Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/30/14 at 9:57 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
hough they had the right to do so
Not according to how I read the NBA constitution.
Posted on 5/30/14 at 9:58 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
And I still haven't heard a player say black people white people or any others shouldn't be coming to their games.
DS said this?
Posted on 5/30/14 at 10:46 pm to novabill
quote:
DS said this?
Well the guy is senile, so who knows what he said. The real question people should be asking, why is the media not standing up for the rights of the mentally handicap? Guy is sick, needs help, and you try to fine him and strip him of his business. Sounds like quite the lawsuit to me.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 3:21 am to novabill
quote:
DS said this?
He said he didn't want his gf posting photos online with black people or bringing them to his games.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 10:16 am to TbirdSpur2010
Why is this even a conversation? A franchise owner of a sports team populated largely by African Americans and a product consumed largely by African Americans said some sick racist shite against African Americans. OF COURSE the NBA is going to try to get rid of his arse as would Pepsi or Chevy if the CEO talked shite about a major consumer demographic. Who do they think they're kidding with this shite?? Not an analogous examples itch the CEO but a valid point IMO.
Now you have all these conservatives magically ignoring the NBA's rights to protect their business from a horrible PR hit while jumping on the Sterling bandwagon because somehow they've decided he supports their cause. I feel like for a lot of people that cause is bigotry or team politics. I can't find any other reason supposed supporters of business rights just ignore the rights of the NBA while whining about Sterlings being violated.
Now you have all these conservatives magically ignoring the NBA's rights to protect their business from a horrible PR hit while jumping on the Sterling bandwagon because somehow they've decided he supports their cause. I feel like for a lot of people that cause is bigotry or team politics. I can't find any other reason supposed supporters of business rights just ignore the rights of the NBA while whining about Sterlings being violated.
This post was edited on 5/31/14 at 10:17 am
Posted on 5/31/14 at 10:34 am to AUbused
It's partly because they see the usual suspects in the "MSM" calling him out. Those guys persecute conservatives and they are persecuting him. Others are unhappy a private conversation is what got him in trouble.
Many more though are upset because they deep down have similar thoughts to the one DS stated and feel society threatening their way of thinking. Those types are pretty obvious to see...
Many more though are upset because they deep down have similar thoughts to the one DS stated and feel society threatening their way of thinking. Those types are pretty obvious to see...
Posted on 5/31/14 at 10:36 am to AUbused
quote:
Now you have all these conservatives magically ignoring the NBA's rights to protect their business from a horrible PR hit while jumping on the Sterling bandwagon because somehow they've decided he supports their cause.
Can you point me to the place in Sterling's agreement where the NBA can force a sale because of stuff he says? TIA.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 10:38 am to Duke
quote:
Many more though are upset because they deep down have similar thoughts to the one DS stated and feel society threatening their way of thinking. Those types are pretty obvious to see...
I'm not upset. Who owns the Clippers doesn't matter to me. I'm fascinated by the idea that if someone says something stupid, racist, "homophobic", etc, that legalities can apparently be ignored. I don't see anything in the NBA's agreement with team owners that can force a sale because of statements of the owner.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 10:46 am to the808bass
I didn't think you cared that much. My post wasn't directed at you and certainly not the last part.
To the legal side, what does the owner's agreement state as cause for a forced sale? Is it specific regarding the reasons? If there's nothing about speech in the specific reasons, then DS should win in court. If more general the NBA might have a case they can argue. I figure his wife and him will just sell for 2 billion anyway and get it over with. 850 million after taxes ain't a bad pay day and you get the media circus away. I know DS is the type of guy to fight to make a point but at some point just enjoy being rich.
To the legal side, what does the owner's agreement state as cause for a forced sale? Is it specific regarding the reasons? If there's nothing about speech in the specific reasons, then DS should win in court. If more general the NBA might have a case they can argue. I figure his wife and him will just sell for 2 billion anyway and get it over with. 850 million after taxes ain't a bad pay day and you get the media circus away. I know DS is the type of guy to fight to make a point but at some point just enjoy being rich.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 10:49 am to Duke
I agree with every single bit of that post.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 10:50 am to Duke
quote:
To the legal side, what does the owner's agreement state as cause for a forced sale?
The only specific reasons are for gambling, or general non-performance (i.e. non payment of players or bills, not having your team show up for games, etc.). There's some vague stuff that the NBA is trying to shoehorn this case into, but if it were to actually stand it would basically mean they could force the sale of a team for virtually any reason.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 10:53 am to the808bass
I can simply point to the fact that generally in a franchise relationship there are standards of conduct. You hurt the franchise and affect it's bottom line, the franchise owner(s) have the ability to hold you accountable. That's pretty elementary.
Can you point to the clause in Sterlings contract that protects his right to walk around public in black face holding a watermelon? TIA
Can you point to the clause in Sterlings contract that protects his right to walk around public in black face holding a watermelon? TIA
Posted on 5/31/14 at 11:01 am to AUbused
quote:
That's pretty elementary.
So you got nothing.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 11:15 am to the808bass
Specifics outweigh generality in contracts. So if the NBA has specific conditions to force a sale, he better have done one of those things. They'll likely lose in court otherwise.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 11:17 am to AUbused
The NBA and your typical franchise are different since the NBA is a pratical monopoly. Antitrust law comes into play here as well as much as what is in the owner's agreement. For a normal franchise relationship, it would be easier to force him out. It's the price you pay for being the only basketball leauge.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 11:57 am to Duke
Either way if the guy holds on to the team he hurts his financial position. If he continues in his role the NBA and players will do everything they can to destroy the viability of his team and, in the end, severely harm the value of the team. It would be shocking to me if the NBA franchise contract placed no restrictions on the actions or statements of its ownership, but perhaps they just expect owners to act in their own financial self interest and not make hateful race statements.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 12:11 pm to AUbused
Practically you're right about him holding on. The beat deal hws going to get is right now.
The NBA does have power to punish an owner for statements like that. Look at his fine and banishment from the game. The owners agreement from what I understand has specific conditions to justify a forced sell. Those specifics are what matters here from the best of my understanding.
The NBA does have power to punish an owner for statements like that. Look at his fine and banishment from the game. The owners agreement from what I understand has specific conditions to justify a forced sell. Those specifics are what matters here from the best of my understanding.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 3:47 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
He said he didn't want his gf posting photos online with black people or bringing them to his games.
So, he tells his girlfriend what he does and does not want HER to do and they want to take the team from him for that?
An owner that does not want his son/daughter to marry outside of their race would fall in the same category don't you think? What about telling someone not to go into a bad part of town?
Wow. Hearing all of the crying about this you would have thought he would have said something horrible about black people and used multiple racial slurs.
Posted on 5/31/14 at 3:55 pm to AUbused
quote:
Now you have all these conservatives magically ignoring the NBA's rights to protect their business from a horrible PR hit
Their rights are spelled out in the constitution are they not? There have been more than one person that asked which of the 10 clauses in Article 13 (the article that discusses the removal of a member) that DS violated. No answer yet.
quote:
while jumping on the Sterling bandwagon because somehow they've decided he supports their cause
How about the cause of the rule of law and freedom, namely the freedom of speech.
I understand that the NBA is not the government and the US constitution limits the powers of the government and not the marketplace, however, the US was a place where one could hold opposing views and not be targeted for destruction the way DS has been.
Do you really want to live in a country where people have to keep their views to themselves for fear of being ruined? Is that your idea of America? Sadly, it is just the idea that many have of the future of this country.
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News