[quote]therajraj wrote:
Even though he’s a billionaire, a $2.5M fine for something he said off the record in private is insane.[/quote]
It’s obviously a retroactive punishment for all of the other shit he’s done over the years. Gotta be honest though, some of the complaints seem completely made up. Like the alleged “beautiful black bodies” comment by Sam Cassel and Elton Brand. Have y’all ever seen Sam Cassel and Elton Brand?[/quote]
My honest opinion is that Whitlock’s article is shit. I usually love his columns but this one is hot garbage. First it’s based on something hasn’t been confirmed(invasion of privacy: as I noted earlier, there is a side that claims this was a consented recording that a 3rd party will corroborate). Second, Sterling’s position of power is unique in comparison to almost any other person that would face these circumstances.
We have heard players and other members of society say bigoted, ignorant, racist, and hateful things. They get fired from their jobs, fined by their employers, run out of public office, etc, based on their position on the social ladder. Sterling’s position is higher and we expect more of a man in his position(probably wrongly so), so we act more harshly and remove his ability to inflict widespread damage to the best of our ability. For right now that means making sure he can no longer influence the NBA.
I’m not sure how this was framed as only a ‘black issue.’ Media may have made black players’ responses more apparent(that seems correct though), but they were hardly alone in response or offense. He also completely misses how this is a case of modern technology and society working. A large part of Sterling getting away with his past transgressions may be in large part Rich White Man culture, but it was also pre-modern internet and social media explosion. I had never heard of Sterling’s past dealings as a slumlord, or his multitude of court settlements, and I’m definitely more than a casual(but less than hardcore) sports fan. I had heard he was a wonky, possibly racist dude from stories like Baron Davis told about his time in LA, but it ended there.
What did Whitlock want done here? What is his ideal solution? What would have been accomplished from more inaction, and more protection of privately(but made public) held ideals that continue to purport a horrific culture of supremecy? Things may not have played out ideally, but I think society did alright on this one, and I don’t think anyone is running away feeling like all of society is fixed either.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Mike D’Antoni steps down[/quote]
I guess the Lakers wouldn’t pick up his '15-16 option, so he resigned. Doesn’t sound like he was forced out. I don’t see the team being good next year either, so maybe he just didn’t want to stick around for ‘rebuilding’ without any commitment that he’d be there longer?
[quote]red04 wrote:
My honest opinion is that Whitlock’s article is shit. I usually love his columns but this one is hot garbage. First it’s based on something hasn’t been confirmed(invasion of privacy: as I noted earlier, there is a side that claims this was a consented recording that a 3rd party will corroborate). Second, Sterling’s position of power is unique in comparison to almost any other person that would face these circumstances.
We have heard players and other members of society say bigoted, ignorant, racist, and hateful things. They get fired from their jobs, fined by their employers, run out of public office, etc, based on their position on the social ladder. Sterling’s position is higher and we expect more of a man in his position(probably wrongly so), so we act more harshly and remove his ability to inflict widespread damage to the best of our ability. For right now that means making sure he can no longer influence the NBA.
I’m not sure how this was framed as only a ‘black issue.’ Media may have made black players’ responses more apparent(that seems correct though), but they were hardly alone in response or offense. He also completely misses how this is a case of modern technology and society working. A large part of Sterling getting away with his past transgressions may be in large part Rich White Man culture, but it was also pre-modern internet and social media explosion. I had never heard of Sterling’s past dealings as a slumlord, or his multitude of court settlements, and I’m definitely more than a casual(but less than hardcore) sports fan. I had heard he was a wonky, possibly racist dude from stories like Baron Davis told about his time in LA, but it ended there.
What did Whitlock want done here? What is his ideal solution? What would have been accomplished from more inaction, and more protection of privately(but made public) held ideals that continue to purport a horrific culture of supremecy? Things may not have played out ideally, but I think society did alright on this one, and I don’t think anyone is running away feeling like all of society is fixed either.[/quote]
Silver fucked up and went way too far. Sterling will make this run and run in court. If he sues and files his own anti-trust case it will go on for years. For the loss of estate tax benefits alone he will not let it drop…
[quote]RampantBadger wrote:
Silver fucked up and went way too far. Sterling will make this run and run in court. If he sues and files his own anti-trust case it will go on for years. For the loss of estate tax benefits alone he will not let it drop…
From what I’ve read elsewhere, legally Sterling is in for an extremely uphill battle. The sponsors pulling out puts the other owners are risk of losing money, which is one of the grounds for removal of association under the NBA constitution. Also in theory, if Sterling files a suit, the players can then actually protest/boycott games instead of saying “we were prepared to,” which will show a direct relation to Sterling’s action and financial harm on the league, again giving cause for his removal.
His only hope sounds like it is SCOTUS reversing previous anti-trust rulings for the major sports leagues.
