The suspension of player Pedro “Tatu” Seixas, belonging to FURIA, during a CBLOL match, has rekindled discussions about the importance of adhering to regulations and the level of professionalism in electronic sports. The decision was made after Riot Games identified that Tatu maintained contact with an external person during the Champions Selection phase, prior to the match against LOS.
According to the developer, such an action constitutes a violation of both the competition's specific regulations and the Global Code of Conduct for Esports, characterizing an undue advantage. This penalty generated polarized reactions on social media; while some community members considered the sanction excessive, alleging lack of intent to gain a competitive advantage, others argued that the mere breach of rules was sufficient grounds for punishment.
This debate transcends Tatu's case, raising a crucial question about the maturity of esports: what should be the weight of rules in a professional environment? In any serious competition, a set of rules is established beforehand and known by all participants, ensuring conditions of equal competition, not created after a problem occurs.
Riot Games' official statement emphasized that communication with an external individual at a prohibited time constitutes an infraction, regardless of the content of the conversation or the player's intention.
Many initial arguments focus on the claim that the infraction occurred without malice. While this point is valid, it is not always the most relevant in a highly competitive context. Just like in traditional sports, where athletes are penalized for unintentional failures (such as cards or club fines), the logic in esports is similar.
The regulation exists precisely to eliminate ambiguities about when a rule should or should not be applied, protecting the integrity of the tournament. Arguments that the punishment was severe because it involved questions about 'build' do not address the core issue, which is the preservation of competitive integrity.
If a rule is ignored under the justification that the incident did not seem serious, a dangerous precedent is set for future exceptional decisions. Confidence in a championship depends directly on the predictability of its resolutions, requiring players, teams, and spectators to know that the norms will be applied uniformly, regardless of who is involved.
This does not imply that the regulation is immutable or perfect; the discussion about the proportionality of the punishment or the need to revise rules is relevant, but it must occur outside the competition period. As long as a rule is in effect, it must be applied to everyone.
With the advancement of esports, the responsibility of professionals also grows. Being a high-level athlete requires not only skill in the game but also knowledge of and respect for the rules that ensure fair competition. Tatu's case will continue to generate debates, which is positive for any sport, but professional evolution depends on the consistent application of the regulations.
It is essential to recognize who establishes the guidelines of a tournament. In CBLOL, as in any professional championship, the rules are defined by the organizer before the start of the season and presented to all teams, who accept the conditions and responsibilities. This does not prevent the evolution of the regulation, but there is a clear distinction between questioning a norm and violating it.
If every participant could determine which rules to follow, the scenario would become amateur and chaotic. A professional championship only sustains itself when everyone agrees to compete under the same legal framework, even if they disagree with each item.
The rapid growth of esports in Brazil demands a change in attitude from everyone involved. Professionalism includes fulfilling contracts, respecting regulations, and understanding that competitions of any level depend on clear and consistently applied rules. Despite this advance, the Brazilian scene still faces structural challenges, such as issues of athlete representation, labor relations, and professional protection, with reports of contractual and labor problems.
Therefore, relativizing pre-established rules does not aid this evolution. To achieve greater recognition and legal security, players, organizations, and organizers must assume responsibilities commensurate with this goal, as maturation depends on mutual commitment to respecting current rules.
