Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Reports: Donald Sterling refuses to pay fine
CNN ^ | 5/16/14 | Steve Almasy

Posted on 05/16/2014 2:23:22 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper

Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling has sent a letter to the National Basketball Association telling the league he won't pay his $2.5 million fine and rejecting his lifetime ban, according to multiple media reports.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Sports
KEYWORDS: nba; race; sterling; thugs
The NBA will withhold TV royalty payments to get the money, and Sterling will likely include that amount in any lawsuit.

Thus we see the results of Adam Silver's pathetic "investigation" that lasted less than four days and was based on mob rule and media hype.

1 posted on 05/16/2014 2:23:22 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

I wouldn’t pay the damn fine either. Someone in this country has to put their foot down about all this race baiting.


2 posted on 05/16/2014 2:30:39 AM PDT by caver (Obama: Home of the Whopper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Every sports league fine of has an appeals process.


3 posted on 05/16/2014 2:34:28 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

You are having the wool pulled over your eyes. Adam Silver and David Stern are cronies of Sterling. Silver came out and did what he had to do to save the NBA, but that doesn’t mean he wants to follow through with it. The NBA would be better off if it got rid of Silver, Stern, and Sterling.


4 posted on 05/16/2014 2:56:09 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Squirrel!


5 posted on 05/16/2014 3:10:17 AM PDT by who knows what evil? (Yehovah saved more animals than people on the ark...www.siameserescue.org.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Oookay.


6 posted on 05/16/2014 3:16:17 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Face it, the NBA would crumble without the support of all fans. If we don’t like their politics, don’t go to the games or buy their merchandise. Which NBA star will be fired, pilloried or flogged for uttering a racial slur irrespective of its many nuanced forms?


7 posted on 05/16/2014 3:16:19 AM PDT by blaveda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

The maximum fine under league rules for what happened is $1M , not $2.5 ,,, the 2.5 is for an act ,, it’s $1m max for verbal. This will not end well for the league.


8 posted on 05/16/2014 3:36:29 AM PDT by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

And here we have Sterling whimpering, sniveling, begging and making a spectacle of himself on national T V just like Paula Deen- for something he said in private! Gawd! How pathetic.

.


9 posted on 05/16/2014 3:48:43 AM PDT by patriot08 (NATIVE TEXAN (girl type))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

well, the NBA Normal Baiting Attitude to cover up for racial inequality (read wealth redistribution) will have its day in court. Does anyone really believe that Sterling will have to pay the 2.5 million fine and sell the Clippers. Come now lets get real, the Chief race Baiter in Washington DC is making a killing on racial inequality where is his fine and why is he not booted out of office.


10 posted on 05/16/2014 3:50:03 AM PDT by hondact200 (Candor dat viribos alas (sincerity gives wings to strength) and Nil desperandum (never despair))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
The maximum fine under league rules for what happened is $1M , not $2.5 ,,, the 2.5 is for an act ,, it’s $1m max for verbal.

The act was the damage his comments caused to the league through cancelled sponsorships and relations with the players. That's where the $2.5 mil comes from.

This will not end well for the league.

I don't know if the league will manage to strip him from ownership, but the ban and the fine will stay.

11 posted on 05/16/2014 3:51:58 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

I think the path to ending Sterling’s ownership will require the owners to vote to end the Clippers franchise. Clippers no more. One less team in the league.

How awkward would that vote be? Looking around the room wondering who’s billion dollar asset will vanish next.

I doubt they go down that path. I think Sterling will sell the team to someone or something he owns and he will just fade to the back of the room.


12 posted on 05/16/2014 4:00:03 AM PDT by IamConservative (If fighting fire with fire is a good idea, why do the pros use water?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

You’re overthinking this ,, an act is an act and words are words ... the max fine for words is $1m if you don’t believe me then read the NBA Constitution and bylaws , it’s available at http://mediacentral.nba.com/media/mediacentral/NBA-Constitution-and-By-Laws.pdf


13 posted on 05/16/2014 4:18:07 AM PDT by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Lebronn threatened that he was going to lead boycott playing any games. Why not start now?


14 posted on 05/16/2014 4:36:11 AM PDT by Hotlanta Mike ("Governing a great nation is like cooking a small fish - too much handling will spoil it." Lao Tzu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hotlanta Mike

Donald Sterling will win more money than Al Davis did the NFL.


15 posted on 05/16/2014 4:50:43 AM PDT by scooby321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Hotlanta Mike

Because Lebron is following the money, as well.


16 posted on 05/16/2014 4:52:48 AM PDT by Pecos (The Chicago Way: Kill the Constitution, one step at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

pass the popcorn willya?


17 posted on 05/16/2014 4:56:01 AM PDT by camle (keep an open mind and someone will fill it full of something for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IamConservative

I think it was Mark Cuban that foreshadowed what’s likely coming down the pike.

Say an owner supports a Christian charity or a Republican candidate and the NBA takes umbrage—That owner can expect to be pilloried and be stripped of his team, using the Sterling affair as a model.

I don’t care one whit about the NBA, but I do care that a man’s comments, made in private, are being used to rob him of his property. This should concern everyone.

It’s not a crime, at least not yet, to be an idiot and a boor. I say fight on Mr. Sterling.


18 posted on 05/16/2014 4:59:41 AM PDT by Arm_Bears (Shoot cops that shoot dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

The NBA is a racist organization seeking a means of pointing the finger away from themselves. Sterling gave them the opportunity to do exactly this.


19 posted on 05/16/2014 5:04:55 AM PDT by BuffaloJack (ItÂ’s 2014 and muslims still own and profit from slavery and selling slaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arm_Bears
Thanks Arm_Bears, I agree fully with what you wrote. We all have the right to say what we think without the fear of confiscation of ones property, no matter how smart or stupid the remarks are.
20 posted on 05/16/2014 5:18:40 AM PDT by 2001convSVT (Going Galt as fast as I can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Huh? Where do you get that take on Silver?


21 posted on 05/16/2014 5:29:59 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
You’re overthinking this ,, an act is an act and words are words ... the max fine for words is $1m if you don’t believe me then read the NBA Constitution and bylaws...

You're looking at the wrong clause. Look at Article 24 which outlines the powers of the Commissioner. Clause (l): "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."

Sterlings infraction wasn't shooting his mouth off. His infraction was costing the NBA money and causing labor issues through shooting his mouth off. The 'best interest of the association' is whatever Silver says it is. The fine was within Silver's authority to levy, based on a document that Sterling himself agreed to. Sterling can sue over this but he's going to lose.

22 posted on 05/16/2014 5:59:48 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

23 posted on 05/16/2014 6:18:51 AM PDT by Arrowhead1952 (The Second Amendment is NOT about the right to hunt. It IS a right to shoot tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arm_Bears

“...but I do care that a man’s comments, made in private, are being used to rob him of his property. This should concern everyone.”

Seems like it is a slippery slope. But what is the recourse for a company who loses business because of something that was said in private by one of its franchised owners to an open mistress lizard person and then made public?

“I don’t want to see you in public eating 80% of the food we sell.” What would a fast food company do?

“I don’t want to see you in public driving 80% of the cars we sell.” What would a car company do?

What if a competitor starts using it in a an ad campaign? And cars and food can’t get offended and threaten to go on strike. I don’t know, does the parent company have any recourse?

Freegards


24 posted on 05/16/2014 6:24:13 AM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

The phrase “best interests of the Association” is rather wide and subjective —

He might just deem that having Magic Johnson as owner of the Clippers is in the “best interest of the Association”.

Or keeping LeBron James from sitting out next season is in the “best interests of the Association”.

The owners had better take note — they may be next


25 posted on 05/16/2014 6:44:41 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

Sorry - the ‘damage’ you cite is the *result* of a verbal utterance by Sterling. The league constitution separates verbal utterances and acts as the catalysts for such results. A verbal utterance is explicitly set apart from an act.

If the contract that is the NBA constitution is enforced per its own content, the league loses big time.

The content of Sterling’s character notwithstanding, the NBA screwed the pooch by overreaching, legally. (Of course, Obama’s screwing the GM bind holders did show that contracts are no longer enforceable, so...)


26 posted on 05/16/2014 6:46:04 AM PDT by MortMan (Avoid temporary variables and strange women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Arm_Bears

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. Voltaire, (Attributed); originated in “The Friends of Voltaire”, 1906, by S. G. ...

This was an expression of Voltaire’s attitude. I guess it is passe now. How far this country has fallen!


27 posted on 05/16/2014 6:53:46 AM PDT by Know et al (No one has ever choked to death on a raw oyster.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: camle

28 posted on 05/16/2014 6:57:02 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hotlanta Mike

yeah, he did a backtrack on that...or roger mason, the spokesdude for the “union” of players spoke out of line.

but the media won’t attack mason for lying.


29 posted on 05/16/2014 6:58:39 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Arm_Bears
Say an owner supports a Christian charity or a Republican candidate...

Already in the crosshairs is the owner of the Orlando Magic. He doesn't enthusiastically endorse homosexual "marriage"...he, instead, sides with Moses, Jesus Christ, and the apostle Paul...as well as five thousand years of civilized society.

30 posted on 05/16/2014 7:00:09 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling has sent a letter to the National Basketball Association telling the league he won't pay his $2.5 million fine and rejecting his lifetime ban, according to multiple media reports.

Good. EFF THE RACE HUSTLERS.

31 posted on 05/16/2014 7:02:07 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Early 2009 to 7/21/2013 - RIP my little girl Cathy. You were the best cat ever. You will be missed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
Sterlings infraction wasn't shooting his mouth off. His infraction was costing the NBA money and causing labor issues through shooting his mouth off.

That'll be an interesting argument in court. Because the "instrumental cause" of the penalty WAS INDEED his statement...gotten under suspicious circumstances at best.

If allowed to stand, Sterling's lawyers could argue, then the entire Constitution is null and void--the "best interest" of the league could mean Sterling farted in an elevator and upset some sponsors.

Do you think the NBA owners want to put that kind of power into one man's hands?

32 posted on 05/16/2014 7:02:42 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

LaBron threatened to not play.... that threat probably hurt the league in some way too. Players getting arrested for being thugs are bad for their image too, right? Did they ban Jay-Z and his anti-white racist buddies?


33 posted on 05/16/2014 7:05:01 AM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed

I prefer a market solution to the issue—Not Fascism.


34 posted on 05/16/2014 7:21:27 AM PDT by Arm_Bears (Shoot cops that shoot dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Arm_Bears

“I prefer a market solution to the issue—Not Fascism.”

How is it fascism? I don’t understand. Seems to me the only solution would be for fans and players and the media to not care about what he said, but that didn’t happen. So what is the NBA supposed to then do about it? Ignore it or what?

Freegards


35 posted on 05/16/2014 7:32:17 AM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Ransomed

Yes, if they ignore Jay-Z and his anti-white racism, they should ignore what is said in private conversations


36 posted on 05/16/2014 7:35:51 AM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

I agree that it is completely hypocritical. But I don’t really expect anything else from the NBA, I mean come on. Just look at the product they put out. I’m not even a fan.

Seems to me the fans and players are the ones that get to decide what is ignorable for the NBA or not. Obviously they can ignore black on white racism, because their fans and players don’t care about it or agree with it. Just like the NFL can ignore their league being HGH riddled because their players and fans don’t care about them ignoring it.

Freegards


37 posted on 05/16/2014 7:46:58 AM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
The phrase “best interests of the Association” is rather wide and subjective —

It certainly is. And all the owners signed off on it so they have to abide by what Silver decides what constitutes best interest.

He might just deem that having Magic Johnson as owner of the Clippers is in the “best interest of the Association”.

Silver doesn't have the power to strip an owner of his team. That requires the other owners to agree. While Article 24 gives Silver broad discretion on levying sanctions on infractions not covered in other areas and deciding 'best interest of the Association', it also limits the punishments he can impose.

Or keeping LeBron James from sitting out next season is in the “best interests of the Association”.

That falls under Section 36 and yes, he could suspend any player for infractions he deems are against the best interests of the NBA. Fine's lower though - $50,000 max.

The owners had better take note — they may be next

Which is why I don't see enough owners voting to strip Sterling of his team.

38 posted on 05/16/2014 7:49:59 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: MortMan
The league constitution separates verbal utterances and acts as the catalysts for such results. A verbal utterance is explicitly set apart from an act.

So then you're saying Silver could fine him the million for shooting off his mouth and another $2.5 million for actions against the best interests of the NBA? Because nothing in the constitution or bylaws that I was prevents multiple fines for multiple infractions.

The content of Sterling’s character notwithstanding, the NBA screwed the pooch by overreaching, legally.

One can argue that they overreacted to the racist ramblings of a stupid old man, but having decided to act I disagree that Silver used the wrong clause to nail Sterling with.

39 posted on 05/16/2014 7:53:20 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

Where a situation arises which is not covered in the Constitution and By-Laws - operative phrase ...
*********************
It is covered ,, and the max fine is $1m (monetary penalty only) ,, This will end up in civil (complex) court and take years to decide ... it will be decided far after Donald dies in his favor and it will drag the NBA through the mud.. meanwhile the Clippers ownership (of which Donald is a part) will continue to share in the TV money no matter what and if they are illegally cut off from what is rightfully theirs and it harms them (as it will) ,, the heirs to the clippers will own the NBA.


40 posted on 05/16/2014 7:54:59 AM PDT by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

Good for him.

Someone making popcorn for this? Sterling is an uber liberal in an uber liberal city dealing with an uber liberal angry mob.

The mistress threw the brick in the window, and Magic Johnson and Oprah Winfrey are stealing his TV.

There is no difference between the looters in the OJ case and the looter is the Donald Sterling case, except maybe the looters in this case are better dressed.


41 posted on 05/16/2014 7:56:37 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper
Do you think the NBA owners want to put that kind of power into one man's hands?

Little late now since they all signed off on the Constitution and the by-laws.

42 posted on 05/16/2014 7:58:15 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

This is interesting. Imho, most basketball players are thugs, so I haven’t watched a game in years.


43 posted on 05/16/2014 8:00:46 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
What "act" has Sterling committed? in order to be fined $1M for the utterance, then $2.5M for an "act", there would have to be an "act".

Now, if an owner instructs his ticket-takers at the home arena to disallow blacks to attend games, that is an "act". Telling one's mistress not to publicly bring blacks to games in a private conversation is not an "act".

One can argue that they overreacted to the racist ramblings of a stupid old man, but having decided to act I disagree that Silver used the wrong clause to nail Sterling with.

I am having trouble deciphering two things with this sentence in your post: (1) *Who* "decided to act" in your opinion and (2) *what* was the "act" to which you refer?

44 posted on 05/16/2014 10:00:54 AM PDT by MortMan (Avoid temporary variables and strange women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MortMan
I am having trouble deciphering two things with this sentence in your post: (1) *Who* "decided to act" in your opinion and (2) *what* was the "act" to which you refer?

Perhaps posting the clause in question would help, Article 24 (l). The pertinent section is in bold. "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."

As you can see the clause is written so vaguely that Silver has wide authority under it. Loss of revenue. Harming the relationship between the league and its players. Causing sponsors to leave. Damaging the reputation of the NBA. Sterling's comments caused all of those, in Sliver's opinion, and triggered his 'best interest of the association' excuse for hitting Sterling with the higher fine. He has those powers.

He could have nailed Sterling with a lifetime ban and a million dollar fine under Article 35A (c). But that may require intent, which is hard to prove. The powers under Article 24 (l) can be based on his opinion alone. He doesn't have to prove anything.

45 posted on 05/16/2014 11:24:51 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

In order to see that clause as operative, you have to assess that the ‘verbal utterance’ clause of the constitution and by-laws does not cover Sterling’s statements.

That is where we disagree, FRiend. The limitation in the cited clause disallows its use when the situation (a verbal utterance) is covered elsewhere.


46 posted on 05/16/2014 12:20:27 PM PDT by MortMan (Avoid temporary variables and strange women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: MortMan
In order to see that clause as operative, you have to assess that the ‘verbal utterance’ clause of the constitution and by-laws does not cover Sterling’s statements.

Easy. They'll say that it's Sterling's racism itself that is harming the NBA. And since that is not directly addressed by the Constitution and bylaws then the Commissioner was empowered to act under the authority granted him by Article 24 (l). His comments were only evidence.

I truly think that the NBA has wanted to get rid of Sterling for a long time. He's detested by the other owners, the Clippers have been a joke for most of the time he's run them, and he's by all accounts a complete assh*le as a person. He finally gave them an excuse and where Stern was gunshy of lawsuits and publicity Silver has jumped all over it, possibly because he's new to the job and wants to establish his control. Either way, Sterling is never going to sit courtside at the Staples again.

47 posted on 05/16/2014 12:35:17 PM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

We still disagree.

But time will tell, I am sure.


48 posted on 05/16/2014 9:29:12 PM PDT by MortMan (Avoid temporary variables and strange women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson