It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


CNN/ORC poll: Public split over whether Donald Sterling should be made to sell NBA team after he was

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on May, 5 2014 @ 07:56 PM
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Ok, I must have been confused because you said -

If I sign a contract and I break the rules, I expect to be punished. That's not victimhood. Sterling is not a victim.

I admit that I know nothing of this NBA constitution. I did hear the recordings though and it was a private conversation. Personally I don't think a private convo is breaking NBA rules no matter how many stupid things he said. Meh, oh well, you're entitled to your opinion.
edit on 5-5-2014 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 5 2014 @ 08:09 PM
a reply to: Wookiep

It would depend on what's in the contract / agreements / bylaws of the organization. Some places of employment have clauses built in where any action by the person who signed the contract, regardless if at work on on their own time, does something to to cast bad light on themselves, they can be let go since the tarnished image can carry over into the employer.

Emergency services entities have similar - conduct unbecoming etc.

when you own an NBA team and your gf release that info into the media, I would wager the NBA will be damaged if they don't disassociate themselves from the personal issue. If he is kept on its possible to see clients pull up and go elsewhere, financially damaging the entire NBA.

posted on May, 5 2014 @ 08:15 PM
Common sense tells you the NBA will make him sell the team. Coaches will refuse to work for him, players will refuse to play for him and that is bad for the NBA. What anybody esle thinks does not matter.

posted on May, 5 2014 @ 08:45 PM

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: deadeyedick

There is no way that a forced sell would hold up in the supreme court. No matter how many fake constitutions were signed. The right to own property even basketball players will be up held. The whole legal slave trade thing is still going strong and we just argue over who should the masters be. You are not free no matter the color you are owned. It is called indentured servitude. I wonder why we have seen no figures on how much this man has contributed to black organizations over the years. I bet he has done more finincially for their community than the majority of then have been able too. This was a knee jerk reaction designed to force a sell.

What world do you live in? Basketball players are not property. Also the NBA is a private organization they can set their own rules and the court would find in their favor.
I live in a country where every man,woman and child owe around 50,000 each. Every person here is owned and is givin their copy of inventory number when born to prove it. Even the word team is derrived from owning animals used to serve man.

posted on May, 5 2014 @ 09:03 PM
a reply to: buster2010

What part of the disconnect between "well known racist" and "lifetime achievement award from the NAACP" don't you get? I'm not saying that the guy was a saint, I don't know or care much about his character. I'm saying that your claim, that he was a well known racist that the NBA had been itching to get rid of for a long time isn't bourne out by the facts.

If this recording hadn't come out, he'd still have his team and he'd have received the award. Whether he bought it or not is of no consequence (to him, obviously it speaks to the ethics of the NAACP.)

posted on May, 5 2014 @ 09:29 PM

The legal basis for Sterling's lawsuit, according to the report, would be the use of the word "willful" in the NBA's Constitution and By-Laws with regard to the violations that activate Article 13, the provisions for termination of ownership. If so, the NBA could find itself embroiled in a fight over whether Sterling's private, recorded comments represented a "willful" violation of the Constitution and By-Laws. Sounds tricky, messy, costly and lengthy. But then, there is this: The final paragraph of Article 14, which lays out the procedure for the board's termination of ownership, says the following: "The decisions of the Association made in accordance with the foregoing procedure shall be final, binding, and conclusive, and each Member and Owner waives any and all recourse to any court of law to review any such decision." As we delve into more and more details of the Constitution and By-Laws, which until Tuesday was a private document that had never been distributed to the public, the more we learn that it is a very one-sided document. This isn't surprising. When an owner or group is approved for ownership of an NBA team, these are the rules that are furnished -- rules that must be followed. Unlike the collective bargaining agreement, which is a negotiated contract agreed upon mutually by the owners and players, the Constitution and By-Laws is a set of rules dictated by the owners, who in turn agree to have their ownership interests governed by them.
well that seems to be the option hes going with and seems like mostly semantics to me but im no where near a lawyer and i no nothing of how these corporate thingys work just figured people would find it interesting and relevent to the matter. And like ive said before never underestimate the spite or rich old dying men who feel (wrongly or rightly) that they have been spited,i mean he cant take his money with him and he seems to no care for his wife much(all thought she can save him millions in potental capital gains taxes if he sells to her.....)unsure if he has any surviving children(one died of a drug overdose they blamed on him for alegedly beating the boy when he was younger)so i see him just throwing money at the problem tell he either wins,looses ,runs out of money or the cancer gets him. TMZ on him lawyering up
not a fan ingeneral of them as a source but they did help break the story and of a small humorous note hes trying to use paula deens lawyer(is specializing in racism alegations a specialty of lawyers now?) sports illustrated

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 03:29 AM

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Wookiep
Ok, since when does the NBA force people to sell things?

I have no idea. But Sterling agreed to the rules and broke them. You get a job, you break the rules, you get fired. You sign up with an organization, you break the rules, you get forced to sell. It's pretty easy to understand.

Why is it ok for any organization to perform such practices based on someones duchebaggary?

That's freedom, baby!

What rules did Sterling agree to specifically?
The NBA constitution makes no mention of race or discrimination in any way. And there certainly is nothing about being forced to sell due tostupid crap being said in your own home with a reasonable expectation of privacy.
edit on 6-5-2014 by Deny Arrogance because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 03:35 AM

originally posted by: howmuch4another
a reply to: Xcouncil=wisdom

No she won't. Donal Sterling himself said he knew he was recorded and "that woman" has hours of recordings he is afraid might come out because of it.

Please link to your source for "Donald Sterling himself..."

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 06:46 AM

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance

What rules did Sterling agree to specifically?
The NBA constitution makes no mention of race or discrimination in any way.


"Any person who gives, makes, issues, authorizes or endorses any statement having, or designed to have, an effect
prejudicial or detrimental to the best interests of basketball or of the Association or of a Member or its Team"

His comments seem to meet that criteria since the team was talking not playing.

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 09:07 AM

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
What rules did Sterling agree to specifically?

Article 13(d), apparently. The penalty is talked about in Article 24(l).

Article 13(d)

That article states an owner may be terminated if the person fails or refuses "to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Association, its Members, Players, or any other third party in such a way as to affect the Association or its Members adversely."

Article 24 in the NBA's constitution also lists the authorities and duties of the commissioner. Silver is charged with "protecting the integrity of the game of professional basketball and preserving public confidence in the League," the article says.

Source 1

The most relevant rule to what the commissioner was able to do in the Sterling situation is found in Article 24(l), which is the "Best Interest of the Association" clause. The commissioner is able to give any punishment he sees fit when it's not clearly covered by the constitution and by-laws. (Via Deadspin)

The Commissioner shall, wherever there is a rule for which no penalty is specifically fixed for violation thereof, have the authority to fix such penalty as in the Commissioner's judgment shall be in the best interests of the Association. Where a situation arises which is not covered in the Constitution and By-Laws, the Commissioner shall have the authority to make such decision, including the imposition of a penalty, as in his judgment shall be in the best interests of the Association. The penalty that may be assessed under the preceding two sentences may include, without limitation, a fine, suspension, and/or the forfeiture or assignment of draft choices. No monetary penalty fixed under this provision shall exceed $2,500,000.

Source 2

Just to be clear, I neither support nor criticize what the NBA is doing or has done. Sports is the LAST thing I care about. If they want to wear white hoods on the court and burn crosses, I don't care. (I support free speech for Fred Phelps, as well as Donald Sterling, even though I disagree strongly with their opinions and actions.) So, what the NBA does in this situation is of NO consequence to me. I became interested in the story when I read about it here on ATS and since race relations IS an interest of mine, I did the research to educate myself on the situation so I could talk intelligently about it.

For some reason, people have taken that to mean that I support the NBA's action, which is simply not true.

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 07:53 PM
Well this should dispel the frequently parroted myth about "Sterling giving consent" being an established fact.

V. Stiviano is under criminal investigation for allegedly extorting Donald Sterling by demanding money in return for keeping more audio recordings secret ... TMZ Sports has learned.

Law enforcement sources tell TMZ ... a senior investigator for the L.A. County D.A.'s Bureau of Investigation contacted Shelly Sterling Tuesday ... asking for an interview in connection with the extortion investigation.


And we've learned the investigation is also focusing on whether Stiviano illegally recorded Sterling ... recording private conversations without the consent of all parties is a crime in California.

Read more:

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 08:05 PM
It does make me wonder how his personal views really matter if the team is winning more than the majority of other owners teams. At some point you gotta ask yourself why does this racist know how to put together such a fine group of people even if he sees them as below him or less than him. Like i said before his racist views really have not hampered anyone in ways that are coming to light and his forced contributions and fines have helped many in the long run. I say that they will all have champ rings soon because of their teamwork and the vision of the owner. Look at the situation rationally and see he is out the door soon either way and opportunities will come up for more ownership and such but stepping on someones head to get to the top only brings you down to their level. Rise Above Gracefully

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 08:07 PM
a reply to: roadgravel

(c) Any person who gives, makes, issues, authorizes or endorses any statement...

And this is why the NBA cannot remove Sterling...

He did not issue the statement...

He made a statement that was recorded during a conversation he was having with his archivist...

He did not release that statement (the archivist did) and had no reason to believe it would be released...

He has not initiated any policies at any NBA game indicating people having dark skin would be barred from attending...

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in