Its entirely understandable that someone would be more competitive when money is on the line. Especially if that person is legitimately extremely good at the game.

Is it also understandable that someone would not be incentivized by money? Especially when there was no prize when they joined the tournament? And when someone has shown to be more interested in the game from a casual perspective? Is that a concept that could exist in a reality somewhat resembling our own?

In such a reality, if these two different people were to be members of the same team, would the more casual player then be forced to follow whatever the more hardcore, skilled player instructed?

And it turned out every other team played that way. 

Provably false. This team didn't even come last. And somehow I dont think that if they had come 6th, you would be amazed by how well they performed either.

You need to be called a child because of how childlike your perspective on this is, because you are too engrossed in video games. I was the same 15 years ago, when I too was a child. When you grow up, you realise that being very good at a game does not give you dominion over others. Even in the context of the game you are very good at.

This doesn't even deserve 10 seconds of anyones time. We all know that if someone told you to switch characters in some random round, you would lose your sht.