Additional racist comments attributed to Clippers' Donald Sterling released

mschmidt64 said:
That's not picking and choosing, it is indisputable that the league has the jurisdiction to fine players (and coaches, and owners) for saying things the league does not want them to say. It happens every season in every one of the major sports in this country. And if the league simply fined the shit out of Sterling you wouldn't have heard me say jack shit on the subject, ever. I not only acknowledge that the league has the jurisdiction to fine players and owners, I support that jurisdiction.

The league taking away Sterling's ownership interest is (1) not something that happens every season; (2) not something that the league indisputably has the right to do; and (3) is still not a matter of free speech. The issue with Sterling isn't his right to speech, it's an issue of whether someone else has the right to strip away his owned property without due process in a court of law.

A better analogy to what Sterling is going through would be if I was advocating the league fining Roger Mason, banning him for life, and then trying to foreclose on his house. And in that case I would side with Mason. The league can fine him, but it can't take away stuff he owns.
Click to expand...
Yes there are seperate issues involved in this process. To me it has always been a question of what actions can the league take within their jurisdiction. Attempting to take control of his team certainly seems to overstep their authority. Sterling as an individual is subject to the rules and policies to which he contracted to abide with but I don't think he is obligated to subject personal property to the league's control.
 
L.T. Fan said:
Yes there are seperate issues involved in this process. To me it has always been a question of what actions can the league take within their jurisdiction. Attempting to take control of his team certainly seems to overstep their authority. Sterling as an individual is subject to the rules and policies to which he contracted to abide with but I don't think he is obligated to subject personal property to the league's control.
Click to expand...

Boom.

:unsure
 
Owners can lock out players over revenue sharing...acceptable. Players talking about a boycott because an owner in the in the league they play in is a racist...unacceptable.
 
Also, what Mason said is not true...Lebron said he fully supports Silver and if they continue the process there will not be an issue.
 
Carp said:
Owners can lock out players over revenue sharing...acceptable. Players talking about a boycott because an owner in the in the league they play in is a racist...unacceptable.
Click to expand...

No disagreement that owners can lockout players. No disagreement that players can boycott.
 
Correct.

You can't have the players making threats about boycotts and strikes every time they don't like what the league is doing. In this case, Mason is advocating the league doing something they may not even be legally able to do, and saying they're all gonna strike if the league doesn't do it.

He's getting waaaaaay out in front of any official, lawyer-approved statements or actions that the league may want to, or need to, take. Sterling's lawyers may find a way to use those comments against the league as well, moving forward.

The league has the power to silence those players with fines, and would be justified in doing so, just like they were justified in fining Sterling for his comments.
 
L.T. Fan said:
No disagreement that owners can lockout players. No disagreement that players can boycott.
Click to expand...

Right...both lose income either way, but I don’t see calls for owners being fined due to a lockout.
 
Carp said:
Also, what Mason said is not true...Lebron said he fully supports Silver and if they continue the process there will not be an issue.
Click to expand...

So just another reason to tell Mason to shut up, he doesn't even know what he's talking about. He's just running his mouth making empty threats.
 
Carp said:
Right...both lose income either way, but I don’t see calls for owners being fined due to a lockout.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure I've seen owners fined for talking about plans for lockouts though.
 
Carp said:
Not quite the same...this was speaking about details of a lockout, not about boycotting a racist owner.
Click to expand...

Well I didn't say I've seen examples of fines for talking about boycotting a racist owner, I said I've seen owners fined for talking about lockouts. There are no examples of the league fining an owner for talking about boycotting another racist owner. This is the first time it's ever happened.

But there are multiple examples of leagues fining owners for making non-sanctioned statements about labor relations. It would not be hypocritical for the league to also fine a player for making comments about either going on strike, or boycotting. The league wants to control all that dialogue, and that is a fair expectation of the league IMO.
 
Carp said:
Right...both lose income either way, but I don’t see calls for owners being fined due to a lockout.
Click to expand...

Players are under contract with the owner. If they breach the contract they can be fined. Owners are not under contract to the players.
 
L.T. Fan said:
Players are under contract with the owner. If they breach the contract they can be fined. Owners are not under contract to the players.
Click to expand...

Yeah...I'm sure those fines will make up for the lost income of no games.
 
Carp said:
Yeah...I'm sure those fines will make up for the lost income of no games.
Click to expand...

I have no position on that. That is something that happens when private enterprise and unions become at odds with each other. Everyone loses. The only ones that seem to be unscathed is the union officials.
 
Carp said:
Owners can lock out players over revenue sharing...acceptable. Players talking about a boycott because an owner in the in the league they play in is a racist...unacceptable.
Click to expand...
Don't the owners only lock out during CBA negotiations? This isn't a time where a work stoppage is warranted. It's just knee jerking threats by pissed off players.
 
Deuce said:
Don't the owners only lock out during CBA negotiations? This isn't a time where a work stoppage is warranted. It's just knee jerking threats by pissed off players.
Click to expand...

When the owners don't get what they want, they lock out the players. The players are doing the same thing here, for moral and social reasons.
 
Well Roger Mason can go on strike all he wants. Obviously Lebron James has confided off the record to someone that as long as the league is going about the legal process he's going to play, which is the smart stance to take no matter what his personal convictions about Sterling are.

But that doesn't effect the issue of whether the league can fine, and would be justified in fining, Mason for running his mouth. They fine owners for talking about lockouts, they can fine players for talking about boycotts.
 
Deuce said:
Don't the owners only lock out during CBA negotiations? This isn't a time where a work stoppage is warranted. It's just knee jerking threats by pissed off players.
Click to expand...

Yup. And like I said -- even if I'm not personally issue-spotting a statement by Mason that could hurt the league -- he might end up saying something that Sterling could use against them if it goes to litigation.

If he was smart he'd be quiet. And if I were the league I'd get him to shut up about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom