TL;DR

• Through routine behavior checks, sixteen players and coaching staff from eight teams across five regions were found to have exhibited various levels of negative behavior in KR solo queue.
• As described below, twelve players are being issued formal warnings for negative behavior, which includes griefing or toxic language in chat.
• Danil “Diamondprox” Reshetnikov of Gambit Esports is being fined $1,000 for negative behavior based upon his actions and his prior disciplinary history in the LCL.
• Seunglok “TheShy” Kang of Invictus Gaming is being fined $1,000 for negative behavior, including intentionally feeding and toxic language.
• Yeonsung “iloveoov” Choi, the head coach of Afreeca Freecs is being fined $1,500 USD for negative behavior, based on both the frequency of reports and his prior disciplinary history in the LCK.
• Jian “Uzi” Zihao is being fined $2,000 for griefing his teammates and intentionally feeding and for doing so on an account that did not belong to him, either through account sharing or through a purchased account.

CONTEXT

Through routine behavior checks over the past week, we found multiple instances of professional players exhibiting negative behavior in solo queue during September. After reviewing the reports and chat logs, each of the following players was found to have exhibited abusive language towards teammates or opponents in solo queue games. The frequency of reported games was fairly low amongst each of these individuals and the language used, while not what we expect from pro players, was not so egregious as to require a fine or ban. Each of the following players has been issued a formal warning and future negative behavior, either domestically or at international events, will draw an enhanced penalty.

• Daniele “Jiizuke” Di Mauro (VIT)
• Amadeu “Attila” Carvalho (VIT)
• Minkook “Dreams” Han (VIT)
• Luka “Perkz” Perkovic (G2)
• Petter “Hjarnan” Freyschuss (G2)
• Dennis “Svenskeren” Johnsen (C9)
• Stanislav “Lodik” Kornelyuk (GMB)
• Zhen-Ning “Ning” Gao (IG)
• Uijin “Rookie” Song (IG)
• Li “4LivcloveR” Zhe (EDG)
• Jaeha “Mowgly” Lee (AFR)
• Hyesung “Comet” Lim (AFR)

Of note from the above list, in issuing a warning to Svenskeren we did not take into consideration the competitive ruling against him in 2014 because of the length of time between since that ruling and the lack of recidivism since then. Over the last four years, multiple behavior checks against Svenskeren’s accounts have not raised any flags. In addition, the language used by Svenskeren in connection with this warning was not culturally insensitive. Taking all of these factors into consideration, coupled with the fairly low instances of reported instances on the KR server, we believe a warning is appropriate in this instance.  

Four players had negative behavior that rises to a level where a fine is appropriate.

Danil “Diamondprox” Reshetnikov was reported in multiple games for toxic behavior. We also confirmed that earlier this year Diamondprox received a formal warning from the LCL due to his toxic behavior. Based on his negative behavior in KR solo queue and his previous disciplinary incident in the LCL, Diamondprox is being fined $1,000 for his actions.

Seunglok “TheShy” Kang was similarly reported for intentional feeding, griefing and negative behavior in multiple games in solo queue. We confirmed these reports through a chat log and game play history review. Based on the evidence in these records, TheShy is being fined $1,000 for his actions.

Yeonsung “iloveoov” Choi was reported in nearly 80 games, which was more than 70% of the solo queue games he played in September. While we saw no evidence of intentional feeding, and his toxicity varied over the reported games, the high rate of reports coupled with a previous disciplinary incident in the LCK justifies a heightened fine for these actions of $1,500.

Jian “Uzi” Zihao was found to have exhibited negative behavior in solo queue during his bootcamp practice for the 2018 Worlds Championship Event. Our investigation revealed that Uzi received reports for ‘griefing towards teammates’ and ‘intentionally feeding’. A review of the relevant chat logs and game play history confirmed these reports. We also found out that Uzi was using an account not registered to him, but one that had been obtained either through account sharing or purchasing. Such account sharing or purchasing is strictly prohibited under the LoL Terms of Service and the Summoner’s Code.  Based upon his negative behavior, griefing, intentional feeding and account sharing/purchasing, Uzi is being fined $2,000 for his actions.

We expect professional players and coaches to respect and abide with the LoL Terms of Service and the Summoner’s code, maintain good behavior in and out of game, regardless of the actions of their teammates or the outcome of the game. These actions clearly violated the principle.

RELEVANT RULES

9.2.7    Player Behavior Investigation.

If WCE or Riot determines that a Team Member has violated the Summoner’s Code, the LoL Terms of Service, or other rules of LoL, WCE officials may assign penalties at their sole discretion.

RULING

Each of the above players has violated rule 9.2.7 of the WCE ruleset.

Jiizuke, Attila, Dreams, Perkz, Hjarnan, Svenskeren, Lodik, Ning, Rookie, 4LivcloveR, Mowgly and Comet are warned that future negative behavior may result in heightened penalties, including fines and suspensions from competitive play.

Diamondprox is fined $1,000 USD.

TheShy is fined $1,000 USD.

iloveoov is fined $1,500 USD.

Uzi is fined $2,000 USD.

Q&A

Q: How does this differ from previous punishments that occurred during Riot global events (Svenskeren’s Worlds 2014 punishment, Road’s punishment during Worlds 2016, YoDa’s punishment at MSI 2017, Shernfire’s Worlds 2018 punishment)?

A: Each of these competitive rulings followed racist or culturally insensitive statements. While we certainly believe griefing teammates and intentionally feeding is inappropriate behavior from a professional player, none of the conduct at issue in this ruling rose to the level punished in the above competitive rulings.

Q: Is this ruling only being issued because some of this behavior was raised publicly?

A: The negative behavior described above was all flagged through internal reports before it was raised publicly.