Banned for life

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

No, this isn't a thread about OTTers and the WoTC forums.

Silver said the Clippers owner was banned from any association with the team for life and fined $2.5 million. Silver added that he would urge other owners to force a sale of the team.

I doubt they'll get him ejected. I'n fact, I'm betting after a while, they may lift these sanctions.

It kind of sucks for the team that after being terrible, they are finally doing good, and they have this kind of distraction.

 

[Zombie_Babies]

It's interesting, IMO. Obviously what he said was out of bounds but it doesn't appear he actually discriminated that way in his basketball business. I have heard that he's not such a great dood in his other ventures, though. That said, I find it sort of odd that they'd ban him and try to force him out for not doing anything other that saying something terrible in a private conversation. If his coach wants to quit and his team wants to bail because of it, fine - that's on them. But for Silver to ask for this? Seems extreme. I mean, the worst they actually have him on other than saying what he did is allegedly not wanting to pay white players as much as black players. Allegedly. Meh, I get what the league wants to do and don't really care that a racist is gonna get punished but it really doesn't seem to fit to me. Had he practiced what he preached by refusing tickets to minorities or something I'd feel differently. Right now, there's no proof he did anything even remotely close to that.

 

[Kramodlog]

It's interesting, IMO. Obviously what he said was out of bounds but it doesn't appear he actually discriminated that way in his basketball business. I have heard that he's not such a great dood in his other ventures, though. That said, I find it sort of odd that they'd ban him and try to force him out for not doing anything other that saying something terrible in a private conversation.

Producing a tape in our mediatic age is pretty damning evidence in the court of public opinion.

If his coach wants to quit and his team wants to bail because of it, fine - that's on them. But for Silver to ask for this? Seems extreme. I mean, the worst they actually have him on other than saying what he did is allegedly not wanting to pay white players as much as black players. Allegedly. Meh, I get what the league wants to do and don't really care that a racist is gonna get punished but it really doesn't seem to fit to me. Had he practiced what he preached by refusing tickets to minorities or something I'd feel differently. Right now, there's no proof he did anything even remotely close to that.

It is bad for the NBA's image, the majority of players are black and I wonder how many fans are black. It is public relations more than anything else.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I think it's a good move.

However, it's been rightly noted that this owner had a long history of misconduct, some of it discriminatory in nature, and was in substance a terrible sports owner whose franchise was the laughingstock of the sport for most of his tenure. There were a variety of other accusations made against him. It seems like if the league had wanted to get rid of him they could have found a reason years ago; instead, their hand was simply forced by the disclosed audio and the fan and corporate backlash.

On one hand, that makes the decision look better. If there was some context that made it seem like his words were uncharacteristic, it would be inappropriate to take this scale of action over one moment. It seems, however, that they are indeed reflective of his views.

On the other hand, it begs the question of why action wasn't taken sooner. Surely, if they'd done some serious investigation they would have found something years ago. Luckily for the NBA, they have a new commissioner, and the old one doesn't have to answer those questions. There is some hope, though, that this new guy will enforce higher ethical standards throughout the league, starting here.

 

[Zombie_Babies]

Producing a tape in our mediatic age is pretty damning evidence in the court of public opinion.

The only source saying he agreed to be taped saying that stuff that I'm aware of is TMZ. As they also made the tape public and recording someone without their knowledge is illegal, well, it seems pretty damned suspect that those were words he was cool with putting to tape. She probably secretly taped him and leaked it. In other words, what he said was most likely a private conversation.

Regardless, nothing he said had anything to do with his business.

It is bad for the NBA's image, the majority of players are black and I wonder how many fans are black. It is public relations more than anything else.

So's criminal behavior and yet they rarely act on that. I get it's PR but, to me, it's awful flimsy precedent to force a financial penalty on someone of this scale - and I don't mean $2.5 million.

We need to remember that there is no evidence whatsoever that he acted toward employees or customers in the way he spoke in that private conversation.

On the other hand, it begs the question of why action wasn't taken sooner.

The answer to that question is remarkably simple: There was no evidence whatsoever to any wrongdoing - especially concerning NBA business - by him. He was taken to court over discriminatory practices in his other business but never for anything NBA related. He also wasn't convicted of any wrongdoing nor was he ordered to pay any compensation. He did settle but that's not an indication of guilt which is why - especially, again, considering the fact that this had nothing to do with basketball - the league did nothing.

It's easy to condemn someone for something they say. We need to remember, though, that pretty much all of us have said some heinous poo of one sort or another during our lifetimes. It's unfair to ruin someone for something they said - especially in America. Again: said, not did. That's an important distinction we seem all to willing to forget these days.

I hate coming off like I'm defending some racist - I'm not. All I'm trying to say is that the punishment doesn't fit the crime. I understand the NBA's actions, understand the organization's right to those actions and really don't care all that much that some racist moron is gonna lose something he cares about. I do, however, have an issue with the precedent this sort of thing sets.

 

[Ahnehnois]

The answer to that question is remarkably simple: There was no evidence whatsoever to any wrongdoing - especially concerning NBA business - by him.

I'm not an expert, but you'll find plenty of people saying otherwise. To say that there wasn't sufficient evidence to win a legal case against someone who is rich and a lawyer is not the same thing as saying there was insufficient evidence for institutional discipline. The NBA's rules give the commissioner very broad authority; he isn't bound by the rules of the judicial system.

Moreover, as I stated, that sounds like a case of "hear no evil, see no evil". I find it entirely plausible that if this girlfriend of his got these statements on tape, if the NBA had rigorously investigated the serious allegations by some former players and coaches associated with him, they would have found something indicating that he held bigoted views and mistreated people.

However, somewhat separately, there is an abundance of evidence that he did a terrible job running the team; which in and of itself should have been enough reason to get rid of him. That's NBA business. As is often the case, his high stature shielded him from the consequences of incompetence. Even if he was not a racist, isn't having the lowest winning percentage in the league enough reason for the league to want to get rid of him? There are several sports owners who seem to have decided that losing is profitable, which is bad for the sport. In sports, you're supposed to try to win. That's the sort of thing the commissioners of the various leagues are empowered to stop. For example, Miami Marlins fans would certainly like to be rid of their owner. Heck, we in DC would be happy to be rid of Dan Snyder (also for a mix of business and personal reasons). It's ironic that this is happening just as the team is becoming a legitimate competitive basketball team.

It's easy to condemn someone for something they say. We need to remember, though, that pretty much all of us have said some heinous poo of one sort or another during our lifetimes. It's unfair to ruin someone for something they said - especially in America. Again: said, not did.

I don't think this will ruin him. I also think it's entirely fair that if he ruins the league's image, the league can get rid of him. Again, this is business, not criminal justice. People get fired for saying less objectionable things than this all the time. You can make business decisions for a broad variety of reasons. The same thing, for example, was said about Hank Williams when he was booted from Monday Night Football, and the answer is the same. He has a right to free speech, including objectionable speech, but that can have social and financial consequences independent of the criminal justice system.

I also suspect that his one damning statement is being used as a proxy for a long record of bad behavior that was never punished before. Comeuppance.

I hate coming off like I'm defending some racist - I'm not. All I'm trying to say is that the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

He hasn't been accused of any crime. I think the business decision by the league fits the bad decisions he made. It seems clear that the league acted within its constitution, which all its member owners signed on to.

 

[Kramodlog]

The only source saying he agreed to be taped saying that stuff that I'm aware of is TMZ. As they also made the tape public and recording someone without their knowledge is illegal, well, it seems pretty damned suspect that those were words he was cool with putting to tape. She probably secretly taped him and leaked it. In other words, what he said was most likely a private conversation.

It doesn't matter. Now it is public. He can sue if he wants. If you did not think/speak ill of black folk, he wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

Regardless, nothing he said had anything to do with his business.

It has an impact on the image of the NBA, whether what he said was related to it or not (well it was a bit, since he asked not to bring black folk to games).

So's criminal behavior and yet they rarely act on that. I get it's PR but, to me, it's awful flimsy precedent to force a financial penalty on someone of this scale - and I don't mean $2.5 million.

We need to remember that there is no evidence whatsoever that he acted toward employees or customers in the way he spoke in that private conversation.

It doesn't matter. Image doesn't bother with criminal guilt. What he said was pretty damaging for the brand though.

The answer to that question is remarkably simple: There was no evidence whatsoever to any wrongdoing - especially concerning NBA business - by him.

Legally no. No one said he said he did either. Morally, yeah he did, and that is enough to get kicked in the nuts by the NBA nowadays.

On the flip side, you got business like Chick filet or whatever who supports homophobia and gets business because of it.

It's easy to condemn someone for something they say. We need to remember, though, that pretty much all of us have said some heinous poo of one sort or another during our lifetimes.

In a serious fashion? Speak for yourself.

It's unfair to ruin someone for something they said - especially in America.

Not really. It is all "market forces" at work.

I hate coming off like I'm defending some racist - I'm not.

I'm sure you have many black friends.

[quot]All I'm trying to say is that the punishment doesn't fit the crime. I understand the NBA's actions, understand the organization's right to those actions and really don't care all that much that some racist moron is gonna lose something he cares about. I do, however, have an issue with the precedent this sort of thing sets.[/QUOTE]Maybe petition your law makers to protect bigotted speach?

 

[Janx]

The only source saying he agreed to be taped saying that stuff that I'm aware of is TMZ. As they also made the tape public and recording someone without their knowledge is illegal, well, it seems pretty damned suspect that those were words he was cool with putting to tape. She probably secretly taped him and leaked it. In other words, what he said was most likely a private conversation.

It depends on the state. In Texas, it is legal to record a conversation as long as at least one participant knows it is being recorded.

As for the Clippers' owner, he's a real estate guy who'd been sued over discriminatory practices against minorities. This pretty much clinches that the guy is a racist, rather than a guy who said the N-word when he should have known better.

As for being banned for life, that is I guess the consequence for offending a large enough demographic. And given his wealth and power, what other punishment would have been sufficient? heck, he'll get to sell his share of the team and make money on his way out, no doubt.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It's not that big a surprise- this guy is essentially the NBA's answer to Marge Schott.

Not only has the been increased scrutiny of the inflammatory statements of American business owners in general over the past couple of decades, that scrutiny has been more intense in American pro sports businesses because of the special treatment they get under our legal system.

Plus, athletes & sports fans around the world are, in general, trending towards less tolerance for intolerance.

Add in all the lucrative advertisement deals with image conscious brands, and the overall patience for sports owners who speak incautiously is pretty minimal.

 

[Kaodi]

I do not understand how they fine him and ban him. The ability to be fined by a private organization is contingent on being a member. They are making him a non-member, so how are they still fining him?