We know he intended to secede with the full knowledge that a strategic advantage would result from his action. No part of this was a surprise to him or a random occurrence. You guys keep hemming and hawing about the player's intent as if there could be any doubt about it.
While it seems like you are attempting to troll, in case its simply a lack of understanding I will prove that false through a counterexample: If I get in a car I know it ups my risk for injury and death but I that is not my intention. My intention is to get somewhere faster.
And if you are unaware, a counterexample proves an implication false.
You might also look up the definition of
false analogy. Getting injured in a car accident is merely a risk that you try to avoid. The strategic advantage here is a foreseeable consequence of seceding and a relative certainty. But if you're driving your car and you see someone standing in the middle of the road, and you don't make any attempt to avoid him, then you intended to run him over. If you point a loaded gun at someone and pull the trigger, then you intended to shoot him. You're not excused just because the bullet passed through him and hit a deer.
