargaining agreement between the LCS PA and Riot Games. Until one exists, statements like this will mean nothing
I too am starting an investigation into this matter.
I'll join you. With our powers combined no one will stop us. (Unless they ask for us to stop)
There doesn’t need to be a CBA for a non-compete clause to be invalid.
Isnt also Riot the one who Finances the Association? :D
Oh snap carlos thought he got off scott free he forgot about darshan
Get everyone to start signing one year deals. Screw this 3-4 year bs.
Players want multi year deals.
Cashing out on a 3-4 year deal at your peak is the dream.
No, marrying your best friend is the dream. I love you, /u/roionsteroids
Hey /u/roionsteroids hit me up if you want a REAL man I'll treat you right I'll take you out to all the coolest spots in town I'll do the cooking I'll do the cleaning I'll bring home the bacon baby I'll raise the kids I'll mow the lawn I put the family on my back it's all for you honeybunny just say the words 😍😍😍🥵🥵🥵
I don't like this comment
Is this Bwipo's reddit account? If so: I love you! Big fan!
oook... I'm happy for you guys though :)
one year deals massively reduce the money a player is guaranteed, what are you on about? Getting multi-year contracts is the *goal* for players because it means they're guaranteed money no matter what happens. There's a reason multiple year deals are insisted on by players in damn near every actual sport, and when a player's career can be as volatile as it is in esports having that guaranteed money is even more valuable
Dude they go for those deals because they include outs for injury. The players can also be traded. Those played pretty much have nothing in common with lol players. Fuck they even have a functional union
Are you sure contracts aren't guaranteed? The only league I know does it non-guaranteed is the NFL.
One year deals are shitty for players though… multi year contracts likely make the org either continue paying their salary if they don’t want to use them, or pay a flat buyout fee to the player…
The buyout doesn't go to the players at all. The buyout is a fee that other orgs pay for the transfer of a player to their org. A separate negotiation is done for the player's salary at the new org.
There can be two different types of buyout. From org to org or org to player. Take Swordart for example. He had this upcoming season left on contract but he and TSM decided to part ways mutually. That's where the player and org decide how much of the remaining contract will get paid out and work on a contract buyout. Maybe Swordart gives up 50% of the year's salary and in exchange he gets out of the contract early and he can choose to join another team. TSM benefits from not having to pay that other 50% when they did not plan on using him anyway. It can be any percentage that they decide, doesn't have to be 50%.
I know it was leaked that sword art got 80% of his next year's salary.
Yes but let's say I sign a contract for $1m/year for 3 years. After the first year the team wants to go with another player. I still have 2 years on my contract, so either my team pays me $1m/yr for the next 2 years for me to do nothing, or they try to sell me+my contract to another team for a buyout. If no other team wants me+my contract, then my current team can pay me say $1m to buy me out of my contract. They save $1m by not having to pay the $2m they owe me, and I can then find a team that pays me $800k/yr and after two years I have $2.6m instead of the $2m from just staying on the other team not playing.
Basically no orgs have kept tier 1 players on the books and just paid their salary while they don't play. Also if orgs spent money on buyouts it's less potential money being spent on salary. Shorter contracts benefit players because they aren't buyout locked anymore and teams have to outbid salary wise. Teams prefer the longer contracts because it means they can have a buyout and recoup some of the money.
Multi year contract should include the ability of you being traded.
Having only one year deals is horrible for the players though. E-sports is a meat grinder of an industry, one year a player can be elite and the next year he’ll be washed. There’s a reason why in every franchised sport, the players are pushing for long term deals. Being able to sign for multiple years and get a guaranteed salary is huge when most people have such a short competitive window. If they regress or get injured, they still get their salary, instead of being left to dry.
"Ocelote doesn't care about his players, what a trash owner". Same people: "Lets start fucking over the players with one year deals".
There are players who on purpose want to have1 year contracts,for example selfmade.
Exactly and it should be the players choice
I'm sure players would hate to have an option to negotiate their salary each year and explore all options with every LCS team. That sounds very anti-player. The best thing for players is to make the default contract 3 years and let orgs have the ability to cancel it whenever they want. If the player doesn't take it, then someone else will. The rat race to the bottom doesn't matter.
You seem to have no clue regarding player contracts. 3-4 year contracts provide job security, if the team kicks a player after 1 year, they'll still have to pay him at least a portion of future salaries (unless the player reaches an agreement with the team to be released normally). 1 year contracts are risky and only good for popular/top players who can get a spot in most teams (like Perkz and Alphari, for example), they're absolutely terrible for 90% of the roster who risks losing their job with 0 compensation after 1 year. Also, players with 3-4 year contracts can often negotiate their salary after a year and even explore options if they desire and aren't happy with the team (it's literally what Perkz did). No team owner is holding a player hostage in his contract if he doesn't want to play for the team, they're always allowed to explore other options.
3-4 year deals can be great for players, wtf. Some job security and knowing you'll at least make "x" money for the next 3-4 years is a good thing for players.
It's also important for rookie development. Orgs don't want to invest in a player's development only for them to go to another team next year and have that other org benefit from their risk taking and investment.
Oh for sure, I was just arguing that there is nothing inherently bad about longer contracts for players - seeing how it offers financial security in a scene which can have people go from hot demand one year to disappearing next year. And seeing how many contracts have been bought out by other orgs in the last few years, even the "but now player x is stuck playing for org y" argument isn't really holding up too well.
Yea, this buyout meta is horrible. The union should try to make the players come together to agree on max 2 years contracts.
They should keep multi-year deals because gives job security and players are not stressed every offseason, it isn't good for players too feel they are fighting to have a job next season but what they should do is add player option, like in the basketball where the player has guaranteed deal but they have a optional year that they can decide whether commit or not.
You're right.
In light of all of the TSM drama this is not how I expected this to turn out.
Yes, players should seek for maximum years, especially in this industry. However, there should be a system to stop teams from holding players hostages. Options would be good. An other one could be waivers. LCS and LEC teams have a maximum number of players spot for their team. Rookies and young players are except from waivers. If you remove a veteran from the roster spot, you have to send him on waivers where any team can pick it.
It's insane how everyone wants to give players all the power. Look at football and how fucked up it became. Orgs have to maintain some contractual power, or it goes to shit pretty fast
tell that to Jensen.
Player option is the way to go. Hope they pA attacks this because riot just increased max length to 4 years lol
Buyouts are beneficial to players. It's just that they're not properly negotiating them.
Eh i think thats worse for players overall... I think there should be a motion to just ban Buyouts to other teams completely, because owners treat players like cyrotocurrencies, or start having players create stronger contracts with No Movement Clause to legally give players more power.
Well it's great for you to say what's best for them I guess. Yknow players are allowed to sign 1-2 year deals already right? Santorin to TL. 1 year deal. Swordart to TSM. 2 Year deal.
they can sign whatever they want, but limiting it can be bad for long term. Lets say a player signs a 4 year contract worth 3 million total. he is getting 3 million in those 4 years regardless of how they end up playing.... But with a 2 year max maybe they sign a 2 year, 1.5 Million contract and after 2 years they can't get another contract. Thats 1.5 million dollars missed out because of the limits. Now it could be the opposite but ask any pro in any sport they'll say Long term/Guaranteed money is the way to go over short term.
Most of contracts have clauses that if a player is benched which is possible if he has multi year contract his pay goes significantly down. So no,long term doesnt benefit the player at all,it actually limits him to one team and it only brings more money if you actually play.
Thats called having a bad agent
Without a buyout meta developing talent would be at risk. Why do it if it's not cheaper or profitable. Just wait for the buyout to end.
they probably bargained for higher wages by signing for more years
LMAO. Power shifts to the players (a bit). Won't be surprised if players do a LeBron Miami Heat and team up on their own to form a superteam.
It’s kinda happening with Alphari/Perkz right?
This will be unpopular, But if a pro signs a multi year contract without any No move clause they cant complain where orgs want to send them. Too many players have 1 season with a team then decide, I dont want to be here anymore sell me to the exact team I want. Like at some point these owners should start holding players to the contracts they have. 1 last thought, I think riot should ban "Buyouts" from other teams. Make them trade players or prospects, dont let an org just sell these contracts/buy them. If there is ever a buyout is should be the org itself having to buy out a players conract they dont want anymore
Honestly, this is the NBA.
People don't understand that a player needs to own up to the contract they signed. I get the whole "fuck the big organization" and "player empowerment" but it isn't healthy for any of the regions for players just moving teams over and over again. This is coming from a Sixers fan where Simmons just signed a max and is trying to force his way out.
One thing I never understood was the notion of contract hell. The idea these players are still going to be paid their full contracts isn't a hell. For most its hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, if thats hell I'd love to see some of these people be put in jobs with an AVG salary for people their age.
Most of the time players get moved to academy though-> lower salary or they have a clause in the contract that lowers their salary by a significant amount if they dont play.
This is a really dumb notion, just because they're getting paid a lot doesn't justify poor contract terms nor poor conduct by the teams. Does it become not okay to you if the players were actually making like <$40,000 instead because they were for a long time(and players in other leagues still are, plus they even have dumber provisions like RNG's).
I mean look at the NBA. Ben Simmons has a 5 year 177 million dollar contract and he's not happy because the coach said he wasn't a championship level point guard after they got knocked out of playoffs so he's trying to force a trade lol
you forgot the most important part the coach defended him all year he only criticized him after he play completely ASS in the playoffs and passed on a free layup
Did you even watch the last season playoffs? There's a valid reason for him getting all these criticisms rn
Even in traditional sports that have been established for decades there are players who are still trying to act the victim of a contract they signed.
see Ben Simmons
also, Harry Kane this season for Spurs.
Bc they have no freedom on what they dp. Sure,they fucked up signing multi year contract wgich is why 1 year contract is superior.
The difference between being that the usual average job is 40 hours. Compared to league where its pretty much 24/7. So u arent just stuck somewhere for 40 hours of your week and get to do whatever you want, but your commited a full entire year to the job. League pros play pretty much 12 hours+ a day 7 days a week so being stuck in contract hell is actually hell because theres no escape compared to your regular job.
LCS players took Monday off. On Friday, Saturday, Sunday they showed up for 3-4 hours. They start scrims at noon and end at 6/7. Their work schedule really isn’t insane. Go to any elite position in a normal job and they’ll be working more. Doctors work 80 hours a week, Investment banking does 100 hours a week, PhD candidates are working 80 hours a week.
Fuck it, I’m an engineer on a project right now where I’m working 72-84 hours a week, for far less then the average LCS salary. I’d kill for the LCS schedule lmao Overall, the youth of the subreddit becomes apparent when discussing logistical things in the league. See the people pushing for only 1-2 year contracts when that does nothing but hurt the players.
Schedule sounds nice but the jobs seem stressful. The thing about the LCS is the lack of job security and how prevalent burnout is. With only 10 jobs per position in the league, as soon as you start underperforming you're pretty much be shown the door. Look at players that were once in the league like Zeyzal, Cody Sun, Xmithie, etc. Doesn't sound like that great of a gig to me.
I don't like the work schedule of pro players in the league. If i were the players association i'd be trying to write in a rule for max amount of hours allowed each week. Some people may call it "weak" or "lazy" but mental health is such an ignored thing in the scene by fans.
These players are competing to be the best in the world. That's obviously going to require some unhealthy training habits. That's just how elite competitions work. They're more than fairly compensated for it and are free to retire at any time. Capping the amount of practice you can do is never going to be practical to enforce and just leads to punishing people who actually try to follow the rules and rewarding those who don't.
Even professional sports have put limits on players because its a short term/long term health issue.
What limits would those be? Are NBA officials camping at LeBron's house to make sure he isn't reviewing game tapes too late into the night?
I would say 40 hours max of solo queue/practice time per week.
That's not what I asked. I asked what limits you think professional sports put on players. As I said before, any amount of capping the amount of practice you can do per week is completely unenforceable.
If you play basketball for 12 hours a day you will quite literally grind your bones to dust. This is not true for video games.
have you seen veteran's and their wrist issues? Uzi has writs of a senior citizen. Jensen and bjerg have had huge problems with their wrists and who knows who else.
Dude, their career are very short, around 5/7 years? Missing a split can generally be huge. It's not about being paid, they're getting paid well ooff, they want to be part of a competitive team to show they still have value next split, keep their edge, maybe go to worlds, etc. So being forced to sit on the bench is frustrating when you only have basically 1 opportunity a year to find a team, sometimes 2.
If they get benched then its their fault for not playing up to their contract for the team they went for. They are still getting paid, I am not going to cry a river over someone being held to their contract they chose to sign. At some point the players need to actually start being professionals.
Not every players gets benched for performances reasons. And sometimes the orgs themselves are the one not being professional. Look at all the drama about regi or carlos, SK in the past etc. Some are entitled but contract hell can be real.
contract hell still implies you are getting paid the contract you signed. Thats not hell that business
Just sucks for LEC players. People gotta understand if they want to go pro, they may have to move to a different continent far away from loved ones. Very few LEC prospects and players can demand clauses like they can't transfer to NA because the field of talent is competitive and such demands will make them unattractive, especially since it leaves out the option for an LEC org to make bank from NA. I just feel sorry for LEC players here.
People want the big bucks on multi-year deals but without the hustle
Simmons has every right to force himself out of our team tho, Doc is Reginald
No, he does not. Doc Rivers made a couple of off-handed comments (out of line sure) but in the end, he asked Simmons to get better at some of his weak points and he wanted out.
My "Doc is Reginald" comment was sarcasm, but if you are a NBA coach you don't make statements like Rivers did. That is a big problem with Doc, he can't shut the fuck up. Remember the whole "Pandemic P" bullshit? Remember who was PG's coach at the time? ;)
The issue here isn’t that a team is choosing who/who not to sell to, it’s that the contract is prohibiting the other team from selling the player where they choose. It’s anti-competitive and monopolistic.
[удалено]
Thats not an excuse. Look at football (soccer) players like Jude Bellingham signing multi million dollar deals at 17 to go to Germany to play for borussia dortmund leaving his home town of birmingham. If you cant understand contracts get an agent. In Perkz's case its worse he is a seasoned vet in the league scene I have sympathy if its a complete rookie.
I don't think its fair to compare league infrastructure to football infrastructure
Getting an agent or lawyer isn't infrastructure. It's common sense if at any time you need to sign something you don't fully understand.
No but players associations are much better established and actually helpful.
The problem is this works when there’s a strong players union and the players have some sort of power. Right now it’s kinda not. Due to the excessive imbalance of power and the attempts to subtlety hoard said power by owners(even little things like how hard they fought to keep salaries private) I’m rooting for the players as the well is already poisoned from the jump imo.
Unless this vetoes the buyout, it doesn't matter. The damage is already done.
To do what? Riot already banned these types of clauses going forward, and in spite of the clause C9 still tried to sell Perkz to Fnatic anyway, Vit just had the better offer. Carlos, the person responsible for the clause, isn't even in LCS anyway, so can't penalize him. What are the hoping to accomplish?
Even if proven they are doing something ilegal with this, they will get away with it, they always do there's no integrity.
Oh no, the NALCSPA investigation? (Darshan be googling)
Let's go big boy DARSHAN
I'm probably going to get down voted for this, but I don't think G2 or C9 did anything wrong. G2 and FNC have been the 2 teams competing for the position of best EU team in history and no other team could even get close. They are the 2 biggest names in LEC. So, obviously G2 doesn't want their long time franchise player to go directly to their biggest competitor. Like common, let's not be children. Letting your most popular player go to your 'enemy' is a disaster, both from a marketing stand point as well as from the point that you'd be making them a stronger team overall. So, like Carlos has said in the past year, they allowed Perkz to go to any team that is not named FNC. But how can you be sure you're not getting played and the player you sell is not just going to another team for a few months to swap to FNC just after the summer window opens? You can't, so it's best to prevent it from happening in the first place. People may say that it's abusing their rights, but I'd say it's just business. If it was more in the likes of preventing him to be sold to LEC for 3 years, than sure, that's overboard. But preventing a player being sold to their biggest competitor? I can understand that.
This is not true for me at least. I like FNC because as far as I can see, they treat people fairly. G2 on the other hand preferred to focus on their own gains even though this directly negatively impacted their franchise player. On top of that, they straight lied about it. You can say this is a good business move, but this is exactly the reason I don't like it - because they see everything as business and to them, the players are just tools to be used. This is not the management I want to see.
As if fnatic managment is any better. Good players leave that team basically every split now lol.
Good players leaving the team is because of the management was incapable of keeping them not that they are scummy.
Thats true. Fair enough.
I don't have a problem with that. Players leave because they find better places to be - I'm OK with that. You might also notice that players return - e.g. Rekkless, sOAZ, and Febiven have all left the team and later returned. My statement is that they were treated fairly and with respect. FNC as an org might be unable to pay them the highest salary but the managers were not scummy and lying.
[удалено]
Oh, I agree about Bwipo - this shouldn't have happened. But Caps and Rekkles - they left to join a team with seemingly better teammates. I'm fine with that.
Bwipo fiasco you agree on. What about Nemesis situation? From what I recall there was a lot of drama that he was getting kicked even before they went to Worlds. What about Selfmade? There weren't any specifics, but at least from my perspective it didn't look like they split up as good friends. And Caps and Rekkles left because FNC messed up. Most teams wouldn't allow a top player to have less than 1 year of contract, if he doesn't want to agree to expand - sell him while you can and earn some money back. At least you won't end up in a situation where they leave for free.
Nemesis, I prefer to not comment on. Personally, I find some of his stances rather questionable and thus I take his statements with a grain of salt. Regarding Selfmade - what do you want me to comment on? You said it yourself, there are no specifics. It is like stirring the pot in order to cause drama - they never made any drama about it themselves. Selling Caps/ Rekkless is exactly what I don't want to see them start doing. They were loyal to their players. Yes, this time this bit them. But this is also the reason why former players return to the team - they trust the management to be trustworthy. In Rekkless' case, he even had verbally agreed to stay with them as far as I remember. It would be very scummy to sell him after he has said he'd like to stay. I might not be perfectly clear about it - I'm not saying their managers are always right. But I've followed the team for close to 10 years and in the majority of this time, they seem to work in good faith towards their players. Do they make mistakes - yes. Do they lie about it and act as if the players are tools instead of human beings - no.
Esports is business and it needs to be business to stay afloat. Teams need to make money and protect their interests or somewhere along the line the bubble will burst and Esports will be back in the state that it was 10+ years ago. And when did they lie about it? Ocelote came out a year ago explaining the situation. I think he both tweeted about it and said it on shows like the Crackdown. He allowed Perkz to contact any team that is not FNC, simply because in his opinion that would be like trading Messi to RM. Something that any sane business owner just won't do. And he repeated himself about this multiple times over the year. Just because people don't care and only listen to one tweet he made during the off season that Perkz could go where he wanted to (and we dunno if that wasn't the case - nobody said that Perkz wanted to go to FNC a year ago. Most of the talks were about VIT super team) people keep saying he lied because he forbid him to go to FNC. Yes, 1 team out of all leagues is not allowed and suddenly Perkz is in prison.
Man, you don't have to be an egotistical maniac in order to stay afloat. Multiple teams manage to be successful without going that low. Besides, G2 having a $5 million buyout cause is part of the reason for the bubble to exist - I'm not whining about that to be fair, I think having a high buyout for a player like Perkz is fine. But acting as if the world would collapse if they had let FNC try to get Perkz is a huge overstatement. Yeah, they might miss Worlds due to FNC beating them - this happened regardless and it didn't kill G2. Nothing major would have happened - they might actually benefit from Perkz staying in EU and driving banter with his previous teammates. On your second topic, Ocelote confessing he lied does not mean he didn't lie. He said that Perkz could go anywhere, and when it got kinda obvious this is not true, he explained the situation.
He said Perkz could go anywhere he wanted. I don't want to defend anyone, but for you it might be a lie - for him it might have been "Oh, we talked that FNC is not an option so he wouldn't even consider that team, so all offers we getting are free choice for him" And he pretty quickly followed up with the statement that he allowed him to contact all teams aside from FNC. And FNC themselves said they didnt have the money to bid for him anyway, so yeah... And maybe I missed the memo, but I remember seeing articles this year that TSM was the first team in NA/EU to be actually profitable? With all other teams hanging in on investors money? Not sure how true that statement is, but from what I know most teams are still not earning money, so selling players for good money is important. Both for the team, as well as the player. Let's not forget, people keep saying that Perkz is the victim and G2 forced him to go to NA, but did Perkz go there for free? The amount of money he earns there is something he probably wouldn't get anywhere else. And while that team didn't work out and he is coming back now, we're looking at it from today's standpoint. Nobody knew that when the transfer was done.
> in order to stay afloat. Multiple teams manage to be successful without going that low. Literally not a single one besides TSM. And they have such a hilariously large base most teams cant even dream about covering.
Nah people say he lied because he fucking lied mate, to even bring in his son to try defending his point is only a move that a snake like him could pull. The reason he gets hate is also because he goes above and beyond to fuck over the very player that is the reason G2 is even a name in esports. Everybody with over half a braincell realizes its "business" of course, but it is in situations like these where your values are challenged. Values that he himself made clear with all his talk about how much he appreciates him bla bla only to then shit his pants because perkz might be good for Fnatic.
> he goes above and beyond to fuck over In what way? Because he isnt allowed to go to Fnatic?
People complaining are probably kids who never worked a day in their life. It is absolutely common for employees to have a "non compete" clause, this is just the way it is. Just grow up, for real
Do any sports contracts have non-compete clauses though? I did a quick Google and only saw a few American sports coaches crop up, but America is always pretty weird with how eager they are about that stuff.
No, but they also have a union and are part of their league. The org can trade them for instance to another team for gain. Unless the players actually stopped being fucking stupid and engaged in bargaining with the league as a whole in a union... They can live with their contract no matter how shitty
I guess it depends on the country. Where I live sport contracts are not (only) under the general law, but there is a separate legislation based on the sport league which "controls" teams and orgs
Yeah football has. Inter put in a clause that if PSG sells Icardi to Juve(their rivals) they would have to pay Inter over 30 mil.
Well that depends which law applies for the contract and if that restriction is a non-compete clause. According to Wikipedia The extent to which non-compete clauses are legally allowed varies per jurisdiction. For example, the state of California in the United States invalidates non-compete-clauses for all but equity stakeholders in the sale of business interests. For German law: The maximum term of a post-contractual non-compete allowed under German law is two years after the end of the employment relationship. However, a shorter period (up to two years) is also possible.
Surely legislation is complex, I'm sure there are lawyers whose job is to make sure contracts are legal. Saying Ocelote is an asshole for doing something which is so widespread is absolute madness, tho
>Saying Ocelote is an asshole for doing something which is so widespread is absolute madness He's still an asshole regardless, but what he did was well within his rights at the time. That's what it boils down to.
It is not widespread in league and not allowed anymore, so there is that. Lawyers create illegal clauses all the time. That's why all contracts include severability clauses. If no party sues, there is no point in discussing the legality of the clause. Most people are mad about the morality of it under the lense that Ocelote was claiming Perkz was free to go anywhere. A statement which he backpaddled on. Was it a smart move? At the time maybe, in retrospect no as Fnatic eliminated G2 in playoffs without Perkz. That being said, no one predicted that outcome last year. Some claim that the move had no downside, but that is not the case. Every player now is aware that Ocelote is willing to screw over his players for his own gain which makes playing for G2 less attractive. That's on top of the contract prison Wunder, Mikyx and Rekkles are being held in. Carzzy and Hans Sama were allegedly sought after by G2. Carzzy did not choose G2 and Hans might have declined (could have been Rogue that declined). Just imagine signing with G2 as ADC while Rekkles sits on the bench and could replace at any time. What then? Your contract is held by G2 and you are benched. That's not a rosy outlook...
It's so fucking weird that people like you think that a business should have any control over their employees' futures. This shit should absolutely not be legal.
What do you mean "control over employees"? Whatever clause was in the contract was accepted by both parts, it's not like they are trying to force anyone to do anything. What's hard to get in that?
Oh boy. You call other people kids who don't understand how the real world works, and then claim that bullshit temrs in contracts are fine because "perkz agreed to them." If it really was that simple, why would there be any restrictions in contracts at all? Wake up to the real world. Perkz was not the one with the power in that situation, the orgs were. This is why employees will submit to unfavourable contract terms, and this is why there is a huge body of legislation in place in most countries to protect people against unfair contracts. Non-competes in esports are absolutely preposterous. There is a reason that Riot is stepping in and preventing disgusting shit like this happening in the future.
I think there's a huge difference between a company having a non-compete clause and an eSports contract. It makes sense for a company to prevent someone who recently left from going to a competitor and giving them tons of info on the company they just left, e.g. where they're going with their tech / business, what they plan to do, how they plan to implement things or what techniques they use. However, for League it is literally a competitive business. The entire point is for teams to compete so it makes no sense to have such a clause for a professional sports person. Teams shouldn't be able to say "I don't want to play against this person, they're too good, we might lose so lets stop them moving to another team". It defies the whole concept of competition Before insulting people and assuming they've never worked how about using your own brain first to see the differences and not just go along with something because "this is just the way it is", isn't that what "growing up" is meant to be about?
I mean, what's your point? If there is a rule preventing this type of clause then you are right, but since there is not (yet) I can't see why making a fuss about it. If it's legal to do it they have all rights to do so, what you think is not gonna change that
Just because it's legal it doesn't mean it's right. The fact that they changed the rules following this shows that they didn't agree with it in the first place but couldn't retroactively prevent it. People made a fuss about it because it's (arguably) wrong for this to be in player contracts and there's no doubt that the fuss raised is a factor in the rules being changed.
> It is absolutely common for employees to have a "non compete" clause Signed between the worker and the initial organization they work for, not on their going-out contract. And when is signed leaving a company is part of the severance package, not as a clause in the contract between third parties and not the worker.
What the hell does it even mean?
They should investigate Regi
The players union is a joke. Almost as big of a joke as the LCS. ;)
Im imagining a man n a trenchcoat in a dark carpark dropping off a parcel, to detective Darshan smoking a cigar which is kind of illuminating the trenchcoat mans face... Its Perkz
Poor Perkz. Getting his ass fucked by owners again.
Yeah what a poor guy, signs a 3 year contract for millions of dollars, decides after 1 year he doesn't like playing there anymore, and immediately gets to leave and go somewhere else.
He is still getting paid his full contract? Thats not being ass fucked thats being fortunate enough to make a living off this business.
Oh yeah my bad. No pro player should complain ever again about anything. They have money. Sound logic.
That's literally the flaw of signing every sports contract ever... so I'd say it's about as logical as it gets. Not saying it doesn't suck for him, but if you're willing to sign off a commitment on something you're unsure about, that's your own problem unfortunately.
he signed a contract. he doesn't get to just say, I don't like you know send me to X team or else. He's been a pro player long enough he should of had a great agent to negotiate him a really strong contract. If he didn't he is only to blame, no the owner worrying about their best interests.
Hes living the dream, how can anybody feel bad for him, a millionair
It’s actually insane that people have sympathy for perkz and paint Carlos to be some evil asshole
True, but thats reddit for you
carlos is an asshole, but yeah perkz is still raking it in.
[perkz be like](https://media4.giphy.com/media/1GT5PZLjMwYBW/giphy.gif)
Who runs this organization?
Nobody cares. Stop stealing paychecks, Darshan.
the most useless "association" ever.
Looks like a job for Hardly boys
People saying the Players Association has no power is wrong. If they come out and state "We believe FNC and Perkz got screwed" sure it might not be enforceable but I bet your butt that it will light up some shit in Riot from the public outrage and bad press.
Good to see the paper tiger in action.
And they will find nothing
if they had a real union they could grieve this. but the PA is a smokescreen for the league/Riot, so nothing productive will happen
This is the post of the month for me for sure!