OverDrive: ESIC definitely needs people who understand the shooter

CIS insider Alexei 'OverDrive' Biryukov spoke negatively about the recent incident involving ESIC. He did it on his Telegram channel.

Recall that on May 6, the Commission for Fair Conduct in the world of eSports banned several coaches who were supposed to attend PGL Major Antwerp 2022. Sergey 'hally' Shavaev from Team Spirit, Luis 'peacemaker' Tadeu from Imperial Esports, as well as Rafael 'zakk' Fernandez from 9z Team. As for the deadlines, after which the coaches will be able to return to their direct duties, information about this will appear later.

Alexey 'OverDrive' Biryukov, like many eSports figures, did not stand aside and commented on the current situation. He suggested several solutions that could help improve the situation.

According to OverDrive, in the world of professional CS:GO, after what happened, there should not have been adequate people left who would respect ESIC. In addition, he believes that the inhabitants there are not suitable for their role, as they are not competent in the field of CS:GO to the right extent:

On May 6, ESIC completely lost respect from all adequate CS:GO fans. What did she really need to do?

Firstly, the commission definitely needs game consultants - people who understand the shooter. They can be professional players from different top teams or ordinary amateurs. To understand the impact of a bug at a particular moment, it is enough to gain a conditional seventh level on FACEIT.

Alexey believes that the severity of the punishment should directly depend on the impact of the used bug on the result of the match:

Secondly, bans should be issued relative to the theoretically possible impact on the result. For example, take Hally. He hung over the pit on Mirage, looked only at his teammates - he could not give any impact, although he used a bug. And, for example, in the same situation, the coach saw the pressure of the pit from CT, and the team eliminated the opponents with the help of the mentor's information. In the second case, the coach should receive a longer ban. To determine this, just need an expert opinion.

In my understanding, the minimum punishment for one round with a bug is a month, and for one game - six months, and so on.

Finally, OverDrive spoke in an extremely negative way towards ESIC. In his opinion, the commission simply parasitizes on the professional stage and does merciless and senseless actions:

Bans had to be issued strictly after the discovery of violations, and not when you want. The ban of coaches three days before the major for the games of 2018-2020 is cynical idiocy in the highest degree.

Such entities should report monthly on what they are doing and investigate at what stage of detection of violations they are. Such an organ, of course, is useful and necessary, but in the format it is functioning now, it is simply parasitism.