EMEA COME | VLR.gg

#219

kskm

Frags

–

book1 - wrong - ur title says EMEA come and gives example of exceptions in CS, not Valorant implying nobody in EMEA experiences the so called beautiful thing of cheering for ur nation. there arent 10000s of EMEA teams in the franchised world - there are 10 and 3 of them infact have more than 3 players of same nationality - Karmine Corp, FUT Esports, and BBL. So yes u did not do ur research on the topic and ur OP question was not sincere. Here you used EMEA - infact more than a continent to generalize but when i say EU u want me to include clubs from the vatican city to drive some stupid point. Hypocricy and idiocy is insane. again the same shit with football - ur best of the best play in the best of the best leagues in EUROPE not Brazil - the majority of them do - that just refutes any stupid unresearched links u paste to shift the goalpost and include countries that dont care about football.

book2 wrong - again the same shit, comparing oranges to apples. laws are not universal - they are different in different countries and even enforced differently. For example LGBTQ rights might be considered basic human rights and discrimination could go punished in some countries while in some countries it could be actively encouraged/discouraged by the state. Thus there is no universal definition of "abnormal" behavior. Another example : people from Pakistan and India are actively discouraged by both the countries to participate in sports, music etc. Usa ACTIVELY discourages people from hostile countries to immigrate and play in their sports or act in their movies. These are not exceptions, even if they are it is enough to counter any point made that suggests that there is anti-discriminatory laws that protect everyone everywhere. A European state can and will if they want to - actively discourage Brazilian players to play in their league without being held accountable for their actions. The fact that they dont do such stuff - is not bound by any law - for there is no such international law so it out of their benevolence that they do it and it should be appreciated. dont bring that stupid "oh it increases competitivenenes" argument again cause i already refuted it by saying historically people have discriminated against diversity EVEN if it means increase in competitiveness.

wrong - it is not specific rather an example how developing countries with lower overall budgets have defeated countries with more wealth in the sports they are passionate about. Just the fact that best cricket players from Europe and Australia and Americas go and play in India is an example of what could happen in Brazil with Football - a sport they are good at but fails to happen. China winning record medals every year is another example of a developing nation with lower budget to spend on Sports does something really spectacular. You bringing in the idea of washed tier 10 EU players playing in Brazil only further proves my point and shows that ur hell bent on shifting goalposts.

wrong and hypocritical - i already refuted this several times and shown 3/10 EMEA franchised teams have national lineups. There are 4/5 serious countries in Americas and 48 in EMEA so even if they have 3 core national lineups that is praise worthy.

#220

Astroman77

Frags

–

Book 1 - Not wrong - 1 -> My question was clear and applies to any team in any e-sports game in the EMEA region. In summary: "How do you feel about not having national representatives to cheer for, with the EXCEPTION OF... and having to root for 5 foreigners?" In the post itself, 2 Poles responded to me citing VP and I agreed that I had not mentioned all the teams and didn't need to, because the question was DIRECTLY FOR THOSE WHO CHEER FOR 5 FOREIGNERS. "Oh, but there are several EMEA teams in other games with a lineup of at least 3 players from the same country" - So what? Those teams are not the focus of the debate. KC is not the focus, FUT is not the focus, BBL is not the focus. After all, it doesn't make sense for me to ask, "Hey Turks, how does it feel to cheer for a team with national representatives?" or "Hey Germans, how does it feel?" because THEY have already celebrated in the past and currently have a developed e-sports scene in their countries, so I wouldn't ask something I already know. I'm referring to Greeks, Armenians, British, Dutch and many others that I don't need to cite meticulously, country by country. THESE are the ones who don't have national representatives with a lineup of at least 3 players and cheer for teams like fnatic, NaVi, Liquid, FaZe, among others. It's basic interpretation. What's difficult to understand about that? Am I not speaking clear English?
2 -> I only mention EMEA when I'm talking about Valorant (e-sports in general) and I mention EU when I'm talking about football, I didn't think it needed to be explained! Again: Europe is composed of over 60% weak leagues and countries without tradition in football. If you don't want the bad part to be included in a debate about EUROPE, then don't mention "EUROPE" - because that includes the entire continent. You're doing mental gymnastics just to think you're right, even though you know you're wrong. What needed to be refuted here has already been refuted. You're just repeating the same thing.
Book 2 - Not wrong - The definition of "abnormal" behavior is given by society, in agreement with the State that regulates such behavior through laws. If you live in a country where being prejudiced is a crime, then it doesn't matter if this is a universal law or not - obviously, every region has its own legislation. By disregarding the laws, a person is acting contrary to the values and norms that govern life in society, which can cause harm to oneself and others. No sane human being seeks or takes actions to be harmed and punished, therefore, acting in disagreement with what is established by the State is acting in an unnatural and abnormal way. It is expected that you OBEY the law like any other fellow citizen. You are not expected to be a criminal. Again - you are considered innocent until proven otherwise. Even if you are accused of something, the word of another is not enough evidence, as the principle of innocence is a global right guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. From the moment a pattern/attitude is framed as something to be avoided and punishable, in a particular country, you will obey the will of the majority (the laws of your country are created through a democratic process). Disobedience implies not acting in the way that society/State expects. In Iran, it is abnormal to be gay. This "abnormality" is punished by law. In Europe, it is expected that people are not prejudiced, otherwise, they are acting outside the normality that is expected and are punished. The law imposes limits, you can do everything that is not prohibited. Acting within the limits of the constitution and the civil/criminal code is not something to be proud of. You just don't want to be punished or arrested for acting differently than what is expected of you. I don't know why you're coming back to this point again. You only thought of something to try and refute me, saying that "laws are not universal," when it doesn't change anything about the central point that led to this debate - it is not a virtue to obey laws, you are not applauded for not committing crimes! It is easier for you to receive credits for disobeying some outdated and authoritarian law than for obeying something that is already expected.
Not wrong - You talked and talked but didn't refute the point of "you cite exceptions while you have to deal with me alongside common and observable events." You use India and China to validate a line of reasoning based on EXCEPTION. "Oh, it could be like this." Okay - but most of the time it isn't. Population size doesn't influence anything. Factors such as sports culture, infrastructure, funding, quality of coaches and players, among others, are much more determinative of success than mere population size. And that's very obvious in practice.
????????????????? - I didn't understand what you meant here and which argument you were refuting. If you could edit and formulate a better response, I would appreciate it and will come back with an edited response on the same point.

#221

kskm

Frags

–

book 1 wrong and hypocritical - reread ur title and OP. EMEA = Europe, Middle East and Africa - exception provided: Sweden and Denmark in CS. Post made in Valorant forum. Expectation : talking about all esports and only those who cant cheer for a team. It is "obviously" clear and not region baiting when "EMEA COME" is the title and when countries in APAC for example have majority foreigners playing too - why target EMEA in that case? Everything u say is clear and carries implicit meaning when others say "Europe" they should explicitly mention only the rich leagues or else not use that term but u can use the term EMEA and one should understand u "obviously" dont mean 3/10 franchised clubs.

book 2 - bunch of bullshit definitions provided which miss the entire premise and refutes nothing. reread or get an adult to read my previous post to understand it.

nah im chillin ive given enough examples, structured arguments and information to educate u, u can reread entire posts to get a better grip on reality. ur OP question was never sincere - it was a pathetic attempt to mock a specific region - I aint even from EMEA and can read it just the like the rest of vlr did and downvoted the shit out of it. keep malding and writing books!!

#222

Astroman77

Frags

–

Book 1 - Not wrong - I mentioned 2 teams as exceptions ("oh my god there are others!!!"), but it becomes clear when interpreting the question that it is directly addressed to EMEA teams that do not fit the exception. "What is it like to cheer for teams with 5 foreigners?" - This excludes teams like the ones mentioned and all others that have at least 3 representatives from the same country. Clearly, I just wanted to make it clear that there are exceptions by mentioning Sweden and Denmark, leaving it free for the reader to automatically associate other teams that come to mind that also do not fit my question. There is a clear and defined target of people to be targeted, and it does not include people who do not cheer for a very diverse team. This is very obvious, by the way.
There is no other way to refer to people from countries without competitive teams with national representatives other than EMEA - when I refer to the EMEA region. It doesn't make sense for me to research country by country and then address the question to: "hey you from Greece, Romania, Azerbaijan, Lithuania, Netherlands, Vatican, etc, etc, etc, etc". It's all implied in the message. I wanted to ask the question specifically to people from this region. For obvious reasons: it is the most diverse of all the others.

Book 2 - Not wrong - You saying that I didn't refute doesn't make your previous argument, which was refuted, not refuted. You basically say: "It is praiseworthy and admirable when a person respects a law, such as not discriminating, because in other countries it is not a law. Therefore, it is not a universal norm for people to act in such a way," when respect and obedience of a law ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD is not something to be proud of. That's the point. Each nation has its own legislation based on the history and culture of the country. If it's prohibited to be prejudiced in Europe and you respect a European law, you're just doing what's expected of any citizen who doesn't want to be punished and acts according to society's desires. It's a natural movement. You won't be applauded for not being a murderer, harasser, rapist, thief, prejudiced, or racist because that's what's expected of European citizens! In other places, other things are expected. That's the point, and there's no refutation because it's based on a perceptible reality. It's not like you can say, "No, it's different here. We applaud people for not committing crimes because everyone is expected to be a criminal."

Not wrong - You don't even know what you're talking about anymore. You cited India and China to prove your weak argument that population quantity can be used as a parameter to measure a country's success in sports. It has nothing to do with supporting/playing/investing. You basically say, "look, India is the best in the world in cricket, a country with 1.4 billion inhabitants achieves such a feat, so my narrative that population equals success makes some sense" - no, it doesn't. As I said: it's an exception. Cricket. There are countless sports in which they are bad. Jamaica with 4 million inhabitants is more successful, sports-wise, than India. "oh but what about China, they are really good in the Olympics with a population of 1.4 billion, my narrative still stands!" - no, it doesn't. China, as a country, is an exception. And despite being good in the Olympics, they can barely qualify for the football World Cup.

You provided no structured and substantiated argument, no statistical data, no scientific research, no genuinely useful and relevant information to support your reasoning. It was all based on "I think this, so it must be true." Something that any layperson without any study on the topics discussed could do. The most you did was use a research that I had already sent, from the IFFHS - an institute that you probably had never heard of - proving in my favor that currently the Brazilian league is the strongest in the world. Your only attempt to contribute minimally to the debate by sending some data, link, or whatever, was to self-refute. My question was directed to people from the EMEA. There is no way to know the sincerity/lack of sincerity of words typed on a forum, it's speculation on your part to say that I was trying to mock, you don't even know what my intention was. If they voted negatively, then it's a sign that it bothers them, nothing more than that. You know what else bothers? The truth.

#223

kskm

Frags

–

book 2 - reread or get an adult to read my previous post to understand it. laws are niether universal nor enforced universally so no they are not expected behavior. no rebuttal provided here

wrong - already refuted that India and China are not exceptions, rather examples of how countries can and do invest and make the best out of the sports THEY SUPPORT and PLAY. google for more examples - wait why would u do that lmao - you only google for links which support ur narrative not question ur bullshit personal believes. desperate attempt made to compare WCs of India and Jamaica when I was clearly comparing Indian Cricket League to Brazilian footballs league and to Chinese Olympic performance - two examples provided ("I mentioned 2 teams as exceptions ("oh my god there are others!!!")" - use same logic here to google for more examples of APPLES TO APPLES comparisons to educate urself). any desperate attempt to make an apples to oranges comparison is no rebuttal provided. reread my previous posts to get a clearer understanding.

all ur links are unresearched, twisting of facts to fit a narrative which i have already refuted several times in the thread including the iffhs one - reread my previous posts to understand it. my job isnt here to educate and enlighten you, just because I am responding, ur expecting me to spend more than 30 seconds to refute every stupid strawman argument you make on an online forum is crazy. none of my claims are personal opinions and i have stated where it is my personal opinion, ive asked u to google for more information on the subjects where u clearly lack information - feel free to do that by highlighting every fact ive mentioned on this thread. there is no judge here to decide whose arguments are better but the users - if anyone is bothered by the comments on this forum they just report - downvoting is a sign of saying ur takes are awful - nobody is "bothered" by ur comments based on twisted data - dont confuse urself as someone who is bothering people by talking the truth on an online forum - most people here troll and bait and nobody takes anyone seriously. on the contrary i feel ur the one bothered by my comments on Brazil which made u research twisted data and present false narratives

#224

Astroman77

Frags

–

Book 1 - Not wrong - Everything you're saying here has been addressed in the previous post and if you use your brain even a little bit, you'll understand it perfectly well. You copied and pasted something that has already been countered. In short, it's clearly for any sport, or else I wouldn't have mentioned CS as an example and KR - the biggest power in LoL. I don't care about APAC, the question was for the EMEA region. Basically, everyone who commented on the post understood the question except for you. Yes, when I say "EMEA COME" and follow it up with the question "how do you feel about having to cheer for 5 foreigners" - I expect only those who fit this criterion to respond. That's why I mentioned a few countries as exceptions. The association that a German, for example, shouldn't answer my question because they have teams with national representation, is made automatically by the German who thinks: "okay, this question isn't for me, even though he said 'EMEA COME.' I have teams within the EMEA to cheer for, such as BIG. I'll let others respond."

Book 2 - Not wrong - As I said, expected behaviors vary from country to country. If you ask someone with better interpretation skills, they will help you understand. In Iran, a certain type of social behavior is expected, in accordance with their laws and culture. In the US, a different type of behavior is expected, in accordance with their laws and culture. In China, yet another type of behavior is expected, also in accordance with their laws and customs. The laws govern and dictate how society behaves. The fact that laws are not universal does not prevent classifying a behavior as normal/natural in YOUR COUNTRY, just because it is unnatural in another. In Middle Eastern countries where women are not allowed to go out in public without a headscarf/veil, it is expected that they comply with the law. It is natural for them, despite being unnatural for Western countries. A clear example. Nobody is proud of following a law, as it is nothing less than expected and natural for any human living in society. In fact, many women are protesting against this outdated and antiquated law, taking to the streets with their hair uncovered as a form of indignation against the government. Not following a certain law, then, can be considered an act of pride and something deserving of credit, but it is rare and depends on the context. Following laws? Expected, normal, and definitely not a quality. I want to point out that it is very easy and comfortable to be on this side of the argument, defending the obvious, as it aligns with a rational and observable thought process. True. Trying to refute this is like trying to stop a train going 200km/h with your hand.

Not wrong - India and China were initially cited by you as examples of populous countries that can have some kind of success in sports. Don't you remember what you wrote? It's no fun, it seems like I'm debating with someone who gets lost in their own arguments and has amnesia. India with ...... 1.4 billion inhabitants!! and China with ...... 1.4 billion inhabitants! Coincidence that the two most populous countries in the world are here in this line of reasoning? No, we were specifically discussing that. Population capacity and its relationship to success in sports. There's nothing about "THEY SUPPORT and PLAY". You mentioned only 2 countries because they are definitely exceptions. Moreover, you can't say "look, this country is very good at this because it is very populous." Cricket itself is an exception in something that India is good at because there are countless other sports in which they are not good. Besides, India is an exception that only works for ONE specific sport. China is an exception as a COUNTRY. And yet, it is surpassed by less populous countries. Nonetheless, your argument is flawed because there is NO SCIENTIFIC STUDY that categorically proves that populous countries have greater guarantees of success. But there are scientific studies that prove what is necessary to succeed in sports, such as proper nutrition, adopted routine, training, good professionals working alongside the athlete, among others.

Narrating what you think is happening in this debate won't make that thought true. Saying "I refuted" - when you only give opinions that are immediately rebutted in the next post, doesn't change reality or make an argument valid. Literally, the majority of your responses were based on opinions, while I grounded mine with data, links, and articles. It's a fact. Just look at the beginning of the discussion. We're not even talking about topics that have already been properly clarified. Saying that "none of your opinions were personal" or saying that "I bring false arguments" doesn't have the power to alter reality, it just serves as a mental comfort for you to think you're right. But I understand you, it's like a defendant trying to prove in court that he didn't commit a crime (that he did), trying to deceive the jury with false arguments. He vainly tries to deceive himself, while everyone around him looks at him with that face of "dude, it doesn't matter what you say, we had witnesses at the scene, concrete evidence, and even security cameras."

#225

kskm

Frags

–

yeah bro ur right and im wrong.. JUST KIDDING LMFAOOOOO ur wrong + braindead

book 1 wrong - u just went from sayin u wanted to know everyones opinion who cant support own country to idc about APAC. Nothing was apparent or obvious in ur arguments - it was region baiting and the fact that everyone called it out shows that u did not succeed. i know the reason behind it too - its the pent up anger after the whole world shat on BR for their crowd behavior and their comparison with EU crowd - so u made a thread basically saying "oh u dont know whats it like to support ur own country!!!1" -- yeh yeah yeah i know ur gonna say "u cannot know my intentions!!! where is the proof!! its ur personal belief" - this aint a fucking courthouse ya clown - there is proving and then there is knowing - everyone knows ur just baiting.

so am i falling for this bait by constantly replying to ur bullshit arguments? - nah honestly its an EMEA bait thread by a brazilian who is getting shat on - so its 2 birds at once for me so yes i am downnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn to keep replying LETS FUCKIN GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO - ok im abit drink

book 2 - wtf was this? u just admitted to being wrong or something? reread my original post on the laws not being universal and then read ur bullshit - biggest contradiction ever.

book 3 - wrong i already told u can google for more examples i aint gonna sit here finding articles for rebuttals cause im not a lawyer getting paid by the hour. a simple google will tell u that - also since ur so big on understanding "clear" and implicit meaning behind everything - oh wait thats a privilege u only accord to ur own arguments and not others!! I have to be clear when i say EU - i cant just say idc about countries in EU which dont play football but u can use broad terms like EMEA - how dare i forget that... hmm but if u had a bit of shame - u would understand brazil, china and India have alot more than population in common which is why i picked up those countries' examples. You wouldnt admit to it but Europe is much more developed and wealthier than BR which is one of the major reasons why the "BEST" in EU is better than the BEST in BR in various terms in football - again idc about baseless links its just a fact which is proven by how the BEST in BR majorly go to the BEST in EU rather than staying and playing for the BEST in BR. This does NOT happen in Cricket in India - an example of how BR should focus to turn things around.

Narrating what you think is happening in this debate won't make that thought true. Saying "I refuted" - when you only give opinions that are immediately rebutted in the next post, doesn't change reality or make an argument valid - yh ill paste this here cause u saying something doesnt make it so either . bro is just cooking up stories in his mind - calling me a defendant.. if anything the accusations on 90% posts on this thread are on ur insincere and region baiting OP so who really is a defendant? you have written so many books trying to claim ur innocence but u havent sold 1 to anyone.

#226

Astroman77

Frags

–

If you were right and I was wrong, I wouldn't have any problem admitting it. But in all your arguments, you didn't present any decent foundation, it was all based on "I think this, so it must be true". Fallacies, guesses, and heuristics. And I made a point of exposing, point by point, that you were wrong - through statistical data, studies, and links, where you could access them yourself and draw your own conclusions about whether what I was saying made sense or not.

Book 1 - Not wrong - If I wanted to know the opinion of people who support APAC teams, I would simply include them and say "EMEA and APAC COME". So no, your statement makes no sense. The intention of the post is not relevant and was never questioned in the debate, this is just your attempt to deflect the focus since you don't have many alternatives left and, I believe, everything was properly clarified. Not to mention that the content of "book 1" had nothing about my intention in creating the post, you just made that up now to build a line of reasoning completely outside of what we are arguing, what was refuted, etc. This shows that you are completely lost in your own opinions and in the heart of the matter.

I have no intention whatsoever of knowing about your personal life. When you're arguing, try not to give irrelevant and useless opinions, like the ones you gave about "being drunk" - literally no one cares, especially not a stranger on a Valorant forum. I'm not interested in your desires, as long as you continue to give opinions that have already been refuted and are clearly out of touch with reality, I will continue to show why you're wrong.

Book 2 - Not wrong - Yes, I read exactly what you wrote and your argument is based on a single premise: "laws are not universal, therefore, a behavior considered normal (prejudice, for example) in one place may not be in another." And for you, that is enough to conclude that not being prejudiced is praiseworthy because it is not universal. You are wrong because: We all live within the borders of some federal state. The absence of universal laws is exactly what makes you follow the laws OF YOUR COUNTRY. Your behavior is governed by these laws (do you see how it narrows down?). We arrive at the individual - you. Everything you do, WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LEGISLATION OF YOUR COUNTRY, is considered normal, as long as it does not violate any law. You may have some judgment about these laws, but that does not change the fact that obeying them is expected by your family, friends, mayor, ruler, and president of your country. Therefore, it makes no sense for you to be applauded or for it to be considered an admirable attitude to not be prejudiced (a crime), because to act like that is to act outside of normality, to act in an unexpected way, and you will be punished. What determines what is normal or not are the laws OF YOUR COUNTRY, not others.

Book 3 - Not wrong - 1. If you're arguing, it's up to you to bring the data and foundation. Empty words are not concrete evidence of anything. "oh, it's on Google" - then search and show me. I want to see, read, and be convinced that you're right - which hasn't happened yet since we started debating. Again - EMEA is used in games and EU in football, and that's obvious. Have you ever seen someone trying to include a European football team in a matter related to EMEA? When we talk about Valorant, we mention EMEA, when it's not related to Valorant or any game - EU. There's nothing ambiguous about this point. A continent is richer and more developed than a country? Don't tell me! I'm surprised! When you want to make a comparison like this, cite country x country, state x state, city x city, continent x continent and not continent x country, which are two completely different things. There are European countries with a smaller GDP than the Brazilian state of Sao Paulo. You can pick a European country to prove your point and I'll pick another European country to prove mine. A discussion in this sense will not lead anywhere. Regarding football leagues, it has already been said that more than half of European leagues are bad and weak. You could have accessed the links and seen with your own eyes. 100% of Brazilian football players will not play in these leagues of countries with weak and non-traditional football leagues - which are the majority. Only 5 are chosen, a rarity among 50 countries.

The cricket in India was exceptionally cited to prove your point that populous countries can succeed (as if there could be a relationship between population and success) and then you tried to correlate it with Brazil - another populous country. Here you already mention India to support another argument: that there is no export of cricket players to Europe, as if player export were something bad for the exporting country or meant something other than "The top 5 leagues pay enough to have players from around the world," and that includes your country. Additionally, football is the sport with the greatest media appeal in the world, watched on all continents and played like no other. The fame of cricket is sustained by the Indians themselves, in Brazil no one even knows what "cricket" means. It cannot be compared to the popularity of football, perhaps explaining why no one cares about cricket players and they are not exported.

The person who feels the need to keep saying that they refuted and were not refuted is you. So it's important for you to know that this won't make your arguments valid just because you want them to be or because you think they are. And I say this because everything indicates exactly the opposite: unfounded opinions, assumptions, fallacies, no data, no links, just empty words with no guarantee of truthfulness. I didn't say you were a defendant, it was a figure of speech and apparently you didn't understand: you are constantly trying to convince yourself and others that you are right, even though all the signals around you are sending an alert of "they know that what I'm saying is purely unfounded and possibly a lie". Just like in a trial. Figure of speech.

#228

kskm

Frags

–

I have indeed presented decent arguments and stated facts all across my early posts, for which you have responded through false narratives, half cooked unresearched shit , shifting goalposts to drive absurd points.

The mere fact that the majority of the best football players in BR play for best in EU instead of staying back and playing for the best in BR refutes all stupid claims of BR clubs being stronger. The links you pasted to show these are unresearched articles and dont refute my claim at all. An actual rebuttal would include links of how the majority of the best football players who play for Brazil national team play in Br league - which is not true so there is no available rebuttal for this argument. This is enough to claim that best in EU is better than the best in BR. I went on to show how BR benefits from this arrangement but none of the proceeds are being used to challenge the status quo in football leagues - again that iffhs link does not refute this claim.

My introduction of cricket and olympics (again nobody cares if BR doesnt know about it or play it - the sports, music and art followed by countries depends on their cultural history and saying stupid stuff like "oh football is played more" makes no sense) shows how countries with population and a wealth divide have defeated and overcome countries with higher overall sports budgets. England for example won the last Cricket WC but most of the Englishmen play in India for their cricket league and NONE of the Indians play in England cricket leagues anymore (this was not the case before). There is a reason why Riot is trying to give China the 3 slots in Valorant majors - they see alot of growth potential and these countries have shown in the past that they can take charge when they start supporting a sport/esport. Brazil has similar problems related to poverty and an advantage in population when compared to wealthier European countries but has failed to challenge the status quo in football leagues for so long. Matter of fact, countries with no history in Football from the Middle East are doing more in signing relevant players. ------------- I know what your stupid ass rebuttals are going for everything here, you will nitpick stupid shit like a nerd and point oUT how I purposely generalized stuff like "HOW CAN U NOT MENTION VATICAN CITY WHEN U TALK ABOUT EU" when to any layman it is understood that if someone is talking about EU clubs they dont mean each and everyone of them. On the contrary your stupid and region baiting OP has generalized statements - it does not mention u exclude BBL, FUT etc in valorant, niether does it specify that oh there must be 3 or more players for u to be able to call it a "national" team to cheer for it -- u included those information and called it "its obvious xDDDD" after u were called out on it. In the same spirt i could also say that I was obviously mentioning only the rich EU clubs - there is no rule as to what can be generalized and what cannot be ---- here you are just twisting the rules to suit urself without making any sense at all.

I have already mentioned clearly that laws are not universal and also mentioned how historically not acting in a discriminatory way towards people was neither a law nor an expected behavior and gave several examples of states which actively to this day discriminate on the basis of nationality, race, religion and dont let players from diverse backgrounds to play in their leagues/sports or even in their music and art industry. Some of these are advanced nations with a constitution and a democracy, not just psycho states with dictators. So your entire point of people acting according to their laws is not appreciable is not a rebuttal at all as people within that state are not held to the same enforcement of the law as the state itself or the influential people in that state. AGAIN - the best clubs in europe CAN AND WILL act in discriminatory fashion towards Brazilian footballers if they wish to and they will not be answerable to anyone - the fact that they dont is not bound of the law of their or anyone's state so NO they are not just respecting their law but rather being nice and benevelont and there is nothing wrong with appreciating that in today's world filled with psycho jingoists like u.

There are tons of other arguments which u brought into this shit like BR apparently not being a protectionist state and then somehow tried to correct it by saying "oh no i did mean this, i meant that - its so obvious!! again most ur arguments are just that - when u say something there is implicit meaning behind it which is obvios but im not allowed to freely use terminology. You are making up things, its like ur acting like a judge in this whole thing which is why everyone feels like a defendant to you - but for me and most people in this thread ur the defendent and the downvotes show that. i am free to share whatever information i like whether its about me being drunk or w.e - its not a fucking courtroom its vlr.gg and i dont need to repeat myself several times if u miss the point or have difficulty in reading comprehension - thats ur problem not mine so i will be copy pasting my replies to show u have not answered or refuted anything

#229

Astroman77

Frags

–

No, you haven't presented any decent arguments in any of your posts, just read what you type, there's no enlightening or new information, no foundation, nothing but "I think this, so it must be this". The best football players playing in Europe doesn't refute "my claim that Brazilian clubs are stronger", because the only way we can know the strength of Brazilian football compared to European football is by putting the respective best teams from each region in competition. This already happens, as you should know. Brazil has won the Club World Cup 10 times against several European giants, only behind Spain, which has 12 and carries European football in this regard. If you want to know the strongest league, which is also the Brazilian league, just search for a research and statistics institute that does the work for you and eliminates any and all guesswork and fallacies. And the IFFHS, recognized by FIFA, is the ideal name. Having the best players is different from being the best team. You are confusing the two.

One of the links I sent is a SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH based on NUMBERS that proves how Europe benefits from hiring talented foreigners, since the crop of national players wouldn't be enough to compete with teams that constantly hire talents from other continents. Not only that, in addition to increasing the team's level and increasing the competitiveness of the league in general, they also gain more audience and fans, which generates higher income with broadcasting rights (with new viewers joining), guarantee a always full stadium (due to the greater appreciation and prestige gained), making the "home of the club" self-sustainable, not to mention the increase in revenue from the increase in shirt sales. Among several other things. It was just a matter of reading instead of saying "it didn't refute me" - when that's exactly what happened. The profit is used within the league itself, not to "challenge the status quo" - you clearly don't understand the subject. CLEARLY. The Brazilian League is the most valuable among 45 European leagues and the strongest in the world. The Brazilian League is managed by CBF (the highest entity), which in turn has 5 World Cups. The money is very well invested. The 5 strongest leagues in the world have money to hire the best, and that's why they get the spotlight, which doesn't necessarily mean they have the strongest league or team.

Even if Indians played cricket in England, it wouldn't mean anything other than "England has money to buy the best Indian cricket players." Exporting/importing players is not a parameter to measure the strength of a league, team, or sport within a region/country. Even if you manage to gather the best players, it's not a guarantee that you will have the best team. Strength is determined by a series of factors. A motivated average player is much better for your team than a theoretically better, unmotivated player. "shows how countries with population and a wealth divide have defeated and overcome countries with higher overall sports budgets" - Yes, that's why Brazil is the biggest football country and the only one with 5 World Cups. Again talking about "challenging the status quo," as if that were the goal of any league or country. Brazil doesn't need to do anything other than "maintain its own status quo" and continue to be the protagonist of world football. Here you show again that you didn't understand a simple question: "what is it like to support a team with 5 foreign players?". It's a matter of interpretation that is not necessary when we mention the EU. "EUROPE" implies all its countries. A team with 5 foreigners implies only teams with 5 foreigners (my god, isn't that obvious?). You cannot say that you were only referring to rich clubs when referring to Europe because it's a generic statement, my statement is SPECIFIC -> "what is it like to support a team with 5 foreign players?".

You just repeated a refuted argument from the previous post. All you're saying is basically, "laws are universal, it wasn't a law in the past, there are states that do the opposite," and I already responded to all of that. I'll try to be as didactic as possible so you can realize that you're wrong: You follow the laws, right? I hope so. Each country has its own legislation. In each region, what is normal/abnormal will be defined through its culture and customs and is reflected in laws (which are not universal and that's why we'll talk about your country). Do you feel special for not stealing? I hope not because the state says that this is a crime (not being a criminal is expected. Presumption of innocence). Is discrimination punishable or not? Well, if you live in the USA, it is a punishable crime. There you go. We already have one of several limits created by the state, in fact, 2 (theft and discrimination) that society has established an exception, an unnatural path that you should not follow. If you step out of line from what is expected, you will be arrested. You mention a club as an example, but the company is not punished, no company is punished, only the person, so your example is horrible. Loud will not be penalized for discriminating against Frod or Saadhak because it is a company. The individual who committed the crime in the name of the company is held responsible if something happens. The state can discriminate as much as it wants, but it cannot punish a state - only those who act on its behalf. I thought you knew these basic concepts.

I actually said: Brazil is not completely protectionist, just go back to the post where I first mentioned it and you'll see. And that implies that Brazil is not completely protectionist, obviously. There's nothing wrong with me defending myself when you say that I said "Brazil is not a protectionist country". Those are different phrases that evoke different meanings. "Not completely" is different from "not". You can use terminology freely, but you can't change the meaning according to what you want to believe. You can't use something generic and expect it to mean something specific.

continue thread →