TL;DR
- ESIC reversed lmbt’s ban only after public Twitter pressure revealed internal communication failures
- The investigation process appeared rushed with inadequate evidence collection and stakeholder influence concerns
- Multiple coaches have challenged ESIC’s unclear ban procedures and inconsistent enforcement
- Stakeholders including betting operators raise questions about potential conflicts of interest
- The case highlights systemic governance issues in esports with millions in prize money at stake
The Esports Integrity Commission (ESIC) overturned its suspension of forZe head coach Sergey “lmbt” Bezhanov following a two-week period where the organization failed to address his formal appeal submission.
After Bezhanov publicly expressed frustration on social media about being ignored during the appeals process, ESIC finally acknowledged his case and promised imminent contact. This sequence suggests the commission remained unaware of the coach’s legitimate appeal until he resorted to public channels.
forZe’s management and lmbt maintained they had submitted exonerating evidence via email demonstrating the coach hadn’t exploited any CS:GO game code vulnerabilities for competitive advantage. However, ESIC’s delayed response arrived several days after the evidence transmission. Upon receiving notification on October 15th that his suspension was rescinded, Bezhanov immediately shared the development with the community.
Well Im officially unbanned by @ESIC_Official with an immediate effect! So starting from next RMR Match Ill be able to be with my team again @forzegg It was super hard month for me and my team and obv I lost a lot of nerves, but now my name is clean and Im happy with that! pic.twitter.com/KHCAI5qdRY
— Sergey LMBT Bezhanov (@LMBT_CSGO) October 15, 2020
ESIC and lmbt’s Interaction Reveals Investigation Flaws
The reversal decision raises fundamental questions about the commission’s investigative protocols and decision-making framework at every procedural stage.
The extent of influence wielded by ESIC’s financial stakeholders regarding punishment severity remains ambiguous. These stakeholders include prominent Counter-Strike entities like tournament organizers ESL and BLAST Entertainment, alongside gambling operators BETWAY and Unikrn. Given these substantial financial interests, both enthusiasts and professional teams should question whether CS:GO’s competitive purity might be compromised by external stakeholder agendas.
Also would like to mention @Mod645 @michau9_ @EL_pANdaRL And all the other head admins who definetly know that I was fighting for rules every tournament. Thank you guyz for doing great job! But @ESIC_Official have to review some of those cases cause their approach is questionable
— Sergey LMBT Bezhanov (@LMBT_CSGO) September 28, 2020
Additional coaching staff, including FaZe Clan’s Robert “Robban” Dahlström, have similarly contested ESIC disciplinary actions while providing contextual explanations for the contested match situations.
- Multiple Coaches Challenge ESIC’s Opaque Disciplinary Procedures
ESIC’s official statement adopted a conciliatory posture while avoiding complete accountability for evidence review delays. If the initial ruling was issued hastily without consulting the implicated coaches, this represents concerning procedural negligence. The situation deteriorates further when evidence voluntarily provided—which the commission never solicited—only received attention after gaining traction through social media exposure.
“ESIC acknowledges LMBT’s and Forze’s cooperation during this resolution period, recognizing the case’s intricate nature alongside other pressing demands on our constrained operational capacity,” stated commissioner Ian Smith.
Considering the annual prize pools exceeding millions and the projected $22 billion gaming industry valuation by 2020, tournament organizers, competitive teams, the Counter-Strike Professional Players’ Association, and unaffiliated professionals would benefit from establishing more transparent governance structures. For teams navigating similar competitive landscapes, understanding proper class selection strategies becomes crucial for maintaining professional standards.
The lmbt case exemplifies broader due process concerns within esports governance. Organizations handling disciplinary matters should implement standardized evidence collection procedures and maintain clear communication channels with all parties involved. Those interested in comprehensive competitive frameworks should consult our complete competitive guide for best practices in professional esports conduct.
Action Checklist
- Establish clear, documented appeal procedures with specific response timelines
- Implement transparent stakeholder influence disclosure policies
- Create standardized evidence submission and verification protocols
- Develop communication standards ensuring all parties receive timely updates
- Regularly audit investigation processes for consistency and fairness
No reproduction without permission：Game Guides Online » LMBT unbanned by ESIC, calls Commission’s verdicts into question Analyzing ESIC's rushed investigation process and its impact on competitive CS:GO integrity