I would like to hear the board's opinion on the Sterling situation

Wow this thread is embarrassing. 1st amendment is protection from government, but a private entity like the NBA can punish as they please.

Sterling is a known racist. He was a scum bag BEFORE this incident happened.

 

And pleas, stop postulating the example of a player like Shaq (when he was playing) or Kobe making racist comments and comparing the punishment with Sterlings. If a player is recorded and revealed to have made similar comments or worst, that player would be punished not in relation to Sterling but in accordance to what is deem appropriate and is allowed in the CBA between the NBA Players Association and the NBA.

Owners are governed in accordance to the rules which they agreed to when they decided to take part in the league and Players are governed in accordance to the rules stipulated in the cba, negotiated between their union and the league, one has no bearing or relation to the other.

 

Oh please. He is not on trial; he is not going to jail. He is being stripped of his membership in an exclusive club for not behaving in accordance with that club's best interests. Cry me a river for poor, persecuted Donald Sterling.

 

I've been thinking why the NBA's sponsors, fans, owners and players reacted so severely to Donald Sterling's leaked statements. They are, after all, the private rambling of a weird old guy to his mistress and is not, in the greater scheme of things, more serious than the racist conduct that he's been accused of doing in the past.

The answer, I suspect, is that people trust recorded words played out in a man's own voice more than they do more indirect forms of evidence like the testimony of a witness who heard or saw him do something.

Maybe those sponsors, players, fans, etc. ignored the prior instances because they didn't hear it with their own ears and see it with their own eyes and think that these prior accusations at least had a chance of being overblown.

So now, this recording not only reveals what Sterling said to his lady friend, but also make us more likely to believe the prior accusations of housing discrimination and locker room shower talk ("Look at all these beautiful black bodies.").

In a way, people are punishing Sterling not for saying what he did on tape, but also for the prior alleged bad acts.

 

Not sure if the term 'ignored' is accurate. On Silver's QnA during the announcement, he sited non-evidence. They closely followed the law suite of Baylor which he lost and the other one was a settlement. I think that they did not feel they had enough convincing evidence to take any action against him.

 

True in the case of the NBA and formal ousting/suspensions.

But just because the NBA couldn't legally/contractually oust Sterling, it doesn't mean that KIA, State Farm, Chumash Casino, Chris Paul and Doc Rivers had hold to the same standard of evidence in deciding whether to do business with Sterling.

They were aware of the lawsuits and the allegations vs. Sterling when they made a decision to sign sponsorship deals and multi-year, multi-million-dollar employment contracts with Sterling. Maybe they didn't believe the testimonies of Elgin Baylor and the other witnesses. I think more likely they kind of believe Sterling was bad but "maybe not as bad as these guys said." I think these Sterling business partners turned a blind eye at least to a degree, and were at least wishfully thinking that Sterling's reputation was overblown and or at least hoping that his racism wouldn't be made public in such an attention-grabbing way that made them all look bad.

Everyone from Chris Paul to Chumash Casino wanted to associate with the Clippers because of the benefits that each of them could reap. I think these benefits in their mind outweigh doing business with a sleazy racist (or at least a guy who has been repeatedly accused for being one over the years). I really don't have much sympathy for them getting eggs in their faces now. They took the chances and knew or should have known the risk.

 

not sure if the punishment fit the crime.... if a black owner, coach or GM get caught making the same remark in private, will they get banned for life too?

The commish got influenced by the "African americans" for sure.

 

poor racist billionaire what will he do now?

 

I figured they would ban him for 10 years etc. He's like 80 so that could already be for life there already. However banning him for life that is fine.

Forcing him to sell the team seems excessive especially considering the Clippers from the way it's run to it's hiring practices, don't appear to be run racially improper.

 

It's not about black or white or anything. It's about public opinion that affects the business bottom line.

If a black owner said the same thing about Asians, for example, what the commish would do would depend on how the public reacted. If there was a big outcry like the Sterling case, he would act likewise. If nobody cared, he'd act like nothing had happened.

 

Elgin Baylor sued him for racial discrimination but ended withdrawing claims of racial discrimination. However, he was also forced to exclude any evidence older than 2 years. He quoted Sterling as saying, "He wanted a bunch of poor black boys with a Southern coach." Baylor also claimed that while negotiating with Danny Manning, Sterling said, "I'm paying a lot of money for a poor black kid."

Mike Dunleavy sued him for breach of contract for firing him without paying him the full amount owed to him by his contract. He settled for pennies on the dollar.

Woj reported that Sterling apparently was opposed to hiring JJ Redick because he didn't want to pay a white player that much. He didn't believe that white players could be as good as black layers.

Or course, none of it was recorded. Nearly everything ended up settled out of court. And at no point was there ever an admission of guilt by Sterling.

 

I share most of the same views as yours with exception of the last sentence. I don't know if we can ever determine if "benefit of the doubt" was used by CP, DR and the other sponsors or, a calculated risk knowing what they were getting into.

 

Donald Sterling may be an a-hole and racist, but what he said was in private. Someone(GF im guessing) set him up. Now if he said that in public or in an interview that's a whole different story.

 

Yeah I know about that but all those are allegations and speculation. Baylor's lawsuit didn't succeed. If it did then those could be grounds for forcing him to sell.

Also Baylor worked there for 22 years! You would think he would have brought something up if it was so bad during his time there. He only brings the lawsuit AFTER he gets fired.


Note as a disclaimer, I believe the allegations of the racism and comments are probably true and think he probably deserves to be forced to sell the thing however I don't think there was enough evidence based upon his actions considering how the Clippers itself was run.


We all say stuff in the heat of the moment and especially true during heated arguments with our significant others (ie in his case mistress).

 

Keep in mind, these are JUST the people that sued him and had the means to do so. I wouldn't be surprised if current employees started coming out of the woodwork now that the threat of being fired is no longer an issue.

We have no idea how much testimony the NBA could collect from current and former Clippers employees. Given he's owned the team for 33 years, I suspect that if the NBA investigates it thoroughly, they would find more than enough people willing to give affidavits.

 

In the news conference Silver got asked whether this punishment was in response for just this incident or also for the past issues and Silver said just this issue.

However I think that's probably a lie. I think the NBA probably knew and but couldn't legally act until they had something actionable.

 

Silver said specifically that his past history didn't apply to HIS decision (lifetime ban + fine), but that the Owners could consider his past history.

The Owners are free to consider whatever they feel is relevant.

 

His decision also included initial step to ask the Owners to remove Sterling from the ownership.

 

This. First Amendment isn't even remotely involved here.