PDA

View Full Version : I'm Still Bothered By The Adam Silver - Donald Sterling Ruling



_Gmen_
05-14-2014, 11:40 PM
How can an owner be fined 2.5 million dollars, have to sell his team, be banned for life for a private conversation he had?

Yeah, and spare me the NBA bycode crap, I know it. Point is, why are we not made aware of this secret NBA Constitution?

And why is no one addressing how the NBA is the one who dropped the ball on this thing.

Sterling has been doing this racist crap on record for years now and just now because TMZ leaked a private conversation, they finally overreact?

BigCityofDreams
05-14-2014, 11:43 PM
Sometimes things are tolerated because that's the way things work or the system/ppl in place allow it.

goingfor28
05-14-2014, 11:43 PM
Cool. Stern looked the other way. Stern was afraid to challenge DTS.

Silver is not.

And why the hell would we as fans know all the ins and outs of the bylaws for owners of an nba team? Highly doubt anyone on here is an owner....

JasonJohnHorn
05-14-2014, 11:44 PM
The finally overreact? Or they finally take the proper steps to address this issue?

Did the NBA drop the ball for years by not addressing it? Yes. Does that mean they should never address it? No.

Just because you made a mistake in the past, doesn't mean you should continue to make it in the future. Call me an existentialist, but I don't think our past has to define our future.

As to the 'constitution', it is NOT secret to the people who buy a team. They know what is expected of them. That is on them if they step out of line.


That said, you can call it a lifetime ban if you want, but I look on the bright side of things: It is likely only a 6 month ban given his age and health. So... it's really not that long at all.

_Gmen_
05-14-2014, 11:47 PM
Cool. Stern looked the other way. Stern was afraid to challenge DTS.

Silver is not.

And why the hell would we as fans know all the ins and outs of the bylaws for owners of an nba team? Highly doubt anyone on here is an owner....



Silver is a clone of Stern.

The only reason he finally did something was because it was so highly talked about via TMZ initially.

FlashBolt
05-14-2014, 11:49 PM
When you're an owner, you sign a contract with the NBA. Most likely, there are things you can't do. Donald Sterling hurts the brand of NBA and that's going to endanger the NBA as a whole. He had to go. Just like any other thing in the world, you are not bigger than the employer.

_Gmen_
05-14-2014, 11:49 PM
The finally overreact? Or they finally take the proper steps to address this issue?

Did the NBA drop the ball for years by not addressing it? Yes. Does that mean they should never address it? No.

Just because you made a mistake in the past, doesn't mean you should continue to make it in the future. Call me an existentialist, but I don't think our past has to define our future.

As to the 'constitution', it is NOT secret to the people who buy a team. They know what is expected of them. That is on them if they step out of line.


That said, you can call it a lifetime ban if you want, but I look on the bright side of things: It is likely only a 6 month ban given his age and health. So... it's really not that long at all.




Private phone call.

If he said this crap during a press conference that would be one thing.

So should we tap all owner's phones now to make sure they are not violating the secret NBA Constitution?

GiantsSwaGG
05-14-2014, 11:51 PM
Can't trust these Thots...

bucketss
05-14-2014, 11:51 PM
we can't have a known racist in a league that is mostly black american im sorry, it will hurt the leagues image and won't sit with the players. if they didn't ban him the whole clippers would all probably ask for trades and refuse to play.

_Gmen_
05-14-2014, 11:52 PM
When you're an owner, you sign a contract with the NBA. Most likely, there are things you can't do. Donald Sterling hurts the brand of NBA and that's going to endanger the NBA as a whole. He had to go. Just like any other thing in the world, you are not bigger than the employer.



Sure but why did he not get in trouble back when he broke actual laws having to do with racism?

Boggles my mind guys like Mike Vick, Ron Artest and Donte Stallworth are allowed to play just months after they comitted terrible crimes.

_Gmen_
05-14-2014, 11:53 PM
we can't have a known racist in a league that is mostly black american im sorry, it will hurt the leagues image and won't sit with the players. if they didn't ban him the whole clippers would all probably ask for trades and refuse to play.



He's been a known racist and a terrible owner for years now.

Hangtime
05-14-2014, 11:59 PM
The league simply didn't have a choice. They had to make a bold move on Sterling. There would have been a storm of protests if they didn't act. Not just by players but corporate sponsors and endorsers as well as fans. A man with his history of blatant racism couldn't just have tap on the hand. The world was waiting on Silver's response. Talk about being in the hot seat. They can't just take such a risk because of one man.

_Gmen_
05-15-2014, 12:02 AM
The league simply didn't have a choice. They had to make a bold move on Sterling. There would have been a storm of protests if they didn't act. Not just by players but corporate sponsors and endorsers as well as fans. A man with his history of blatant racism couldn't just have tap on the hand. The world was waiting on Silver's response. Talk about being in the hot seat. They can't just take such a risk because of one man.


All true, but like I said, everyone is ignoring how Stern gave Sterling a pass for years.

USMCLaker
05-15-2014, 12:05 AM
How can an owner be fined 2.5 million dollars, have to sell his team, be banned for life for a private conversation he had?

Yeah, and spare me the NBA bycode crap, I know it. Point is, why are we not made aware of this secret NBA Constitution?

And why is no one addressing how the NBA is the one who dropped the ball on this thing.

Sterling has been doing this racist crap on record for years now and just now because TMZ leaked a private conversation, they finally overreact?

I'm still glad by the Adam Silver-Donald Sterling Ruling

bucketss
05-15-2014, 12:09 AM
All true, but like I said, everyone is ignoring how Stern gave Sterling a pass for years.

yes and it pissed me off.

hugepatsfan
05-15-2014, 12:09 AM
How can an owner be fined 2.5 million dollars, have to sell his team, be banned for life for a private conversation he had?

He can be fined/banned for life because it is allowed under the franchise agreement he signed to be a part of the NBA. He hasn't been forced to sell his team yet. The owners can vote to do that as part of the agreement he made to be a part of the NBA.

Yeah, and spare me the NBA bycode crap, I know it. Point is, why are we not made aware of this secret NBA Constitution?

We're not aware of the NBA constitution because why on Earth would we be? It's not a "secret" - it's an agreement owners have to sign to be a part of the NBA. There's absolutely no resin why any of us need to have access to it.

And why is no one addressing how the NBA is the one who dropped the ball on this thing.

Sterling has been doing this racist crap on record for years now and just now because TMZ leaked a private conversation, they finally overreact?

Had sponsors dropped out because of Sterling's past racism or players threaten to boycott then he would have been kicked out. Sterling isn't going to get kicked out because he's a racist. He's going to get kicked out because his racism has now been made public (whether it was meant to be private or not is irrelevant - it's public now) and as a result is hurting the profitability of the league.

naps
05-15-2014, 12:10 AM
Just because they didn't do what they were supposed to do years ago doesn't mean they can't do it now. Better late than never. Not sure what you are trying to get at. Sure it was private convo but it's not a private convo anymore (Doesn't matter how and why it was leaked, that's a whole another discussion). NBA is a business first and foremost and they can't keep a public villain attached to them and hope their business won't get ruined.

Hangtime
05-15-2014, 12:11 AM
All true, but like I said, everyone is ignoring how Stern gave Sterling a pass for years.

I will be honest with you Gmen.......I had no clue who this guy was or who even owned the Clippers. I knew nothing about this guy until we all heard that recording. Its one thing when people hear accusations and there are lawsuits being filed but I just think everyone turned a blind eye to it. That recording got everyone's attention. I have heard that the league tried getting this guy out several times. But there was no way getting around this latest Sterling debacle.

Tony_Starks
05-15-2014, 12:12 AM
What was the name of that lesbian show with Jennifer Biels? That was a damn fine show, I wonder if its on Netflix?

_Gmen_
05-15-2014, 12:15 AM
yes and it pissed me off.


I'm glad I'm not the only one.

USMCLaker
05-15-2014, 12:16 AM
What was the name of that lesbian show with Jennifer Biels? That was a damn fine show, I wonder if its on Netflix?

Wasn't it called "The L Show" or something like that?

_Gmen_
05-15-2014, 12:16 AM
Just because they didn't do what they were supposed to do years ago doesn't mean they can't do it now. Better late than never. Not sure what you are trying to get at. Sure it was private convo but it's not a private convo anymore (Doesn't matter how and why it was leaked, that's a whole another discussion). NBA is a business first and foremost and they can't keep a public villain attached to them and hope their business won't get ruined.



The NBA should be investigated for collusion, conspiracy and fraud among other things.

lamzoka
05-15-2014, 12:17 AM
The finally overreact? Or they finally take the proper steps to address this issue?

Did the NBA drop the ball for years by not addressing it? Yes. Does that mean they should never address it? No.

Just because you made a mistake in the past, doesn't mean you should continue to make it in the future. Call me an existentialist, but I don't think our past has to define our future.

As to the 'constitution', it is NOT secret to the people who buy a team. They know what is expected of them. That is on them if they step out of line.


That said, you can call it a lifetime ban if you want, but I look on the bright side of things: It is likely only a 6 month ban given his age and health. So... it's really not that long at all.


woooow :laugh:

****ed up, but funny

hugepatsfan
05-15-2014, 12:17 AM
Private phone call.

If he said this crap during a press conference that would be one thing.

So should we tap all owner's phones now to make sure they are not violating the secret NBA Constitution?

The NBA didn't tap his phone though. Had the NBA have actively taken part in this then I'd agree with you. But that's not what happened. This recording got leaked completely independent of the NBA.

Sandman
05-15-2014, 12:21 AM
Private phone call.

If he said this crap during a press conference that would be one thing.

So should we tap all owner's phones now to make sure they are not violating the secret NBA Constitution?

They don't need to ban him for his words. They can ban him for sabotaging his business.

If I were an owner I would be very cautious of the way this goes down because of exactly what you said: how could I be responsible for some random thing I said? In or out of context?

IF they are able to bring it to a unanimous vote in the best interest of basketball, it would be easy to see that Donald Sterling is bad for business. There would be lost sponsors without a doubt and the media is already suggesting player strikes. They don't need to ban him because of comments if they can force a sale because the team is put at an economic disadvantage with him as the owner. I think they only need a 75% vote, but I'm not sure if the best interest of basketball is something they can vote to ouster him for. It would be a unanimous vote though, because if any nay votes were released to the public, those teams would get the same scrutiny as the Clippers.

hugepatsfan
05-15-2014, 12:22 AM
Sure but why did he not get in trouble back when he broke actual laws having to do with racism?

Boggles my mind guys like Mike Vick, Ron Artest and Donte Stallworth are allowed to play just months after they comitted terrible crimes.

He got taken to court for discrimination in his housing business but settled out of court. He was found innocent in the case Elgin Baylor brought against. He has never been found guilty of breaking any laws regarding racism. Sponsors had never dropped their affiliation with the NBA. Players had never threatened to boycott the game if he remained owner. There was no way the NBA could have gotten rid of them until now. He wasn't guilty of any legal wrongdoing, he wasn't hurting their profitably and he wasn't hurting their ability to operate as a league. In this case, he still isn't guilty of any legal wrongdoing but he is hurting their profitability and he is threatening the leagues ability to operate.

The people who "dropped the ball" in the past are the sponsors and players. Because of their inaction there was absolutely nothing Stern or the other owners could do. At least not anything that would hold up in court. They could have tried but it would have been laughed out of a court room and Sterling would take right back over.

LA_Raiders
05-15-2014, 12:24 AM
Donald is piece of ****, but nobody has the right to make a private conversation public. That's wrong.

lamzoka
05-15-2014, 12:24 AM
Wasn't it called "The L Show" or something like that?

the L Word

_Gmen_
05-15-2014, 12:27 AM
I will be honest with you Gmen.......I had no clue who this guy was or who even owned the Clippers. I knew nothing about this guy until we all heard that recording. Its one thing when people hear accusations and there are lawsuits being filed but I just think everyone turned a blind eye to it. That recording got everyone's attention. I have heard that the league tried getting this guy out several times. But there was no way getting around this latest Sterling debacle.

Sad.

_Gmen_
05-15-2014, 12:28 AM
He got taken to court for discrimination in his housing business but settled out of court. He was found innocent in the case Elgin Baylor brought against. He has never been found guilty of breaking any laws regarding racism. Sponsors had never dropped their affiliation with the NBA. Players had never threatened to boycott the game if he remained owner. There was no way the NBA could have gotten rid of them until now. He wasn't guilty of any legal wrongdoing, he wasn't hurting their profitably and he wasn't hurting their ability to operate as a league. In this case, he still isn't guilty of any legal wrongdoing but he is hurting their profitability and he is threatening the leagues ability to operate.

The people who "dropped the ball" in the past are the sponsors and players. Because of their inaction there was absolutely nothing Stern or the other owners could do. At least not anything that would hold up in court. They could have tried but it would have been laughed out of a court room and Sterling would take right back over.



Nope the NBA dropped the ball.

Multiple racism allegations were brought up and ignored by the NBA.

USMCLaker
05-15-2014, 12:28 AM
the L Word

That's right, lesbians are great.

LA_Raiders
05-15-2014, 12:31 AM
A lot of bs going in the nba: veto the cp3 trade, allow the 3 crybabies play in Miami, the refs show, the draft, etc...

_Gmen_
05-15-2014, 12:33 AM
They don't need to ban him for his words. They can ban him for sabotaging his business.

If I were an owner I would be very cautious of the way this goes down because of exactly what you said: how could I be responsible for some random thing I said? In or out of context?

IF they are able to bring it to a unanimous vote in the best interest of basketball, it would be easy to see that Donald Sterling is bad for business. There would be lost sponsors without a doubt and the media is already suggesting player strikes. They don't need to ban him because of comments if they can force a sale because the team is put at an economic disadvantage with him as the owner. I think they only need a 75% vote, but I'm not sure if the best interest of basketball is something they can vote to ouster him for. It would be a unanimous vote though, because if any nay votes were released to the public, those teams would get the same scrutiny as the Clippers.



He's been sabotaging his business for years now.

Clippers are well regarded as the worst franchise in sports.

hugepatsfan
05-15-2014, 12:35 AM
Nope the NBA dropped the ball.

Multiple racism allegations were brought up and ignored by the NBA.

You can choose to believe what you want. I agree that the NBA could have taken a stronger stance against Sterling's behavior but there was absolutely no way they could have kicked him out. Had they tried, he would have taken them to court and won his team back in a very easy legal decision. Then it would have been a huge **** show that would have hurt the NBA's brand (since now he'd be more well known as a racist and still in the NBA). Then Sterling probably could have argued that the other owners' collusion against him was costing him and the NBA money. He probably would have been able to counter-sue them and actually won money.

lakerboy
05-15-2014, 12:43 AM
NBA should have dealt with this years ago, but the truth is there was really no overwhelming evidence of racist acts by Sterling. The tape is disturbing -- you are right -- but you have to ban him for two reasons:

1. NBA is a business. It's a corporation. Most business franchises know they can have their franchise taken from them. They do it to save a business.

2. NBA is a black man's league, and it will send a really bad message to the league to keep this guy. If you don't fire him now, he will keep doing it again and again.

_Gmen_
05-15-2014, 12:46 AM
I hope Sterling takes down the NBA.

Tony_Starks
05-15-2014, 12:47 AM
the L Word

The L word!!! That's it. Man that was great. They should have that on the logo channel or something.

Sandman
05-15-2014, 12:52 AM
Nope the NBA dropped the ball.

Multiple racism allegations were brought up and ignored by the NBA.

It didn't matter until it cost the NBA money. For the same reasons they shouldnt have to vote him out on his words. He is bad for business.

This is the best way to get rid of him. It is best to ignore the racist aspect because this gives him room to argue semantics. He's out because he's bad for business and it doesn't matter why.

If Silver can legally call the vote he promised

Sandman
05-15-2014, 12:59 AM
He's been sabotaging his business for years now.

Clippers are well regarded as the worst franchise in sports.
I know about his reputation but up until this point you could not take his team away just for being a ****** owner when it comes to pocketing money over reinvesting.

He's also been a documented racist in the past, but up to this point it has still not cost other teams money or hurt the Clippers reputation directly.

Just like you can't vote him out for his racist comments, they now (may) have a way to vote him out because he is directly sabotaging his business by his presence alone.

I'm worried that this guy's angle is now to present himself as senile and pass the team off to his family. The last interview with Anderson Cooper was ridiculous. He will get more air time if he wants it because he's a **** magnet right now, and his best card to play is the demented old man. The last rant was about Magic Johnson and aids. While everybody rushes to discredit everything he said, it could be exactly what he wants. The more ridiculous he sounds in his next interview, the better. To be continued...

Tony_Starks
05-15-2014, 01:00 AM
That's right, lesbians are great.

Damn right they are. I'm waiting for a hot lesbian chick to get drafted to the wnba and go all Michael Sams with her hot girlfriend!

benzni
05-15-2014, 02:08 AM
If they didn't fine and ban him, players and fans would not associate with the clippers. Maybe its time for people to grow up and get with the times. Everyone is equal. If one is going to be a bigot, then he deserves whats coming.

goingfor28
05-15-2014, 02:20 AM
Pretty clear the way you are answering and quoting everything that this is just a troll thread.

Saddletramp
05-15-2014, 02:24 AM
I know about his reputation but up until this point you could not take his team away just for being a ****** owner when it comes to pocketing money over reinvesting.

He's also been a documented racist in the past, but up to this point it has still not cost other teams money or hurt the Clippers reputation directly.

Just like you can't vote him out for his racist comments, they now (may) have a way to vote him out because he is directly sabotaging his business by his presence alone.

Bingo. When you discriminate against poor minorities in a business venture that's seperate from the NBA, not much action will be taken unless the media blows it up. And remember, when that housing stuff was happening, the Clippers sucked. For years. Now they're good with an A List black coach and some black all-stars. And he talked smack about Magic friggin' Johnson.

Discriminate against poor minorities and kick them from their homes? That guys a jerk.
Tell your gold digging ho that she can **** black guys but shouldn't bring them to games and post pictures with them online (in a private conversation that she leaked when the money stopped flowing?). GET HIM OUT OF HERE!

It's a joke but it's just the way it is. Rivers, Paul and any other non-drafted/traded players/coaches (especially black players/coaches) should be ashamed to voluntarily join that organization. (And yes, I know Chris Paul was traded but he allowed the trade to go through. If he would have nixed it because of Sterling's ********, the league would have never dealt him there.)

Pfeifer
05-15-2014, 03:36 AM
I hope Sterling takes down the NBA.

You sound way too apologetic for Sterling. He's a bigot and deserves what he gets. This has nothing to do with the NBA being crooked and you shouldn't be using it as some sort of justification for Sterling. It also hit a nerve because of Magic Johnson being involved. It's like being in an abusive relationship. It's better to get out now than not at all.

naps
05-15-2014, 06:10 AM
The NBA should be investigated for collusion, conspiracy and fraud among other things.

Yeah sure but these have nothing to do with this Sterling situation. I am not sure whether you understood my post or not. You should not have problem with Sterling being ousted once you understand NBA is a business of 30 billionaires and it needs to save its brand even if it takes one of them need to be kicked out for his racism.




Pretty clear the way you are answering and quoting everything that this is just a troll thread.

I get the same feeling too. I am not sure what he is arguing here.

PurpleLynch
05-15-2014, 06:23 AM
Gmen you talk like a kind of troll,the quiet one.
1-Yes,Sterling had a long story of racism,actions weren't taken by Stern,but the new commissioner decided to punish him.What's wrong with that? He was allowed to do that when he feels like the Nba's image is in danger(by Nba's contract that Sterling signed). And when you have a owner who talks like DiCaprio in Django:Unchained,you can bet your *** that the Nba's image could be ruined.
2-Sterling's rights were respected,but like just everone else,he has to face consequences for what he said.The Nba is a league led by afroamericans and blacks in general.What do you think could happen? That tape was a huge strike for him and he deserved it.
3-The situation of the tape is still a mystery,only a court will decide if there was mutual consent to the registration or not. Said that,the tape was leaked and a huge part of global population knows what kind of man Sterling is.What to do you expect from a corporation like the Nba? Having a huge backlash to save the racist owner of the Clippers?

ghettosean
05-15-2014, 07:43 AM
we can't have a known racist in a league that is mostly black american im sorry, it will hurt the leagues image and won't sit with the players. if they didn't ban him the whole clippers would all probably ask for trades and refuse to play.



He's been a known racist and a terrible owner for years now.

Yes and now is the first time there is hard evidence proving it on top of everyone hearing/seeing this evidence NBA fan or not. EVERYONE knows now fan or not of basketball... and the Clippers and the NBA are both being affected financially because of it and if they did nothing they would get hurt worse over time. Something had to be done since everyone was watching fan, sponsors, players and even just the general public... they did the right thing for the team and the league.

IndyRealist
05-15-2014, 08:18 AM
This has been repeatedly explained, people are just ignoring facts because they don't think it's "fair".

1. In any conversation, either party has the right to disclose the contents of the conversation unless there is a nondisclosure agreement. Whether she could legally record it is matter for debate, but she CAN tell anyone she wants. It'd be her word against his. She simply has proof it occurred. As this is not a court of law, whether the recording was legal or not DOES NOT MATTER.

1a. Freedom of Speech protects you from government censorship. It does not protect you from judgement by your peers. (Nor, for that matter, does it protect you from getting banned on PSD. Know how your rights work.)

2. Sterling signed a contract. In this contract, per Adam Silver and EVERY news outlet, he signed away his right to sue. He agreed to be subject to binding arbitration. No court is going to overturn binding arbitration unless they can prove the arbitrator did something illegal.

3. In this same contract, he agreed to give up his team should a 3/4 vote of owners approve it. So did every other owner. This is the EXACT SAME setup as a homeowner's association. And yes, your HOA can take your home from you. Read your contract.

Basically, this conversation keeps going because people don't understand how contracts work, and don't understand how freedom of speech works. Did no one else have to take Civics?

torocan
05-15-2014, 08:34 AM
Basically, this conversation keeps going because people don't understand how contracts work, and don't understand how freedom of speech works. Did no one else have to take Civics?

By far the most shocking thing I've learned from the whole Donald Sterling situation is how many people do NOT understand the First Amendment. It's not like the Constitution and the Bill of Rights hasn't been hammered into Everyone's head since they were 5 years old...

I'm not sure whether it says more about the current state of education, or that way too many people slept through class. :p

tr3ymill3r
05-15-2014, 08:46 AM
Yes it was a private conversation, however it became public and by no fault of his own. If the NBA wants to get rid of him that is a choice, Sterling also has a choice to sue the person recording the conversation and for them making it public.

JonnyBrav000
05-15-2014, 09:08 AM
Silver is a clone of Stern.

The only reason he finally did something was because it was so highly talked about via TMZ initially.


Call me crazy but you have not said one thing that could change anyone's opinion on this subject. BTW, Silver is not a clone to his predecessor Stern. Silver is the new sheriff in the NBA and so far he has been more lenient with players than Stern has been in the past and he has been much stricter on the owners. Look, just because you own a "FRANCHISE" does not mean it is your birth right, there is a constitution and you need to do more research because it is not secretive, the owners all knew about it and after the Sterling ruling the NBA posted the NBA constitution on it's website for anyone interested in looking at it. Just because Stern did nothing in the past, does not mean Silver should follow suit. The owners will vote to kick him out, so it's really not all on Silver. The commish doesn't want him, NBA sponsors don't want him, the players, coaches and GM's around the league don't want him and neither do the owners, only you want him. By the way, it's not like he won't make a ton of money off the sale, but Sterling at this point is toxic to the NBA brand and toxic to an unruly and anxious workforce (the players and the players union). There is no reason not to kick him out. Just the fact that he goes on TV to make matters worse and you still can't see that he needs to go means you really cannot think outside of the box and you made up your mind to side with the bigot plantation minded owner that he is. Good luck finding any support on this. Not!

JonnyBrav000
05-15-2014, 09:26 AM
By far the most shocking thing I've learned from the whole Donald Sterling situation is how many people do NOT understand the First Amendment. It's not like the Constitution and the Bill of Rights hasn't been hammered into Everyone's head since they were 5 years old...

I'm not sure whether it says more about the current state of education, or that way too many people slept through class. :p



LOL what are you talking about! You really have no clue do you? This is a not a first amendment situation, this is a Franchised business. Do you know what Franchise means??? If you violate any of the "FRANCHISE" bylaws or constitution and are voted out by the other owners you are OUT! This has nothing to do with freedom of speech, you are totally misguided here. This is about a franchise business and Sterling is toxic to the brand. He did it to himself. Boohoo, you are going to cry over this ahole??? Then Sterling goes on TV and makes it worse. Do you have any comprehension here? It's not like the NBA is taking the team away without compensation, he is going to make loads of money off the sale, however by expressing hateful views and not even being a bit remorseful he is no longer fit to be in charge of an NBA team. Thank God you are not the commish because the NBA would be bankrupt.

PhillyPhantic
05-15-2014, 10:32 AM
I don't think you quite understand the facts of the situation.
1. It doesn't matter that the conversation happened in his home, office, while hes driving his car, etc. V Stiviano had permission, from D Sterling, to record his conversations. He didn't give permission to the NBA. So your idea of filing collusion against the NBA is baseless. The NBA didn't record Sterling or leak the audio. So, the NBA can use the tapes against him in court by California law.
2. The past racial allegations you say were brought up and ignored by the NBA were not actually ignored by the NBA. Yes, Sterling has been sued multiple times previously, but he has settled the cases out of court meaning on paper he has not been found unlawful of conduct on paper and legally. Just accused.
3. Sterling does maintain his first amendment rights in being able to say anything he wants, including all the things said on the tapes. Whether you agree with him or not, he still maintains that right. But, when you own a franchise, whether in the NBA or you own a franchise in other companies, ie McDonald's, the employer has the right to attempt to take the franchise away from you because you are marketing their brand and company. Sterling has hurt the brand and financials of the NBA. Therefore, the NBA has a right to protect its brand and financials. He signed away rights when he bought the franchise. Additionally, the NBA had sign additional morality clauses over the years due to the multiple lawsuits filed against Sterling.
4. As I mentioned earlier, the NBA didn't ignore the lawsuits earlier, they just couldn't win a legal case against Sterling. Now, they have concrete proof they can use against Sterling. Where as previously on paper he was not found liable for much and sponsors did not pull out like they did now. The league owners will also have a justifiable reason to back their 3/4 vote. If they had tried to force Sterling to sell previously, Sterling would have won the cases in a landslide against the NBA.
5. The majority of players are African American, but the majority of front offices and owners are Caucasian. Regardless of the league being majority of one race/ethic group or the other, what Sterling said was wrong and should not be allowed to represent the rest of the league, especially when the brand and financials are negatively effected.
6. Having the NBA constitution and bylaws public doesn't make sense for the league. Just like any corporation and company doesn't publicize all their papers and documents.

Every action the NBA is taking is against Sterling is fair and allowed. Claiming Sterling's first amendment rights are violated is stupid because he is allowed to say what he wants is still allowed. Well, guess what, the NBA has their rights as well to protect the league and its interests. As someone else stated, the NBA is a business first, and when someone in your company isn't helping your business, you get rid of them.


Nope the NBA dropped the ball.

Multiple racism allegations were brought up and ignored by the NBA.

slashsnake
05-15-2014, 10:57 AM
How can an owner be fined 2.5 million dollars, have to sell his team, be banned for life for a private conversation he had?

Yeah, and spare me the NBA bycode crap, I know it. Point is, why are we not made aware of this secret NBA Constitution?

And why is no one addressing how the NBA is the one who dropped the ball on this thing.

Sterling has been doing this racist crap on record for years now and just now because TMZ leaked a private conversation, they finally overreact?

Up till now it was all rumor and stories. Someone said he was a racist here and there. But he was also getting awards from the NAACP. He settled on his housing discrimination but didn't have to admit any wrongdoing. Now you have his own words saying he is a racist. That makes a difference. Someone says Kobe or Ben Roethlisberger raped them, that's one thing. Catch it on tape, he is out of the league. Not an overreaction. I think it was a fine reaction to a situation that could have cancelled the entire playoffs. They are in the business of making money and during the most exciting playoffs ever, the top story was their racist owner. Easy choice there.

And I have heard a LOT of talk saying that David Stern really did drop the ball here.


As for how that can happen, its a franchise agreement. There's been a lot of franchise owners forced to give up their franchises because of what they have said and done in the business world. Pretty common practice, they get it taken away if they put a bad name on the parent company. Google Andy Cheung for example.

It isn't secret. It just isn't news until it is put into effect. Just like you don't look into and know about what rules and stipulations your local Starbucks franchise owner has to stand by. Darren Collison has a contract that pays him a bonus if he wins MVP. Not secret, but not news unless he is competing for that award. In 1997 the NFL passed a rule that their owners could own other sports teams as long as they were in the same market or didn't have a competing NFL market in that other teams area. Not news until guys like Paul Allen bought teams. The rule is one owner has to own at least 30% of an NFL team (used to be 51%, but with team prices increasing they wanted more opportunities). Not really anything you know until now if you are following the Bills sale.

I am not sure if there is a major company out there that doesn't have these kinds of rules in place for their franchise owners. The last thing you would want if you were Walmart is news of a franchise owner saying he didn't want black people going to his store and you couldn't do anything about it as a company.

slashsnake
05-15-2014, 11:04 AM
His first amendment rights are being protected 100%. No secret police are coming to his house and whisking him and his family away to a concentration camp for the rest of his life because of what he said. In fact, if someone tried to attack him for what he said, the gov't and police would step in and protect him for his words.

Now freedom of speech does NOT give you freedom from responsibility for what you say. I go in and tell my boss to screw off, the gov't isn't coming in and forcing him to keep me. It just promises you that you can say what you want and not end up in prison for it. Having spent time in the military where I've seen countries that don't have that freedom, it is a pretty big one to have.

Tony_Starks
05-15-2014, 11:21 AM
Pretty clear the way you are answering and quoting everything that this is just a troll thread.

I'm shocked more people can't see this and are taking this guy seriously.

Right from the jump I could see this was a "this isn't fair" troll thread.

torocan
05-15-2014, 11:34 AM
LOL what are you talking about! You really have no clue do you? This is a not a first amendment situation, this is a Franchised business. Do you know what Franchise means??? If you violate any of the "FRANCHISE" bylaws or constitution and are voted out by the other owners you are OUT! This has nothing to do with freedom of speech, you are totally misguided here. This is about a franchise business and Sterling is toxic to the brand. He did it to himself. Boohoo, you are going to cry over this ahole??? Then Sterling goes on TV and makes it worse. Do you have any comprehension here? It's not like the NBA is taking the team away without compensation, he is going to make loads of money off the sale, however by expressing hateful views and not even being a bit remorseful he is no longer fit to be in charge of an NBA team. Thank God you are not the commish because the NBA would be bankrupt.

Slow down cowboy. I was referring to people thinking that there was a violation of Sterling's first amendment rights by the NBA. Or thinking that it applied to private businesses instead of just government.

If you'd read the actual OTHER Sterling threads, you'd see that I've posted quite extensively on whether the first amendment applies, and the principles being applied in terms of contract and tort law, as well as the relevant articles within the NBA constitution, Title 7, California labor law, and the Sherman Act.

No need to get so worked up. It was just a general observation. :D

albertajaysfan
05-15-2014, 11:50 AM
The NBA should be investigated for collusion, conspiracy and fraud among other things.

Any explanation on for those ideas?

TheIlladelph16
05-15-2014, 11:58 AM
All true, but like I said, everyone is ignoring how Stern gave Sterling a pass for years.

ah yes, the old "well he didn't address the problem the first time, so there's no way to possibly justify taking the correct steps now".

Please stop having such an stupid opinion. Let me clue you in on something... rarely is a problem actually fixed the first time that it arises. It takes time and support of the public in order to act on issues like this. If we listened to you, nothing would ever get fixed. African Americans wouldn't have rights in this country if we decided to say, well they didn't address equal rights after freeing them in 1863, so I can't see how we can justify it now.

Patriot Pride
05-15-2014, 12:05 PM
Private phone call.

If he said this crap during a press conference that would be one thing.

So should we tap all owner's phones now to make sure they are not violating the secret NBA Constitution?

That's called a slippery slope argument and isn't a valid point.

Also the fact that it was a private phone call means nothing.

BIG worm
05-15-2014, 12:07 PM
Gmen you seem to be straddling both sides of the fence here. On one hand you say youre are pissed that Stern never handled Sterling, on the other hand youre asking how could Silver take this mans team away, fine him etc...Bottom line, the league has this man dead to rights. The phone call is no longer private, he said what he said. Id like to hear your opinion on how you feel the league should of handled this.

BIG worm
05-15-2014, 12:09 PM
By far the most shocking thing I've learned from the whole Donald Sterling situation is how many people do NOT understand the First Amendment. It's not like the Constitution and the Bill of Rights hasn't been hammered into Everyone's head since they were 5 years old...

I'm not sure whether it says more about the current state of education, or that way too many people slept through class. :p

So very true. This is pretty basic stuff here, yet people remain confused and "outraged" for some reason.

Tony_Starks
05-15-2014, 12:15 PM
Simple concept: I record you privately doing something questionable. I put it on YouTube and it goes viral. Your boss sees it and fires you because he feels you are poorly representing the company. You have a issue with me, not your boss. How it got on YouTube is irrelevant to him, the bottom line is its out there.

yoseppii12
05-15-2014, 12:18 PM
Sterlings gone. For good reasons. I just wonder how these types of acts will be punished from this point forward. Don't know how the player's by-laws are different than the owners', imagine they are, but if you are going to throw someone out of the league for racist comments, then everyone that gets caught up saying anything racist from this point forward will probably receive similar punishment, or not?

This whole thing has me thinking of Ray Rice knocking out and pulling his GF by her hair and Riley Cooper on Eagles yelling racist **** (both on Video)... I know the NFL is a different league, but I wonder what happens to NBA players if they do similar things.

I just feel like if we are going to say Sterling is a racist than Ray Rice is pugnacious/dangerous and Riley Cooper is a racist. I know there are past allegations against Sterling for his bad deeds but the guy is like 80 years old. If we accumulated all the bad things he has done in his life sure it would be a decent amount, but it seems people ignore all the good things (thinking I heard he donated millions to minorities in LA). So now that we live in a society, where we can classify someone as something for 1 or a few bad things they have done, will this treatment be given to all patrons of the NBA?

Just interesting to see what happens after all this, I don't really care about what happens now as it is pretty obvious Sterling is gone and probably should be, simply because no one wants him there.

Crackadalic
05-15-2014, 12:24 PM
Simple concept: I record you privately doing something questionable. I put it on YouTube and it goes viral. Your boss sees it and fires you because he feels you are poorly representing the company. You have a issue with me, not your boss. How it got on YouTube is irrelevant to him, the bottom line is its out there.

I can't believe people fail to see this. Probably the best way to help people comprehend

To a lesser extent a friend can post a pic without my consent on fb being drunk with a bunch of hot girls and my boss fire me because I'm hurting the company's image

People seriously need to stop defending this guy. It's a joke

goingfor28
05-15-2014, 12:32 PM
Simple concept: I record you privately doing something questionable. I put it on YouTube and it goes viral. Your boss sees it and fires you because he feels you are poorly representing the company. You have a issue with me, not your boss. How it got on YouTube is irrelevant to him, the bottom line is its out there.

Bingo

slashsnake
05-15-2014, 12:48 PM
Simple concept: I record you privately doing something questionable. I put it on YouTube and it goes viral. Your boss sees it and fires you because he feels you are poorly representing the company. You have a issue with me, not your boss. How it got on YouTube is irrelevant to him, the bottom line is its out there.

Dead on. Two completely separate issues there. You don't have to like how he was outed. But that doesn't make what he says any better.

MassoDio
05-15-2014, 01:01 PM
There are some really simple answers to your questions.

Why didn't the league kick him out years ago since he is a known racist?

1. The players never made threats to boycott games or strike.
2. Sponsors never dropped because of his past transgressions.

Why are we not made aware of this "secret constitution"?

1. It is not our constitution to know about.
2. Only the owners and the league need to know about it because they are the only ones subject to what it says.
3. Bottom line, it is none of the public's business what is in a contract signed by the league and owners. The constitution is essentially a contract between an owner of a team, the other owners in the league, and the league itself. It is no different than a player's contract with a team. There is language in it that includes things that can terminate a contract. Only with owners, it goes further. We aren't privy to the specifics of players contracts either. Unless, like what happened with Sterling, the player does something to violate it, and there needs to be public explanation.

How can an owner be fined, banned, and made to sell his team for a private conversation?

1. The conversation is no longer private. The league did not do anything until the conversation was made public. Regardless of whether or not the conversation was had in private, once it is made public, it is subject to consequences.
2. It doesn't matter if it was a private conversation, that conversation caused the loss of millions of dollars and threats from players to boycott playoff games (which would have been a huge loss of money).

Basically, this was more about money for the other owners and the league.

This was not an overreaction, it is absolutely appropriate. An owner with these views should not be allowed in the league.

Yes, this is long overdue and should have been done many years ago for far worse transgressions. The problem was that there was no outcry or demand for it from anyone who mattered at those times.