|
There are a few things that need to be cleared up.
First off, some of you might not even know what collusion means, so here it is.
Collusion - A secret agreement for illegal or fraudulent purposes.
Are these agreements illegal or fraudulent?
Too many fingers are being pointed in this thread. Has anyone heard the saying "It takes two to tango"? Well in this case it takes four.
If team 233 colluded in seattle well then shame on them, but why just shame on them why not shame on the two teams that agreed with them in every match and their ally who also sat back and watched? This seems very unfair to point one finger when you should point four.
Next, after some thought I have concluded that Don Knight is completely right. This should not be seen as cheating or a loophole, but as a strategy. As we can see it is a good strategy too. Why should a team have to stop doing something completely legal just because you don't like it? Seems selfish.
This strategy is nothing new. Last year I was approached before many matches and told that we would be given one goal and they would take one goal and we would fight over the middle goal. Sounds familiar doesn't it? Why wasn't this adressed last year? Simply because the value of these agreements are much higher this year.
As for my stance on these agreements: If you ask me to leave your stacks alone I will gladly agree and shake your hand, then I will instruct my drivers to knock down your stacks just to the look on your face, because I think its funny. So be warned.
|