Why does Sony A9' s electronic shutter become the focus of debate among photographers?

Sony's A99 is positioned in news and sports, which is the traditional site of Canon and Nikon. Canon and Nikon made a lot of money on this website, because this website is the front of big media and big news. They spend money on equipment to ensure the quality of news, all of which are public funds. Therefore, although it is a bit expensive, it is not for civilian use, and the market demand is not great. It doesn't matter if it is expensive, which conforms to the economic law of marginal effect. Is this good? Is that expensive? It is relative to the use environment. It is said that A9 is good, but the pixel is not high, which is not as good as A7R2 of the previous generation. So everyone has their own advantages and disadvantages. Money for the public can be willful. If you spend money for individuals, don't affect family unity. Only we enthusiasts, who spend our personal money to pursue novelty, have to weigh the left and right, and finally always spend more money on a bunch of redundant functions. Otherwise, how can you be called an enthusiast?