Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   NBA agrees with Donald Sterling that certain types of people shouldn't attend Clippers games   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 80
    More: Repeat, Donald Sterling, NBA, Clippers, Guggenheim Partners, press conference, Adam Silver  
•       •       •

1003 clicks; posted to Sports » on 29 Apr 2014 at 2:46 PM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



80 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-29 02:21:17 PM  
this one
 
2014-04-29 02:22:21 PM  
Subby, you owe me a monitor..
 
2014-04-29 02:22:30 PM  
Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.
 
2014-04-29 02:23:48 PM  
i11.tinypic.com
 
2014-04-29 02:26:02 PM  

keithgabryelski: this one


Yep.
 
2014-04-29 02:26:24 PM  

keithgabryelski: this one

 
2014-04-29 02:26:34 PM  
Oh I like this one!
 
2014-04-29 02:27:05 PM  
Ho-Lee-Fark. This is a heavy pimp hand. The old pos will probably die in the next 3 months anyway
 
2014-04-29 02:27:17 PM  
Nice subby. And (I can't believe I'm saying this) good job NBA on a quick response.
 
2014-04-29 02:27:33 PM  
So does this mean he won't be eligible for the Hall of Fame?
 
2014-04-29 02:27:37 PM  
Does he get an option to join the Night's Watch?
 
2014-04-29 02:27:38 PM  

SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.


I think the NBA can afford it. I heard this morning (foggy memory, so I could be wrong) that the NBA has an arbitration clause, so that would be one more hurdle he'd have to clear before going to court.
 
2014-04-29 02:27:56 PM  

SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.


I'm sure there will be, but this is a really great move by the NBA. Just put the hammer down on this clown, and leave no room for error on how your business feels about this. Sure, there will be fallout to deal with, but that will pale in comparison to what they would have had on their hands from the public/media if they would have went easy, or just tried to brush all this under the rug.
 
2014-04-29 02:29:19 PM  
This is the best thing ever to happen to Clippers fans. Both of them should be celebrating right now.
 
2014-04-29 02:30:10 PM  

scottydoesntknow: Nice subby. And (I can't believe I'm saying this) good job NBA on a quick response.


during the playoffs?  they can't afford for the Clippers to not show up to the arena tonight.
 
2014-04-29 02:30:30 PM  
Interesting that Mark Cuban just tweeted he supports this 100%. Kind of at odds what he said yesterday...
 
2014-04-29 02:31:16 PM  
ts2.mm.bing.net
 
2014-04-29 02:32:08 PM  

SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.


Silvers is a crazy smart mofo. He wouldn't be handing this down if there was a sliver of a chance of blowback. They might try, but any lawyer/firm worth it's salt won't challenge it and mar(sp) it's name.
 
2014-04-29 02:32:28 PM  
We;re getting to that point of the press conference where the questions are getting dumb since everything's been asked already.
 
2014-04-29 02:33:02 PM  
Maybe he'll be happier if he learns to pick cotton
 
2014-04-29 02:34:49 PM  
If he's already banned, why would he bother paying the fine?
 
2014-04-29 02:35:22 PM  
Ta-ta Tokowitz
 
2014-04-29 02:35:48 PM  
Fark Yes! As a Clippers fan this is the best thing that could have come out of this.

My prediction?  Great fan reaction when the Clippers take the court.  And a 25 point Clippers win.


/Great headline subby
//oh, and fark you Sterling
 
2014-04-29 02:36:30 PM  

nathanjr: If he's already banned, why would he bother paying the fine?


He's required by contract. Since I presume a lot of his revenue comes from the NBA in some way, they can probably just set the fine off against any money they owe him.
 
2014-04-29 02:36:50 PM  
Ok, I've been out of the country for several weeks- this is the guy who's cows got waterboarded by Sarah Palin?
 
2014-04-29 02:37:01 PM  
ANOTHER JOB LOST UNDER OBAMA
 
2014-04-29 02:37:27 PM  

SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.

The NBA has deep pockets too.
 
2014-04-29 02:37:48 PM  

DamnYankees: We;re getting to that point of the press conference where the questions are getting dumb since everything's been asked already.


Yes, B...b...b..but I didn't ask it, therefore the previous answer to the same question is completely invalid.
 
2014-04-29 02:37:54 PM  

SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.


According to the NBA's constitution, decisions of the commissioner are treated as conclusive and as final as an arbitrator's ruling.  A lawsuit to set aside the decision would almost certainly fail.
 
2014-04-29 02:38:28 PM  
Welcome to the club, Donny Boy
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-04-29 02:38:30 PM  

SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.


Why?
 
2014-04-29 02:39:25 PM  

El_Perro: SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.

According to the NBA's constitution, decisions of the commissioner are treated as conclusive and as final as an arbitrator's ruling.  A lawsuit to set aside the decision would almost certainly fail.


This is only one side of the issue. There's still the question about what the scope of the commissioner's authority is. His decisions may be final, but he has a limited amount of things over which he has decision-making power. I genuinely don't know if he has the power to put in a lifetime ban on all participation in the NBA.
 
2014-04-29 02:41:58 PM  

cretinbob: SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.

Why?


Because Sterling is a well known litigious bastard, and he loves the power owning the Clippers gives him.
 
2014-04-29 02:48:30 PM  

cretinbob: SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.

Why?


i was reading somewhere where they said if Silvers goes too far, Sterling will just take legal action against the decision.  The person that wrote that article never even considered a lifetime ban and what the reaction would be.  But he said Sterling loves to take people to court.
 
2014-04-29 02:49:01 PM  

DamnYankees: El_Perro: SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.

According to the NBA's constitution, decisions of the commissioner are treated as conclusive and as final as an arbitrator's ruling.  A lawsuit to set aside the decision would almost certainly fail.

This is only one side of the issue. There's still the question about what the scope of the commissioner's authority is. His decisions may be final, but he has a limited amount of things over which he has decision-making power. I genuinely don't know if he has the power to put in a lifetime ban on all participation in the NBA.


I don't know either (the NBA constitution is not public, and only bits and pieces have leaked out as far as I can tell).  I suspect that the NBA wouldn't have taken such decisive action so swiftly if they (and their counsel -- Wachtell, if I heard correctly) if the action wasn't clearly within the scope of the commissioner's authority.
 
2014-04-29 02:52:19 PM  

jayhawk88: cretinbob: SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.

Why?

Because Sterling is a well known litigious bastard, and he loves the power owning the Clippers gives him.


Leaving aside the fact that the best single argument for that not happening is "Sloth said it it would", the point is no one knows exactly whether he even can sue, so no one has a clue if he can or will, because we don't know what clauses he signed on for when he became an owner.
 
2014-04-29 02:58:03 PM  
I submitted the "*BANG BANG* Adam Silver's hammer comes down upon his head" headline, and this one was way better. As was the headline below it.
 
2014-04-29 03:00:26 PM  

SlothB77: cretinbob: SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.

Why?

i was reading somewhere where they said if Silvers goes too far, Sterling will just take legal action against the decision.  The person that wrote that article never even considered a lifetime ban and what the reaction would be.  But he said Sterling loves to take people to court.


Sterling would have taken the NBA to court over any action they took, they are expecting to be taken to court.  And from the sounds of it, if he doesn't have 100% of the owners behind him, he has pretty damn close to it.
 
2014-04-29 03:00:38 PM  
Now it falls to Silver, and the case is based on the audiotape of a private conversation - something not admissible in a court of law (Sterling did not consent to be taped). Combine that with Sterling being very litigious and you have Silver stuck in a spot where no matter what he does some people will be unhappy with him. He has to come down as hard as he can, and even that will have some saying it's not enough and possibly prompting a lawsuit against him from the other side.

I guess the grounds Sterling will use to counter-sue is that his ban is based on a private conservation he did not consent to be recorded.
 
2014-04-29 03:04:03 PM  

SlothB77: Now it falls to Silver, and the case is based on the audiotape of a private conversation - something not admissible in a court of law (Sterling did not consent to be taped). Combine that with Sterling being very litigious and you have Silver stuck in a spot where no matter what he does some people will be unhappy with him. He has to come down as hard as he can, and even that will have some saying it's not enough and possibly prompting a lawsuit against him from the other side.

I guess the grounds Sterling will use to counter-sue is that his ban is based on a private conservation he did not consent to be recorded.


I don't think that will matter as long as the NBA didn't set the whole thing up, which I guarantee you he will probably try to argue. As long as they didn't have anything to do with the recording once it became public knowledge they are free to react to it and base decisions off of it as they see fit.
 
2014-04-29 03:07:42 PM  

SlothB77: Now it falls to Silver, and the case is based on the audiotape of a private conversation - something not admissible in a court of law (Sterling did not consent to be taped). Combine that with Sterling being very litigious and you have Silver stuck in a spot where no matter what he does some people will be unhappy with him. He has to come down as hard as he can, and even that will have some saying it's not enough and possibly prompting a lawsuit against him from the other side.

I guess the grounds Sterling will use to counter-sue is that his ban is based on a private conservation he did not consent to be recorded.


I'm pretty sure Marge Schott did the same thing after her Hitler comments. Didn't work then either.
 
2014-04-29 03:07:51 PM  

SlothB77: I guess the grounds Sterling will use to counter-sue is that his ban is based on a private conservation he did not consent to be recorded.


Of course he'll sue because he's a piece of sh*t asshole and that's what piece of sh*t assholes do, because they can never take responsibility for their own actions. Unfortunately for him, the NBA is not a court of law; owning and being present as an NBA owner is not a right, and therefore that sh*t doesn't matter.

DamnYankees: Interesting that Mark Cuban just tweeted he supports this 100%. Kind of at odds what he said yesterday...


Not really. He was against them forcing someone to sell the team. Silver will continue to attempt to get owners to do just that, but they're unlikely to in the interest of self-preservation in the future, despite the fact that no one likes Sterling.
 
2014-04-29 03:17:06 PM  

SlothB77: Now it falls to Silver, and the case is based on the audiotape of a private conversation - something not admissible in a court of law (Sterling did not consent to be taped). Combine that with Sterling being very litigious and you have Silver stuck in a spot where no matter what he does some people will be unhappy with him. He has to come down as hard as he can, and even that will have some saying it's not enough and possibly prompting a lawsuit against him from the other side.

I guess the grounds Sterling will use to counter-sue is that his ban is based on a private conservation he did not consent to be recorded.


That's not standing for a counter suit, it's an evidence ruling that would exclude that evidence from an actual lawsuit. There is no lawsuit for this to be excluded from. Genius.
 
2014-04-29 03:17:18 PM  
I'm curious if the Republicans who were all sad about the Firefox guy are going to stay hidden during this one.
 
2014-04-29 03:20:44 PM  

JerseyTim: Does he get an option to join the Night's Watch?


I really don't think he's one to "take the black."
 
2014-04-29 03:31:01 PM  

drewsclues: JerseyTim: Does he get an option to join the Night's Watch?

I really don't think he's one to "take the black."


*slow clap*
 
2014-04-29 03:41:36 PM  

AliceBToklasLives: So does this mean he won't be eligible for the Hall of Fame?


The way he's run the Clippers, aside the from the last two years since Donald Sterling gifted him Chris Paul on a silver platter, he should be enshrined in the Hall of Shame. His actions as owner earned it, his mouth just sealed the deal. Two seasons of the Clippers being Pacific division champs shouldn't erase three decades of them being the perennial Pacific division doormat.
 
2014-04-29 03:54:33 PM  

SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.


Depends on the specifics of the rules one agrees to when one buys an NBA team.  Said rules are confidential and the specifics aren't publicly known, but apparently give the commissioner the ability to perform such actions.  To force the sale, it appears 75% of the other team owners need to agree, but it looks like that's a sure thing as well.

IE, there probably was a morality clause of some sort which these sorts of statements violate.
 
2014-04-29 03:55:34 PM  

drewsclues: JerseyTim: Does he get an option to join the Night's Watch?

I really don't think he's one to "take the black."


Darn you.  If you hadn't responded with that line, I was going to say it, almost word-for-word.  Well done!
 
2014-04-29 03:56:49 PM  

Mitch Taylor's Bro: SlothB77: Holy fark, did he really ban him for life?  That's going to be a countersuit from a rich, litigious-happy bigot.

I think the NBA can afford it. I heard this morning (foggy memory, so I could be wrong) that the NBA has an arbitration clause, so that would be one more hurdle he'd have to clear before going to court.


Not to mention that a 3/4 vote of the other league owners will force him out of ownership anyway. "Ban for life" isn't the least of his worries, but it doesn't top the list either.
 
Displayed 50 of 80 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report