I don't understand why you delved into semantics at all, I'm fully aware of the difference. Except you're missing the point of trappers and why they're clearly competitive. Even if I'm bringing Dugtrio and my opponent has a Tyranitar that I aim to trap, I don't just get that scenario for free, especially with the advent of team preview in 5th gen. I have to do significant work to get to the favorable scenario that you claim makes them uncompetitive. Counterplay is possible and it's the reason why bringing a team of exclusively trappers + sweepers isn't an autowin in every theoretically favorable scenario. That's where actually playing the game has to be taken into account.
Yeah, when my opponent makes a great double switch and now their Specs Gothitelle is in on my Hippowdon, I'm fucked. It's not interactive for me because he clicks Grass Knot and I die. (Believe it or not, limiting interaction is a viable strategy - see Spore and a million other examples). Except you leave out the multiple turns preceding that scenario, turns that are the essence of a competitive battle, and turns that you intentionally omit to make your argument sound pretty.
In regards to a trapper's sole purpose being to exert control over the match, isn't that what every single Pokemon aims to do? Whether it's a weather setter, hazard setter, choiced damage threat, setup sweeper, what have you, the point is to create pressure and force unfavorable scenarios for your opponent. The fact that Pokemon like Dugtrio and Gothitelle disable your opponent's switches is offset by the tradeoff in their poor movepools/base stats/external viability. Which is also why we banned Mega Gengar, because it's strong as shit even without ST and thus there's no tradeoff.
I see absolutely zero solid foundation for any of your arguments. You make a lot of bold claims and back them up with nothing. By your logic, we ban Pursuit, hazards, and phazing along with trapping, even though all of these strategies have viable counterplay which tests the skill of both battlers. Solely because they have the potential to exert too much control? Sounds like shrouded whining to me. Especially in a meta like BW OU, I'm in full favor of the complexity which trappers bring to the table.
Yeah, when my opponent makes a great double switch and now their Specs Gothitelle is in on my Hippowdon, I'm fucked. It's not interactive for me because he clicks Grass Knot and I die. (Believe it or not, limiting interaction is a viable strategy - see Spore and a million other examples). Except you leave out the multiple turns preceding that scenario, turns that are the essence of a competitive battle, and turns that you intentionally omit to make your argument sound pretty.
In regards to a trapper's sole purpose being to exert control over the match, isn't that what every single Pokemon aims to do? Whether it's a weather setter, hazard setter, choiced damage threat, setup sweeper, what have you, the point is to create pressure and force unfavorable scenarios for your opponent. The fact that Pokemon like Dugtrio and Gothitelle disable your opponent's switches is offset by the tradeoff in their poor movepools/base stats/external viability. Which is also why we banned Mega Gengar, because it's strong as shit even without ST and thus there's no tradeoff.
I see absolutely zero solid foundation for any of your arguments. You make a lot of bold claims and back them up with nothing. By your logic, we ban Pursuit, hazards, and phazing along with trapping, even though all of these strategies have viable counterplay which tests the skill of both battlers. Solely because they have the potential to exert too much control? Sounds like shrouded whining to me. Especially in a meta like BW OU, I'm in full favor of the complexity which trappers bring to the table.