I’m surprised to quote FIFA as an example but on that point, they have had fairly exemplary approach [0]. Players occasionally try to make political statements, and Fifa has a progressive take on infractions. An unexpected outburst after a victory is usually met with a stern conversation, possibly leaked to the press for good measure; repeated offence, something egregious acting after being explicitly warned not to lead to symbolic fines. You’d need to really cross a line to get near the sanction that Blizzard thought was appropriate for someone expressing a widespread sentiment in his home country.
Blizzard dosen't give a shit about it being political speech, what they care about is that it might upset the Chinese Communist Party, and their profits in the process.
I didn't know that as I'm not up on soccer, but I'm not surprised. This is liberal ideology at its most pure, and it leads to a great many of the social problems we have today. Some know taking a moral position will disenfranchise some subset and reduce their income, and some know that society would recoil (usually rightly!) at their views if they were forced to spell them out.
Are you perhaps using "liberal ideology" in a way that's different than what I'm used to? It seems that Blizzard's decisions were made in service of Capitalism which is a belief system that I associate more with conservative rather than liberal ideology.
[0] https://www.lawinsport.com/content/sports/item/politics-and-...