Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2014/04/30 06:39:14
Subject: Re:Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
a "protest" that ultimately does nothing? yeah.... Sorry, they're still getting paid thousands of dollars per game. I was referring to there being no evidence that his racism has affected the employment of people in his organization, contracts with players and admin/support staff, etc.
2014/04/30 07:02:03
Subject: Re:Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
Sterling still comes out ahead
Though I wonder who be buying up the Clippers next.
So who's picking up the tab to pay the players
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
2014/04/30 07:46:01
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
That's not quite the point, ouze. Sorry I guess I didn't explain my feelings behind my post.
As much as some of these guys pull the Barkley "I'm not a role model" card, they are certainly public figures....well paid public figures...and people do watch their actions (which is why they protested in the first place, they knew eyes were on them).
Unfortunately, if people don't chastise them for it, the behavior will continue until it becomes the norm, rather than the exception.
I destroy my enemies when I make them my friends.
Three!! Three successful trades! Ah ah ah!
2014/04/30 08:06:50
Subject: Re:Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
I thought Kareem Abdul-Jabbar had a good take on it. Full article here.
Moral outrage is exhausting. And dangerous. The whole country has gotten a severe case of carpal tunnel syndrome from the newest popular sport of Extreme Finger Wagging. Not to mention the neck strain from Olympic tryouts for Morally Superior Head Shaking. All over the latest in a long line of rich white celebrities to come out of the racist closet. (Was it only a couple days ago that Cliven Bundy said blacks would be better off picking cotton as slaves? And only last June Paula Deen admitted using the “N” word?)
...
He was discriminating against black and Hispanic families for years, preventing them from getting housing. It was public record. We did nothing. Suddenly he says he doesn’t want his girlfriend posing with Magic Johnson on Instagram and we bring out the torches and rope. Shouldn’t we have all called for his resignation back then?
Shouldn’t we be equally angered by the fact that his private, intimate conversation was taped and then leaked to the media? Didn’t we just call to task the NSA for intruding into American citizen’s privacy in such an un-American way? Although the impact is similar to Mitt Romney’s comments that were secretly taped, the difference is that Romney was giving a public speech. The making and release of this tape is so sleazy that just listening to it makes me feel like an accomplice to the crime. We didn’t steal the cake but we’re all gorging ourselves on it.
Make no mistake: Donald Sterling is the villain of this story. But he’s just a handmaiden to the bigger evil. In our quest for social justice, we shouldn’t lose sight that racism is the true enemy. He’s just another jerk with more money than brains.
So, if we’re all going to be outraged, let’s be outraged that we weren’t more outraged when his racism was first evident. Let’s be outraged that private conversations between people in an intimate relationship are recorded and publicly played. Let’s be outraged that whoever did the betraying will probably get a book deal, a sitcom, trade recipes with Hoda and Kathie Lee, and soon appear on Celebrity Apprentice and Dancing with the Stars.
2014/04/30 08:27:23
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
As much as some of these guys pull the Barkley "I'm not a role model" card, they are certainly public figures....well paid public figures...and people do watch their actions (which is why they protested in the first place, they knew eyes were on them).
While the "Barkley Card" is based on the idea that no professional athlete has a responsibility to be a role mode, Barkley's argument was that no professional athlete should be considered a role model; meaning that kids should not look to athletics for their future.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2014/04/30 10:23:06
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
I like how the wife is defending him from charges of racism for statements he made to his girlfriend. A proper Texas wife would have dealt with this with internal sanction (she would have run over his internals with her pickup).
Thanks Obama!
Remember the First Amendment doesn't protect stupid.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2014/04/30 12:06:36
Subject: Re:Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
Forcing them to follow some random flag protocol is more disrespectful to the country than what they are doing, but that is an old pet peeve of mine.
Its a media event. I could care less. Though I have notice players from MLB, NFL, and NHL have right hands over their heart. Though flag protocol or as we in the military call it Drill and Ceremony is a facet in our career.
One incident that went world wide and pretty much speak for the Battle of Equality. As a kid growing up in the 70's.....
Is there a actual clause in the contract that he breached?
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
2014/04/30 12:32:34
Subject: Re:Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
I will be honest, I have not really been following this story in great detail but my understanding is this;
- Sterling owns an NBA franchise. As such is is likely to have signed a contract with clauses such as not bringing the franchise into disrepute. The NBA has a huge amount of fans and players from the race that Sterling disparaged, and a lot of sponsors that were not happy with his words. Regardless of how his words were made public the fact of the matter is that they were, and the NBA needed to act upon them. Now, can he be forced to sell the team? Perhaps not within the power of the NBA unless the contract states that he may be removed from the league. The NBA may wish to avoid this as it is a likely a long drawn out legal battle. It is more likely that the fans and players will abandon a Sterling owned Clippers team and make it financially nonviable for him to remain the owner.
- Concerning the leaking of a private conversation Sterling has a lot of legal avenues to pursue here, and it is likely that he will. He could take a civil suit against the person responsible for damage to his public image, and for any financial loss arising from the leak - with an NBA franchise at stake this could be a considerable sum. As well as that there exists the possibility of criminal charges being filed.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sebster wrote: And to clarify, I'm not a fan of these little media storms where some high profile person says something awful, and lots of people complain until the person is fired or whatever else. That kind of scalp taking is on the rise and I see it as an ugly trend.
From one perspective it gets results, and it gives the media ratings fodder so this trend is not going to abate any time soon. Seriously, I was in the gym and 3 out of 5 TVs were covering this story
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/30 12:35:12
2014/04/30 12:40:12
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
Dreadclaw69 wrote: I will be honest, I have not really been following this story in great detail but my understanding is this;
- Sterling owns an NBA franchise. As such is is likely to have signed a contract with clauses such as not bringing the franchise into disrepute. The NBA has a huge amount of fans and players from the race that Sterling disparaged, and a lot of sponsors that were not happy with his words. Regardless of how his words were made public the fact of the matter is that they were, and the NBA needed to act upon them. Now, can he be forced to sell the team? Perhaps not within the power of the NBA unless the contract states that he may be removed from the league. The NBA may wish to avoid this as it is a likely a long drawn out legal battle. It is more likely that the fans and players will abandon a Sterling owned Clippers team and make it financially nonviable for him to remain the owner.
It appears that there is a clause that can force him to sell if 3/4th of the other owners agree (not sure of the exact number required). It's not really surprising since this is a league that doesn't even let you buy a team unless all the other owners agree with the sale to begin with.
- Concerning the leaking of a private conversation Sterling has a lot of legal avenues to pursue here, and it is likely that he will. He could take a civil suit against the person responsible for damage to his public image, and for any financial loss arising from the leak - with an NBA franchise at stake this could be a considerable sum. As well as that there exists the possibility of criminal charges being filed.
I'm sure he has a pretty good case in civil court there, which he should pursue. Him being a jackass (and me agreeing with the punishment for him being a jackass) doesn't mean that she was in the right to record him without consent and releasing it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/04/30 12:50:07
2014/04/30 12:49:14
Subject: Re:Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
d-usa wrote: It appears that there is a clause that can force him to sell if 3/4th of the other owners agree (not sure of the exact number required). It's not really surprising since this is a league that doesn't even let you buy a team unless all the other owners agree with the sale to begin with.
Thank you for the information, I can't say that I'm surprised by that clause. My sporting interest begins and ends with college football (Go Irish!! )
d-usa wrote: I'm sure he has a pretty good case in civil court there, which he should pursue. Him being a jackass (and me agreeing with the punishment for him being a jackass) doesn't mean that she was in the right to record him without consent and releasing it.
Absolutely. Between the pair of them they are well suited for each other, and neither of them are going to come out of this looking well. I have no doubt that he'll take legal action. His public image is already shot so he has little to lose there, she might have more to lose image wise. He also has deep pockets so he and his legal team can drag this out and really hurt her financially
2014/04/30 12:55:36
Subject: Re:Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
d-usa wrote: It appears that there is a clause that can force him to sell if 3/4th of the other owners agree (not sure of the exact number required). It's not really surprising since this is a league that doesn't even let you buy a team unless all the other owners agree with the sale to begin with.
Thank you for the information, I can't say that I'm surprised by that clause. My sporting interest begins and ends with college football (Go Irish!! )
Realistically we could end up with a situation where all the other owners force him to sell, while also telling him that he can't sell to this guy....or this guy...or this guy.....
Sports
2014/04/30 12:57:44
Subject: Re:Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
d-usa wrote: Realistically we could end up with a situation where all the other owners force him to sell, while also telling him that he can't sell to this guy....or this guy...or this guy.....
Sports
This is why I only ever concern myself with what is taking place on the field
2014/04/30 13:06:50
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
Other than a lifetime ban, $2.5 million fine, and pressure to sell your business, of course.
The Clippers doing that, sure... maybe it'll help them feel better at night that they flipped their warmups inside out.
The Heat though?? Feth that, they're just breaching their contract (assuming their contracts are similar to NFL players' in regards to the wear of team issue and team logo'd gear), and should be fined. I highly, highly doubt that Mr. Silver, sitting up there in his office sees a clip of pregame footage and says, "Oh no!!! Lebron is angry, I better fix whatever it is he's angry about!"
As Jihadin put up, the sprinters protest at the olympics was what I'd call a "legitimate" protest. The Heat are just trying to bring attention back to themselves, as if they dont get enough of it.
2014/04/30 15:45:48
Subject: Re:Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
Ouze wrote: I don't think there should be any legal consequences for what he said. People can say what they like.
I'm not privy to whatever contracts he may have signed with the NBA that may, or may not say, that his private conduct could have issues if it makes the league look bad. If he did sign an agreement with a morals clause, it should be enforced.
I doubt he cares. He's old as gak and rich as hell. He could probably just randomly kill someone if he felt like it and essentially get away with it. I doubt I'd care about public perception too much at that age and in that status either.
California is a two-party notification state, so there was probably a violation of state wiretapping laws.
Exactly how I feel...
No sympathy for Sterling whatsoever... the NBA is a private company.
I like how Abdul-Jabbar started with this:
Moral outrage is exhausting. And dangerous. The whole country has gotten a severe case of carpal tunnel syndrome from the newest popular sport of Extreme Finger Wagging. Not to mention the neck strain from Olympic tryouts for Morally Superior Head Shaking.
I concur...
Also... the silence is deafing on this compared to Sterling's statements:
Black people your Focusing on the wrong thing. We should be focusing on having our own, Own team own League! To For Self!!—
Larry Johnson (@TheRealLJ2) April 26, 2014
Oh... the irony hurts here...
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2014/04/30 16:10:18
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
I've seen the "these were private thoughts" defense floating around, and I guess there's some merit to it. She seems to be almost cross examining him in her questions, which leads me to believe she was trying to get him to articulate his point.
During the commissioner's press conference, somebody asked if during the investigation Sterling argued that the comments were out of context or anything similar, and Adam Silver kind of flatly responded that Sterling did not dispute the statements or the opinions they hold.
2014/04/30 16:18:59
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
I'm sure that the other owners already knew his feelings and I wouldn't be surprised if he said stuff like that before with them around. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if there are a couple other racist old owners around, they are either smart enough to keep their mouths shut or just haven't been caught.
2014/04/30 16:26:10
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
d-usa wrote: I'm sure that the other owners already knew his feelings and I wouldn't be surprised if he said stuff like that before with them around. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if there are a couple other racist old owners around, they are either smart enough to keep their mouths shut or just haven't been caught.
Well...
Of course. His real crime, as always, was being racist on tape. The reasons the past sins weren't penalized as heavily is because there wasn't the proof (the DOJ's suit was settled quietly), and there wasn't the uproar.
But racial scandal is really bad for an entity that relies on minority dollars more than any other major sports league. It's one thing to secretly suspect somebody of being a bigot, but hearing it on tape makes it harder to ignore, you know?
2014/04/30 16:27:26
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
Polonius wrote: I've seen the "these were private thoughts" defense floating around, and I guess there's some merit to it. She seems to be almost cross examining him in her questions, which leads me to believe she was trying to get him to articulate his point.
During the commissioner's press conference, somebody asked if during the investigation Sterling argued that the comments were out of context or anything similar, and Adam Silver kind of flatly responded that Sterling did not dispute the statements or the opinions they hold.
I listened to the recordings that were available and I was left with the overwhelming impression that she absolutely knew what she was doing and was making sure she gave him enough rope to hang himself, as well as trying to build some moral high ground (the whole "I'm-mixed-race-whether-the-world-likes-it-or-not)
2014/04/30 16:27:39
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
People were asking earlier if the NBA can force a franchise sale. The NBA constitution allows, by 3/4 vote of owners, the NBA to force the sale. And not just force it, but actually conduct the sale, choosing the new owner bid, and then simply paying the prior owner.
2014/04/30 16:28:41
Subject: Sterling banned, which leads to this question of mine
Polonius wrote: People were asking earlier if the NBA can force a franchise sale. The NBA constitution allows, by 3/4 vote of owners, the NBA to force the sale. And not just force it, but actually conduct the sale, choosing the new owner bid, and then simply paying the prior owner.
Thank you for the information. I think it is a foregone conclusion that Sterling will not be the Clippers' owner for long
