Hiwanna
Auto-translated
I started writing a lengthy response, but then I thought, what's the point.
You've probably heard of the phrase "Solomon's judgment." So, during the reign of this guy, there was most likely a legal framework, but the fellow clearly didn't bother with it. And he made decisions primarily based on logic and common sense.
And if common sense suggests that an illegal tactic was used in the game, even if it was officially allowed, then I see no reason not to retaliate against the injustice.
And yes, regarding "what's allowed today might not be allowed tomorrow" – better late than never.
So, you understand that at the time the Arbitration Committee made its decision, this action was officially allowed. So why was the verdict not in favor of Redwait, if everything was officially allowed?
Added 5 minutes later
You couldn't have said it better +1000
Specific people are not relevant here; in fact, the discussion revolves around actions that could have been committed by completely different individuals (players), in a completely different tournament or fan game, at a completely different time.
No, Darkello, the decision made by the Arbitration Committee is being discussed here. The discussion is about why:
a) Such a decision was made in favor of Nitro, even though it contradicts the rules according to which the decision was made.
b) The Arbitration Committee should not be above the rules; otherwise, what's the point of having rules? What's the point of following them if anyone can file a complaint and the decision will be made in their favor?!
twitch.tv/hiwanna