Quality innovate unity

Also I would request the opponent to argue with rich text and correct spellings which will help me to interpret his arguments. Now moving back to debate: According to pro, quality don't innovate unity; he tries to prove by giving an example of world cup 1996. So it is essential to clarify the topic. First let me clear the meaning of the word TEAM. According to Oxford online dictionary; Team means 'a group of people working or playing together'. (Source: . http://oxforddictionaries.com...) Here I think my opponent know the meaning of 'together'. Together means united. Thus a team itself means a UNITED group of people. So my opponent's argument of having Maradona to unite the team is baseless because in such an important competition a team (as its meaning says) is already united! Maradona's quality was hitting marvelous goals. Any goal hit by him surely increased the self confidence and stamina of the team but how his quality united (the already united) team is vague. Moreover, as I mentioned in round 1, 'the need' brings unity. Here team Argentina needed victory as well as world cup and so they played being united, keeping aside personal egos if any. So not the quality of any sportsman but the need to win brings unity in a team. One can say quality of each team mate retained unity but never brought unity. Now let me elaborate the topic more: Imagine a situation in which many qualitative people are sitting in a big conference hall. Suddenly, a big earthquake comes. Those (so called) qualitative person run for their own lives without caring of others. Does the quality of each person able to unite all the people in such extreme condition? No! That's what I want to explain. As I mentioned above and even in round 1 that quality retains the unity but never brings it. To make myself more clear let me put a good example. Suppose a machine is working. Each of its part have to be connected properly so that collective (united) working of each part results a task. Each part should be quality checked. Now think all the quality parts are working together to complete a task. If a bad (having poor quality) part is connected, the machine may stop working. Thus quality of each part retained unity and so a task by machine was completed. But who connected each quality part, who united each quality part. ? Humans. The trained humans. Here quality of human is not needed to unite those parts but whatever he has learnt and whatever he was trained in, he executed the same. In first round, my second sentence was the same:unity is always a result of high intention, sincere efforts, intelligence, direction, innovative execution, perception and ideologies. It represents the wise choice of many alternatives. Even a leader who has good leadership qualities don't bring unity but retain the unity. This is explained by example of Mahatma Gandhi in round 1. Now I will conclude here with the following quote: "QUALITY TENDS TO FAN OUT LIKE WAVES" -ROBERT M. PIRSIG, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. I hope above quote convincingly convince my argument. Quality sort out the united waves (like waves) but never unite the disunited waves. Thus I conclude my second round.