If you believe countering a certain sets and losing to another means that you've found a switch in makes me question your experience as a whole.
Given that Aegi got banned there isn't much point in me explaining in depth again why you are incorrect and that repeating the same argument which I have already disproven doesn't "debunk my arguments". But I will respond to this because it tickles me and I feel that maybe if you can understand this next statement you will finally understand why you're wrong without me haven't to go in depth anyway, so read carefully.
If you have counters to a given Aegi set, and you are able to scout the set through Protect or Sacking (and don't start with you having to sack a pokemon makes it broken crap, cause this meta is currently all about sacking to scout pokemon which is the main reason Balance and Stall are unviable [I talk more about this in the rest of the post]), once you know the set, you can find a switch in. For example, if I switch into a useless pokemon vs your Aegi to scout it, and you use SD, I can be pretty safe to assume it is physically orientated and countered by my Quagsire, which will be able to switch into your Aegi again and again all day.
Which brings me to the point about switch ins. As Chopin said, the problem with this meta at the moment, which makes Offense the only viable strat, is that almost nothing is a guaranteed switch in too anything, until you know what its link / set it. You pretty much have to sack things in order to scout and then either revenge, or send in a reliable switch in once you know the set. Which is pretty much what HO already does in standards anyway. If it gets a poor 1v1 it often would just sack its least valued member based on match up, then revenge the threat. HO relies on Non Switch In checks, where as Balance and Stall as far better off holding their cores together and maintaining all their pokemon, because they don't have enough win cons to just attack with everything till they die, and then send in the next win con. Stall of cause is hurt by this the most as their win cons are generally too slow for this meta and can be flinched to death unless you remove flinch users, but in order to get to a point where your win cons can set up and sweep, you have to sack things, and stall is the kinda play style where you are either sacking your win cons, or you are sacking the cores that clear the path for your win cons, making it extremely hard to set up a victory.
But there was however a time when stall didn't have to sack anything (or balance), because it had the tools to scout the opponent without having to switch in its least valued member and hope it doesn't die. I time of Aegislash, where King's Shield was the most reliable way to scout the opposition's sets without giving them free set up had they turned out to be a Scarfed SD + STAB Garchomp. Stall had a scout, that could give you a great enough indication of the opposing set that you could work out your most reliable switch in.
But before that there was another time. A time where stall wasn't reliant on Aegislash to Scout, because Protect could be linked with other moves. Defensive Prankster mons such as Klefki, Sableye, and Murkrow could reliably scout without conceding free turns. Feather Dance + Protect Murkrow, Taunt/Will-O-Wisp + Protect Sableye, Thunder Wave + Protect Klefki. These were all viable stall mons that fulfilled their role of scouting and blanket checking things such as Physical attackers, Set Up attackers, and Flinch abusers (the 3 links given each check at least 1 of these categories). As a result, Stall (and balanced) could have multiple viable scouts to work out what they could and couldn't switch in against, as well as blanket check certain common links and strategies.
But now Stall and Balance are forced to sack things. R.I.P
Now don't get me wrong, I don't dislike an offensive meta. In fact I don't really like using stall, I just do it because I could ('could' as in I used to be able to before linked Protect and Aegi were banned), and people said I couldn't. I don't mind that linked is an offensive meta, I just hate that it used to be a balanced meta in which all play styles were viable, if people were willing to adapt.
Every time we ban something it seems to sway the meta so drastically, and I agree that if we reduce the power of linked moves, Quag and Clef would become over centralising. And then they will get banned. And then balance and stall will be nothing but a distance memory. Then Choiced Boost + Attack will become broken, and we'll have to ban that. And then what are we left with?
Obviously what I want is for the council to reconsider what has been banned, but I am willing to concede if we stop here. Don't continue banning things, or make changes to the mechanics, this is the kind of meta where that track never ends, something will always stand about as OP or centralising and I feel we are taking the meta backwards every time we attempt to go forwards.
We are all merely passengers on The Rape Train. There are no brakes on The Rape Train. And Rape is bad.
