Disagree tbh. For one, the situation came about from Bruno not adhering to standards that playing group set, and then refusing to apologize or fall in line after the initial discretion(s). Now i totally disagree with those standards tbh, i think theyre far too restrictive in a league like this. And whilst the playing group might have set them, my experience with those sort of things is that they are designed in a way that players set things that the coach wants to hear, or what the players think the coach wants to hear anyway, not necessarily what people will actually be prepared to do in real life.
Nevertheless, that was what was in place and he effectively shat on his teammates by refusing to even acknowledge he fucked up. Im sure they'd have been understanding with a simple apology, you know, alright you cocked up but who cares, do better next time kinda thing.
The second point is that whilst we all might suspect some things in regards to yes men and how the conversations went down, at the end of the day we are totally speculating how that unfolded. Maybe Bruno wanted to fix it and sit down earnestly, maybe he turned his nose up at it. We don't know much, other than Joyce's track record and the associated assumptions, which ultimately imo shouldnt determine the outcome. It certainly wouldnt in a court of law.
FWIW i don't believe Joyce wanted to be surrounded by Yes Men, imo he was happy to discuss and debate approaches, but i think once something was agreed upon then he was ruthless in enforcing that. The problem is that some of those things are agreed upon because they sound like the right thing to do, esp in a group context, and to speak out seems like you aren't committed. But they are ultimately too draconian in practice.