If you were Adam Silver, what would you do with Donald Sterling?

[Thriller Ant]

Silver's banning him for life, fining him $2.5 million and urging the owners to oust him.

I read that it was the Clippers Board of Directors he asked to oust him. Whatevs.

I don't get what banning for life means in this context, since it seems as though he either did not or could not force Sterling to get rid of the team. Obviously he won't be allowed to buy another team once he is gone from the Clippers (because there's no way that isn't happening), but on the surface, it seems like a harsh sounding threat without anything behind it.

 

[The Butcher]

I read that it was the Clippers Board of Directors he asked to oust him. Whatevs.

I don't get what banning for life means in this context, since it seems as though he either did not or could not force Sterling to get rid of the team. Obviously he won't be allowed to buy another team once he is gone from the Clippers (because there's no way that isn't happening), but on the surface, it seems like a harsh sounding threat without anything behind it.

Sterling can only be forced to sell by a 3/4 vote of all owners. If that isn't met, there's no other recourse. The ban means just that. Silver said that Sterling isn't allowed to attend games, go to the Clippers team facilities, and isn't allowed to participate in any activities or decisions involving the Clippers. It sounds to me like the harshest punishment that the commissioner is able to levy to an owner.

 

[LSN80]

I posted above earlier that Mark Stein had broken rumors about the possible repercussions regarding Donald Sterling. For those who missed it, Adam Silver just held a press conference on ESPN, and made the following rulings regarding Donald Sterling:

1. He is banned from the NBA for life. This includes:

A. Having anything to do with the Los Angeles Clippers organization in terms of their day-to-day operations.

B. Banned from the L.A. Clippers facilities.

C. Attending any future NBA games, practices, or NBA sponsored activities.

2. He is fined 2.5 million dollars, the maximum allowed by the NBA constitution.

3. He will be forced to sell the Los Angeles Clippers.

Adam Silver made a huge statement about what type of commissioner he's going to be. David Stern may have been indebted to the owners, but Adam Silver has showed he is going to act in the best interest in the league. The lifetime ban is independent of forcing Sterling to sell the team, as Silver has said that it's his decision, and cannot be contested.

Even Mark Cuban has reversed his past opinion regarding Sterling, where he had stated that it would be "damn scary" to force someone out of their business due to stating their personal belief. Cuban had said that actions, not words, were what was important. Cuban has just tweeted:

I agree 100% with the decision that Adam Silver has made with regards to Donald Sterling.

Take that for what you will, but the biggest part of this is it allows the league to move on. Players, owners, and fans do not have to have this hanging over their heads, as a decision has been rendered by Silver, and he was very decisive about it. He was asked what he would do if he didn't get the 2/3 vote to force Sterling out, and Silver was nonplussed. He noted that he "fully expects" to get the support he needs to force Sterling to sell the team.

Silver did the maximum that he could possibly do, and I commend him for doing what he believes to be right.

 

[ZiON11]

The biggest hurdle the league is going to face is the fact that it is illegal in California to tap a phone call without both parties consent. That little technicality could be all that Sterling needs to sue the NBA to keep his team.

 

[The Butcher]

The biggest hurdle the league is going to face is the fact that it is illegal in California to tap a phone call without both parties consent. That little technicality could be all that Sterling needs to sue the NBA to keep his team.

I'm no lawyer, but I don't see how that would matter. If anyone should be worried it's Sterling's mistress. The NBA had nothing to do with recording the call, Sterling admitted that it was him on the tape, and the investigator found that the tape was not doctored. The NBA owners would simply be reacting to comments Sterling made. I don't see how the circumstances under which he made them would give him legal recourse. If the owners don't want him, for whatever reason, that's their prerogative.

 

[ZiON11]

I'm no lawyer, but I don't see how that would matter. If anyone should be worried it's Sterling's mistress. The NBA had nothing to do with recording the call, Sterling admitted that it was him on the tape, and the investigator found that the tape was not doctored. The NBA owners would simply be reacting to comments Sterling made. I don't see how the circumstances under which he made them would give him legal recourse. If the owners don't want him, for whatever reason, that's their prerogative.

Neither am I but something tells me that Sterling could try to use that to his advantage, even if it holds any water or not.

 

[LSN80]

Neither am I but something tells me that Sterling could try to use that to his advantage, even if it holds any water or not.

But you're missing the point. The NBA didn't put his mistress up to this, she did this of her own volition. She alone is responsible for this. Sterling can certainly push for charges to be filed against this woman, but that's likely the least of his worries right now.

He can't use it to fight Silver's decision, because the NBA-and Adam Silver by default-got this information from a second-hand source. It was leaked to news sites, which is there that it was acted upon. With Sterling acknowledging that it was he on the tape, he's essentially given up all recourse against Silver's decision.

 

[Con T.]

Wow.

The cynical asshole in me was proven wrong... I will be damned. Kudos to Silver, frankly

 

[Kermit]

The biggest hurdle the league is going to face is the fact that it is illegal in California to tap a phone call without both parties consent. That little technicality could be all that Sterling needs to sue the NBA to keep his team.

I'm almost 100% positive that NBA has its own arbitration that all owners/players agree to for settling disputes within the NBA and not in court. So, while you are correct about it being illegal in the California courtroom, the matter is being dealt with in NBA arbitration, which is a separate justice system that has its own rules.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

I'm almost 100% positive that NBA has its own arbitration that all owners/players agree to for settling disputes within the NBA and not in court. So, while you are correct about it being illegal in the California courtroom, the matter is being dealt with in NBA arbitration, which is a separate justice system that has its own rules.

But I have a hard time believing doesn't allow him to sue the pants off of someone. Maybe it's only the mistress. I don't know. Either way, the information was obtained illegally and he's going to suffer financially to an extreme degree.

Anyways, my only issue with this is right to privacy. I'm not condoning what he said at all. My point is if he were to say these statements to her mistress face to face in his bedroom, and someone happened to have a recorder in his bedroom, what would happen then? Because this isn't much different. There was a clear assumption of privacy.

No matter what, this information has become public and he is officially a social pariah. But this is along the same lines of illegally obtaining evidence in order to convict a criminal. Sure it's not official legal business, but where do we draw the line?

I just feel like this is far from over. At the very least, he has a mother of a civil suit.

 

[The Butcher]

But I have a hard time believing doesn't allow him to sue the pants off of someone. Maybe it's only the mistress. I don't know. Either way, the information was obtained illegally and he's going to suffer financially to an extreme degree.

Anyways, my only issue with this is right to privacy. I'm not condoning what he said at all. My point is if he were to say these statements to her mistress face to face in his bedroom, and someone happened to have a recorder in his bedroom, what would happen then? Because this isn't much different. There was a clear assumption of privacy.

No matter what, this information has become public and he is officially a social pariah. But this is along the same lines of illegally obtaining evidence in order to convict a criminal. Sure it's not official legal business, but where do we draw the line?

I just feel like this is far from over. At the very least, he has a mother of a civil suit.

Government | Business

There's the line. Right where it's always been. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. Paula Deen admitted to using the N-word years ago; no one even heard her say it. That didn't keep The Food Network for cancelling her show. There is no slippery slope or dangerous precedent here. The circumstances under which Sterling said what he said just plain do not matter here. When you work for or represent any organization and you do or say something that damages that organization's image, you've given them cause for termination. Ask the hundreds, possibly thousands of people who've lost their job thanks to a Facebook post or tweet.

Sterling can't win if he sues (ESPN's Lester Munson covered it), he can't blame the league for his conversation being made public, and bottom line, he was out of line. If I had a vindictive ex who was trying to bait me into saying something racist nothing would come of it because I'm not a racist. Sterling got what was coming to him, and Silver has the authority, both legally and by the league constitution, to do what he did. It's not over, but that's just because the owners board of governors still has to vote to boot him. He doesn't have a legal leg to stand on against that. He can try, but he will lose.



http://deadspin.com/twitter-users-rage-against-death-of-the-first-amendment-1569415262 This country needs a fucking bus flip.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

You know if the Clippers weren't currently one of the better teams in the league, this wouldn't be an issue. Seriously, Sterling has been saying shit like this for over thirty years, and the other owners turned a blind eye because the Clippers were historically inept. Without checking specifics, since Sterling took over the team has only won about 37% of their games. People looked at Sterling like a joke. The crappy racist owner who never found success. David Stern didn't give a shit because the Clippers were profitable despite their lack of success. Now the Clippers are out performing the Lakers, they are getting more attention, and people care. It isn't right, but I'm glad something is finally being done. I don't want to say I'm happy Sterling is likely going to be forced out, but I can't say with a straight face that I'm sad to see the actions taken by Silver. If a player can be fined for using a homophobic or racial slur in an interview, even without any prior offenses, then I have little issue with the league taking action like this against a guy with 30+ years of prior offenses.

 

[The Butcher]

I've got a free speech test for everyone who has Facebook or Twitter account and a job. Write a post that says, "President Obama is a stupid n*gger." See how many G-men come knocking on your door. Then, a few days later, say the same thing about a minority who is your superior at work. Just be sure to stock up on food and make sure your bills are paid first.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

Government | Business

There's the line. Right where it's always been. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. Paula Deen admitted to using the N-word years ago; no one even heard her say it. That didn't keep The Food Network for cancelling her show. There is no slippery slope or dangerous precedent here. The circumstances under which Sterling said what he said just plain do not matter here. When you work for or represent any organization and you do or say something that damages that organization's image, you've given them cause for termination. Ask the hundreds, possibly thousands of people who've lost their job thanks to a Facebook post or tweet.

Sterling can't win if he sues (ESPN's Lester Munson covered it), he can't blame the league for his conversation being made public, and bottom line, he was out of line. If I had a vindictive ex who was trying to bait me into saying something racist nothing would come of it because I'm not a racist. Sterling got what was coming to him, and Silver has the authority, both legally and by the league constitution, to do what he did. It's not over, but that's just because the owners board of governors still has to vote to boot him. He doesn't have a legal leg to stand on against that. He can try, but he will lose.



http://deadspin.com/twitter-users-rage-against-death-of-the-first-amendment-1569415262 This country needs a fucking bus flip.

Civil court is entirely different. I'm sure you're right in the terms of his ability to win any suit against the NBA. They're a business that's only doing right by them. Against his mistress, I have a hard time believing he couldn't destroy her in civil court. She is going to cost him millions of dollars by illegally obtaining said recording. He'll still make hundreds of millions by selling his team, but he's still losing money because of what he makes from the team over long term. I guess that all depends on how upset he is by it. I'm sure you understand all this. Just saying.

You know if the Clippers weren't currently one of the better teams in the league, this wouldn't be an issue. Seriously, Sterling has been saying shit like this for over thirty years, and the other owners turned a blind eye because the Clippers were historically inept. Without checking specifics, since Sterling took over the team has only won about 37% of their games. People looked at Sterling like a joke. The crappy racist owner who never found success. David Stern didn't give a shit because the Clippers were profitable despite their lack of success. Now the Clippers are out performing the Lakers, they are getting more attention, and people care. It isn't right, but I'm glad something is finally being done. I don't want to say I'm happy Sterling is likely going to be forced out, but I can't say with a straight face that I'm sad to see the actions taken by Silver. If a player can be fined for using a homophobic or racial slur in an interview, even without any prior offenses, then I have little issue with the league taking action like this against a guy with 30+ years of prior offenses.

It seems HH is pretty knowledgable in some (I say some because I'm sure there's more) of his past transgressions. In case you're that interested. But I agree to an extent about their popularity. However, being that this recording was made so public by TMZ, I doubt it would matter this time.

 

[The Butcher]

Civil court is entirely different. I'm sure you're right in the terms of his ability to win any suit against the NBA. They're a business that's only doing right by them. Against his mistress, I have a hard time believing he couldn't destroy her in civil court. She is going to cost him millions of dollars by illegally obtaining said recording. He'll still make hundreds of millions by selling his team, but he's still losing money because of what he makes from the team over long term.

My bad, I thought you were talking about a suit against the NBA. Yeah, man, that Stiviano chick is going to get fucking blasted. Sterling's wife already has a suit against her. And it serves Stiviano right, too. Two wrongs still don't make a right, although in this case some good came of it.

 

[ZiON11]

But you're missing the point. The NBA didn't put his mistress up to this, she did this of her own volition. She alone is responsible for this. Sterling can certainly push for charges to be filed against this woman, but that's likely the least of his worries right now.

He can't use it to fight Silver's decision, because the NBA-and Adam Silver by default-got this information from a second-hand source. It was leaked to news sites, which is there that it was acted upon. With Sterling acknowledging that it was he on the tape, he's essentially given up all recourse against Silver's decision.

True, it would make more sense to go after her, TMZ or whoever that tapped the phone.

 

[Nate DaMac]

I've got a free speech test for everyone who has Facebook or Twitter account and a job. Write a post that says, "President Obama is a stupid n*gger." See how many G-men come knocking on your door. Then, a few days later, say the same thing about a minority who is your superior at work. Just be sure to stock up on food and make sure your bills are paid first.

I guess our circles are different. I see shit like that on Facebook all the time.

 

[The Butcher]

I guess our circles are different. I see shit like that on Facebook all the time.

Full disclosure- I have neither a Facebook nor a Twitter. You get what I'm saying though, hopefully. Of course it depends on a lot of variables. There are plenty of examples of the type of thing I describe happening. A noteworthy example would be Gilbert Gottfried's joking tweets about Japan after their tsunami. Aflac wasted no time in dumping him.

And just a quick quote from ESPN's legal analyst Lester Munson: "Sterling can try to fight; it's going to be a losing fight."

 

[rbv13]

The commissioner’s office dropped the hammer. They pretty much gave him a giant middle finger and told him to hit the bricks. I wonder if they will issue an exact reason for the harsh ruling or only leave it to seemingly obvious speculation as to not open a major can of worms.

I want to know are they furious simply because a white man made these statements? Did it also have to do with his wealth and standing? I want to know exact details because where I am sitting any and all affiliates of the NBA should be held to the same standard. The league should now turns its attention towards partial Nets owner Jay Z. His own songs highlight derogatory slurs and many of his associates express terms of hate through their lyrics. I’ve heard multiple ESPN talking heads make light of Caucasian players in the league. By this precedent the league should look to discontinue future contractual obligations.

I know none of this will happen as black America has set the tone for a massive double standard but just wanted to point how hypocritical this seems and vent a bit.

 

[The Butcher]

Jay-Z no longer holds any stake in the Nets or the Barclay's Center. He sold it well before Silver took over as commissioner. Silver explained that Sterling was banned for his statements, but that the totality of his discriminatory practices would be taken into consideration when the board of governors meets to vote on his ouster. It should also be noted that Silver is Jewish, not black.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

What lyrics are you referring to that were sung by former minority owner JayZ and when did he release these lyrics?

I ask because I've never been offended by a JayZ lyric nor do I know of anything that JayZ has said or done that has offended a whole race of people plus more.

So tell me again exactly what JayZ said or did to warrant him losing ownership of a team he has no ownership of?

 

[rbv13]

I was a bit out dated with the Jay Z Nets situation. He is now launching a sports agency. When it comes to his lyrics they splattered thru his career.

Speaking first hand I've been to NBA where I've heard racial slurs on the floor. It never struck me as odd, its just life, until this situation.

 

[The Butcher]

Have you heard or read Sterling's comments? He didn't use any racial slurs, actually. If that didn't make your head explode, and you're still with me, understand that there is indeed a double-standard in America. If you think that it was the blacks who set it then you're sorely mistaken.

 

[rbv13]

I understand he used PC terms but his distaste for said minorities landed him in this situation. So your telling me the slurs are ok if you "don't" really dislike said race or even sex?

 

[The Butcher]

If that's what you took away from what I said, then you don't get it. The situation wasn't about the verbiage it was about the message.