So I heard we're all at a loss for what thing to suspect next, but fortunately a worthy and talented user, skilled in the profession of tiering jurisprudence has arrived to rescue you from your malaise and give you fresh ideas on how to improve the meta.
1. Ban Dragapult.
Has ever there been a pokemon so strong compared to the meta it finds itself in as Dragapult? Doubtful. Dragapult is the DPP Salamence of gen 8 only twice as centralizing. People who are bad think its physical sets are underwhelming, but how feckless must you be if you can't find away to abuse a Ghost-Dragon with Dragon Dance and 120 base attack? Anyone who says such sets aren't good is just telling on themself. So moving beyond such garbage notions, we understand that when you play in a Dragapult meta you have the incredibly restrictive Specs set which is probably the root of people saying this metagame doesn't reward anything besides guessing at 50-50s, and then you have this DD set which just doesn't seem like it's OU safe in the first place, so we have to play a stupid guessing game against a Dragapult where you will lose at the minimum one valuable pokemon to guessing wrong, be it guessing the set wrong or guessing wrong on U-turn, fireblast, shadow ball, dm. Luckily we have the incredibly fair, and not at all a broken thing for which to check other broken things, HDB Unaware Clefable to keep the DD menace under control, but basically nothing keeps the special attacking U-turn sets in line. As a cleaner on stall it's basically giratina-0, and Infiltrator is an incredibly degenerate ability, which nearly single handedly invalidates whole archetypes like screens when in the hands of something like Dragapult.
2. Ban one of future sight or teleport.
Hard to say really, neither of these seem too bad, it's hard to really make the argument for banning either. I'd hate to see anyone argue for banning a move rather than banning a pokemon. And future sight is practically a skill move, a janky entry hazard, in a metagame defined by an endless series of highly consequential 50-50s desperately risked, often with no compensation for the user who's match-up has been fished.
3. Ban heavy duty boots.
Now there is an idea that actually seems to have a competitive basis. An item is not a move, and a competitive game is decided by moves above all else. Hazards are moves which have defined pokemon since their introduction, and now this item causes us to abandon all of our principles and understanding and play a long series of 50-50s to decide many games rather than a strategy game based on careful calculation and planning. The best hazard is probably currently sandstorm, rocky helmet, and hail (in that order) because of this degenerate item. I wonder, why do we do this to ourselves? 50-50s are of course a beautiful part of pokemon, but there is only so much frequency of 50-50s that can be tolerable. In the past, you might play 2-3 turns of 50-50s to decide a carefully plotted game as it neared the end, or attempted a 50-50 to turn around a losing position, and almost always with compensation for each player in the form of passive damage or set-up opportunity. But now they come nearly from the start of a match and continue on and on, exhausting any pretense of an outcome based on skill. On the metagame level they disincentivize and reduce the counterplay to regenerator mons that have proliferated and lead to a situation where no matter how good one is at clicking moves in the face of high risk and minimal compensation, no progress can be made. It's quite disgusting the level of match-up fishing that such a situation consists of. The level on which this operates has confounded even the most experienced and venerable tierers on this site, who have been habituated to these situations to such an extent that they can no longer analyze a pokemon such as Dragapult or Zamacenta-C as broken, because these pokemon are vulnerable to the most common forms of 'match-up fishing' (the neologism we use for the situations we all have experienced) that an item such as heavy duty boots enables.
Remember in any reply to this post that "the chorus master sings slightly too high so that others may reach the correct pitch".