{"id":241112,"date":"2026-04-22T00:15:21","date_gmt":"2026-04-22T00:15:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/241112\/"},"modified":"2026-04-22T00:15:21","modified_gmt":"2026-04-22T00:15:21","slug":"firestar73-fires-back-after-play-pokemon-defends-orlando-regional-disqualification","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/241112\/","title":{"rendered":"Firestar73 fires back after Play Pokemon defends Orlando Regional disqualification"},"content":{"rendered":"

Play Pokemon has finally addressed the Orlando Regional Championships controversy<\/a>, confirming it will not reverse the penalty that stripped Firestar73 of his Pokemon Go title after his viral post-match celebration. <\/p>\n

In a statement published on April 21<\/a>, the company said judges reviewed the incident and upheld the ruling made during the event.<\/p>\n

The Orlando finals sparked major backlash earlier this month after Firestar73 appeared to win the event, only for officials to issue a Game Loss over what was initially viewed by many fans as an \u201cunsportsmanlike\u201d celebration. <\/p>\n

Article continues after ad<\/p>\n

After a long loser’s bracket run, @Firestar73_<\/a> wins a decisive game 5 to win the Orlando Regional Championship. Allegedly this celebration was unsportsmanlike, resulting in a game loss and giving NTC The win. I’m at a loss for words, I feel so bad for firestar. pic.twitter.com\/72l1RJO31v<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 AXN (@ItsAXN) April 5, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n

Firestar73 later published his own statement, arguing that the ruling was a \u201cgood-faith mistake,\u201d and formally asked The Pokemon Company to reverse it. Now, Play Pokemon says there was more to the situation than viewers saw on the broadcast.<\/p>\n

Play Pokemon says earlier warning led to final penalty<\/p>\n

In its statement, Play Pokemon said Firestar73 had already been given a Warning earlier in the bracket reset during game one for \u201chitting and shaking the table\u201d while the match was still in progress. <\/p>\n

Article continues after ad<\/p>\n

According to the company, that behavior was considered disruptive to players and officials. It then said the issue continued in game five, where the same player allegedly shook the table hard enough to disrupt the broadcast, leading judges to escalate the penalty to a Game Loss.<\/p>\n

Article continues after ad<\/p>\n

The company added that it would uphold the judges\u2019 decisions from Orlando and defended the officials involved, saying judges are responsible for protecting the competitive integrity of Play Pokemon events. At the same time, it acknowledged that emotional reactions after a win are normal and said celebrations themselves are not the issue unless they become disruptive or negatively affect competitive integrity.<\/p>\n

The response does not appear to have calmed the wider community. In the immediate reaction to the statement, many players and fans argued Play Pokemon was \u201cdoubling down\u201d rather than addressing the core complaint, which is that Firestar73\u2019s final celebration came after the match had already ended.<\/p>\n

Article continues after ad<\/p>\n

Article continues after ad<\/p>\n

For now, that means Firestar73\u2019s result remains unchanged, despite the player\u2019s formal appeal and the wider push from Pokemon Go fans who wanted the Orlando championship restored.<\/p>\n

Players publicly dispute Play Pokemon\u2019s version of events<\/p>\n

Play Pokemon\u2019s statement quickly drew public responses from both players involved, with each disputing how the company described the incidents.<\/p>\n

The “incident” you are now, for the first time, claiming was the basis of the decision did not affect the gameplay at all, yet decided the whole tournament. Section 2.1 requires a “clear explanation of any infraction and its penalty” and I was never given this as the basis at all https:\/\/t.co\/aXVLSda8Z7<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Firestar73 (@Firestar73_) April 21, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n

Firestar73 said the \u201cincident\u201d Play Pokemon is \u201cnow, for the first time, claiming was the basis of the decision did not affect the gameplay at all,\u201d and argued that Section 2.1 of the rules requires \u201ca clear explanation of any infraction and its penalty.\u201d <\/p>\n

Article continues after ad<\/p>\n

He added that this was never presented to him as the basis for the ruling.<\/p>\n

The Pokemon TCG player penalized in the other streamed match also pushed back, calling the community statement \u201cnot accurate.\u201d <\/p>\n

He claimed that \u201ctwo separate head judges\u201d told him he was given a Match Loss for \u201cthrowing\u201d his headset down and being \u201cdangerous,\u201d and said, \u201cnot a single judge told me I was given a game loss for disrupting the board.\u201d<\/p>\n

Article continues after ad<\/p>\n

Article continues after ad<\/p>\n

This community statement is not accurate. <\/p>\n

TWO separate head judges told me I was given a match loss for \u201cthrowing\u201d my headset down and being \u201cdangerous\u201dNot a single judge told me I was given a game loss for disrupting the board.<\/p>\n

I didn\u2019t even get to get a chance to appeal the\u2026 https:\/\/t.co\/coc9yNtQG9<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 takani mran (@FishNugget4) April 21, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n

He also claimed he was not given a fair chance to appeal the ruling because, according to him, judges never clearly explained which rule was being enforced. <\/p>\n

In a follow-up reply, he said he was able to appeal the \u201cdangerous\u201d penalty to a higher-up head judge, but not the board disruption ruling because \u201cit was never given to me.\u201d<\/p>\n