News flash; if a school teacher is filmed having sex by someone planting an illegal camera that person goes to jail, the teacher doesn't get fired. Let's compare apples to apples.
Good old Ann, (the horse we're talking about here, right?) No sure what she got. The wife certainly knows what she got into. I wonder if she can now go to the game, ...with a black man.
It's just personal. I came from a very small school where we played basketball all year. We didn't even have enough kids to field a six man football team and there was no interest to even try. I grew sick of basketball and hate the hell out of the game since we students had no choice whether or not to play. Just the thought of being on the court mixing it up body to sweaty body is more than I can handle. The locker room smells like sweaty, stinky socks and jocks.
See the thing about it is he can own a basketball team. No one can prevent that. However, the NBA can keep that team out of the property THEY own... Property rights go both ways. He doesn't own the NBA. He has chosen to be a part of it and must abide by their rules for their property if he wishes to be a part of it. He chose not to abide those rules.
So if the NBA wants to flex its muscle... and rescinds the franchise, thats going to put some folks out of work. And if Sterling flat refuses to relinquish a $500million +++ franchise, seems to me the NBA has a big problem from a legal action standpoint.
The NBA isn't flexing it's muscle. It's making a decision in its best interest, AS A BUSINESS. I'd suggest you go back and re-read this thread from the beginning.
I've realized that the majority of the contributors in this thread have no idea about owning/managing a business.
The NBA is not going to destroy the franchise, they are going to force the guy to sell it, which is well within their power. As has been stated multiple times, he has no legal recourse. It is a franchise. He cannot refuse to sell it if the commissioner and board and governor's agree to force him to sell. He has no legal recourse because league decisions are binding, the same way arbitration is binding. http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/10852199/challenge-donald-sterling I've also realized that many in this thread can't be bothered to read or understand anything posted in this thread.
To appease its diverse & ignorant customer base... yes I get what the NBA is doing, as a business. Silver initiated a $2.5 million dollar fine... the max the league allows plus the banning. There's some muscle flexing going on. Sterling didn't strike me as one that wouldn't go down swinging being as he used to chase ambulances for a living. I was supposing Sterling put up a fight when it came time to close a deal for the team. Do you have intimate details regarding NBA franchising bylaws? Have you arbitrated an NBA business deal? I don't think its going to be an easy transaction, regardless.
Fight over what? He bought that team in the early 80's for $12.5 million. The NBA constitution is now public. http://www.scribd.com/doc/221044766/NBA-Constitution-and-By-Laws
Key word "member" not owner. I own a couple of franchise businesses (food service)...all of my contracts states that behavior that is detrimental to the good name of franchise can result in sanctions, fines, and forfeiture. (I am not putting this verbatim). There is also things about equal opportunity and race relations in there.
Call it whatever you want. Given all that's happened, that term would be at the bottom of my list of terms to describe it.
Here's something from Bill Simmons, for you guys to say is unfair and biased: http://grantland.com/features/sterlings-fold/