If Things Were Different, ESIC Wouldn’t Have Given Hunden a Ban
In a recent announcement, Hunden caught a two-year CSGO ban from ESIC. This comes from his reported sharing important information about his then-team Heroic, while also negotiating with the team he was sharing the information with. This came ahead of IEM Cologne, though ESIC did not disclose the team he was sharing information with. It’s incredibly shady to make such a move, and ESIC said threatened “the reputation and competitive integrity of esports, and ESIC’s member ESL.” There’s no reason a player should resort to sharing secret information with opposing teams in this fashion. But could things have gone down differently for Hunden and his two-year ban from ESIC?
Special Circumstances for Hunden and His Case
The integrity issues surrounding this situation made ESIC view this as a labor dispute between a company and an employee more than anything else. After all, Hunden was in talks with the team he was trying to give information to, and his own team had no idea it was going on. ESIC spoke to Dexerto about this situation specifically in a recent statement:
“In any circumstance other than those surrounding Mr. Petersen’s conduct (see our release for the specific dot points that set these out – but specifically the timing and context of his action), ESIC would not have acted to impose a sanction.”
The matter of the length of the ban has some people talking though. He was previously banned for less, for what could be considered a worse offense. According to ESIC though, the situations are significantly different and thus, are being treated differently. Integrity is incredibly important in esports, after all. If the unnamed team had taken and used the information Hunden was offering, the entire event is suspect. It would have contaminated an entire major CSGO event.
The punishment meted out is, according to the ESIC, “a precedential statement of the severity of misconduct around and leading up to an ESIC member event.” Hunden’s previous penalty was apparently considered but not applied here, so Hunden’s previous ban had nothing to do with his punishment, according to ESIC.
This is why ESIC offered Hunden a chance to have a lesser punishment and offered a deal. However, the ESIC warned that if Hunden chose to appeal, the punishment could potentially be worse. It doesn’t sound like Hunden bothered to put any effort into an appeal, and instead wound up with this two-year ban. Could it have been worse? It’s entirely likely. What about Hunden’s final statement? He said his team knew about the spectator bug being abused. ESIC said they would consider reopening the investigation, but as of yet, no information has been provided. For now, we can expect to see no Hunden in any capacity in the CSGO scene for a few years. We’ll keep you up to date if this story develops.