TL;DR
- ESIC failed to respond to LMBT’s multiple appeal attempts before important qualifiers
- forZe provided substantial evidence challenging three of four cited violation instances
- The commission’s delayed response raises serious questions about its operational capacity
- LMBT’s case highlights systemic issues in esports regulatory body infrastructure
- Tournament organizers should reconsider reliance on understaffed governance organizations
Sergey “LMBT” Bezhanov, head coach of forZe’s Counter-Strike division, publicly expressed his exasperation when the Esports Integrity Commission ignored his formal appeals prior to the IEM Beijing Haidian 2020 open qualifiers. This situation created significant competitive disadvantages for the team during crucial tournament preparation.
The experienced coach turned to Twitter to voice his mounting irritation with ESIC’s administrative silence, revealing he’d submitted multiple formal appeals without receiving any acknowledgment or response. LMBT’s suspension originated from ESIC’s comprehensive investigation into the notorious spectator bug exploitation within CS:GO. The regulatory body’s final determination led to competitive bans against 37 different coaches across ESIC-affiliated competitions. International Esports Masters tournaments fall under this jurisdiction, and LMBT maintains he complied with all competitive regulations despite contesting the fairness of his specific penalty.
Today team is playing open quali and its pretty hard not to be even on TS with the boyz , but @ESIC_Official didnt replyed to any appeal emails and Im not even sure will they? Despite fact its a stone evidence right there.
— Sergey LMBT Bezhanov (@LMBT_CSGO) October 5, 2020
Following public release of the banned coaches list, forZe’s organization issued an official declaration asserting they possessed compelling proof of LMBT’s non-involvement in three quarters of the infractions ESIC referenced. Given the team’s transparent position statement, industry observers anticipated swift verification procedures from the commission. Regrettably for the Russian coach, ESIC apparently overlooked his submission entirely. The governing body finally addressed LMBT’s concerns shortly after his social media post, indicating he would receive formal communication imminently.
“Sergei “lmbt” Bezhanov continues serving as our team’s strategic leader… [ESIC] plans to enforce a seven-month competitive prohibition, disregarding contextual circumstances. Accordingly, we will vigorously contest this determination and, if required, escalate matters to relevant oversight bodies for additional scrutiny,” the forZe organization affirmed in their detailed rebuttal.
Today ESIC published full list of coaches used the ingame CS:GO bug and the sanctions imposed on them. Our coach @LMBT_CSGO also is on the list. We disagree with this decision and we have strong evidence of his innocence. Read the full statement here: https://t.co/1WqWSYg9tI pic.twitter.com/u3rw6IsWCQ
— forZe eSports (@forzegg) September 28, 2020
ESIC might lack staff to quickly evaluate CSGO coaching appeals
This administrative failure prompts critical examination of ESIC’s operational readiness to handle time-sensitive disciplinary reviews. While the preliminary inquiry was conducted by seasoned CS:GO officials, ESIC provides regulatory services to numerous tournament entities. Uncertainty exists regarding whether the commission maintains dedicated personnel to process appeals like LMBT’s. Their choice to contract the original exploit investigators suggests potential absence of permanent staff capable of reviewing evidence files against initial documentation.
This staffing limitation presents alarming implications, particularly considering ESIC’s authority to exclude competitors from events organized by major tournament providers. LMBT hasn’t publicly addressed ESIC’s communication failure, nor confirmed receipt of appeal responses. The commission demonstrated its enforcement capabilities through the initial ruling, but their sluggishness in addressing LMBT’s challenge should prompt esports organizations to reconsider the body’s capacity for managing large-scale regulatory matters effectively.
Action Checklist
- Document all appeal submissions with timestamps and confirmation receipts
- Establish direct communication channels with regulatory bodies beyond email
- Review tournament agreements for governance provisions and appeal timelines
- Develop contingency plans for regulatory disputes affecting team participation
No reproduction without permission：Game Guides Online » ESIC fails to respond to forZe coach LMBT’s ban appeal ESIC's delayed response to LMBT's coaching ban appeal raises serious questions about esports governance