Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They have the votes, they wouldn't have announced he was losing the team without knowing the votes are there. I believe the other 29 owners all gave their support to the commissioner after he announced Sterling's punishment. Just as Sterling has powerful lawyers working for him, so does the NBA including Adam Silver himself.
Not to mention that collectively they have more money than Sterling as well and Sterling will pay court costs in the end.
Why would Sterling pay court costs?
Sterling actually has the better "case," legally.
The NBA should promptly seek to resolve this fiasco in a manner that AVOIDS court input. They are holding the losing hand in that regard.
You cant be this ignorant? The trust that owns the Clippers supercedes community property. You have no clue what you are talking about. dont quit your day job to practice your dime store attorney skills.
What trust are you talking about about? How does the fat that Sterling bout a portion of the trust nullify California state law on community property? Why hasn't any lawyer who isn't as stupid as you unaware of this mystical ability of trusts to nullify state laws?
I'm talking about the one that owns the Clippers. You must be a retard if you dont know how trusts work. The ownership belongs to the trust not Sterling stupid.
What trust are you talking about about? How does the fat that Sterling bout a portion of the trust nullify California state law on community property? Why hasn't any lawyer who isn't as stupid as you unaware of this mystical ability of trusts to nullify state laws?
I'm talking about the one that owns the Clippers. You must be a retard if you dont know how trusts work. The ownership belongs to the trust not Sterling stupid.
Except for the fact that the NBA says that the Sterlings jointly own the clippers, you have a really good point.
Assclapius is talking out of his ass cheeks again.
It is far from surprising that a guy like Sterling would "own" the team via the mechanism of a trust.
That doesn't change a fucking thing in the dispute between Sterling and the NBA over the ban, the fine and the directive to sell the team.
It is actually fairly straightforward.
Until and unless the NBA can point to the appropriate provision(s) in its own NBA Constitution and by-laws and regulations and contracts, for both the AUTHORITY to do what it seeks to do and for the GROUNDS which would justify that action, then they are in trouble. And as I have noted before, the NBA Constitution and by-laws do NOT appear to give the NBA (the owners and the Commissioner) valid authority to do what they have purported to do.
IF they have no valid ground and/or they failed to follow necessary procedures, then their ruling cannot be hidden behind the clause that says a team owner cannot take the issue to court. That would work only if they had followed the proper procedure and relied on a valid ground in the Constitution and by-laws, regulations or contracts.
So, guess what? It looks a LOT like Sterling CAN take this matter to Court. And with no valid basis for the Commissioner's edict, that "ruling" is unlikely to stand up.
This is why the matter SHOULD get resolved OUT of Court. For that to happen, the NBA is most certainly going to have a lot of yielding to do. Forget the "fine." Fuck the lifetime "ban." And possibly even forget the forced "sale." They are gonna have to give Sterling another way out that is much more satisfactory to him and his property interests.
Sterling may be a racist pig, but he still has rights. Welcome to America, Assclapius.
Assclapius is talking out of his ass cheeks again.
It is far from surprising that a guy like Sterling would "own" the team via the mechanism of a trust.
That doesn't change a fucking thing in the dispute between Sterling and the NBA over the ban, the fine and the directive to sell the team.
It is actually fairly straightforward.
Until and unless the NBA can point to the appropriate provision(s) in its own NBA Constitution and by-laws and regulations and contracts, for both the AUTHORITY to do what it seeks to do and for the GROUNDS which would justify that action, then they are in trouble. And as I have noted before, the NBA Constitution and by-laws do NOT appear to give the NBA (the owners and the Commissioner) valid authority to do what they have purported to do.
IF they have no valid ground and/or they failed to follow necessary procedures, then their ruling cannot be hidden behind the clause that says a team owner cannot take the issue to court. That would work only if they had followed the proper procedure and relied on a valid ground in the Constitution and by-laws, regulations or contracts.
So, guess what? It looks a LOT like Sterling CAN take this matter to Court. And with no valid basis for the Commissioner's edict, that "ruling" is unlikely to stand up.
This is why the matter SHOULD get resolved OUT of Court. For that to happen, the NBA is most certainly going to have a lot of yielding to do. Forget the "fine." Fuck the lifetime "ban." And possibly even forget the forced "sale." They are gonna have to give Sterling another way out that is much more satisfactory to him and his property interests.
Sterling may be a racist pig, but he still has rights. Welcome to America, Assclapius.
You really think they don't have the 3/4ths vote needed? The NBA wouldn't have done this if they didn't have the votes. Silver most likely spoke with every other owner regarding this before laying down the decision.
Funny how people don't think this billion dollar league that has firms of attornies at their disposal didnt have this mapped out from day 1.![]()
It doesn't matter how many attorneys they have. Few attorneys will tell a client he's full of crap. Even those that say it will still take their money and file whatever they can use to milk the client. Having a lawyer is not a comment on the merits of the case.
If Silver spoke to these owners at all few if any would go against the outrage tidal wave. They'd be next. A fly on the wall would report the conversation as "go ahead call the old man's bluff."
I hope the NBA has lots of lawyers and hemorrhage money. This case is going to settle. Sooner or later sanity will prevail once they see how much it's costing.
Assclapius is talking out of his ass cheeks again.
It is far from surprising that a guy like Sterling would "own" the team via the mechanism of a trust.
That doesn't change a fucking thing in the dispute between Sterling and the NBA over the ban, the fine and the directive to sell the team.
It is actually fairly straightforward.
Until and unless the NBA can point to the appropriate provision(s) in its own NBA Constitution and by-laws and regulations and contracts, for both the AUTHORITY to do what it seeks to do and for the GROUNDS which would justify that action, then they are in trouble. And as I have noted before, the NBA Constitution and by-laws do NOT appear to give the NBA (the owners and the Commissioner) valid authority to do what they have purported to do.
IF they have no valid ground and/or they failed to follow necessary procedures, then their ruling cannot be hidden behind the clause that says a team owner cannot take the issue to court. That would work only if they had followed the proper procedure and relied on a valid ground in the Constitution and by-laws, regulations or contracts.
So, guess what? It looks a LOT like Sterling CAN take this matter to Court. And with no valid basis for the Commissioner's edict, that "ruling" is unlikely to stand up.
This is why the matter SHOULD get resolved OUT of Court. For that to happen, the NBA is most certainly going to have a lot of yielding to do. Forget the "fine." Fuck the lifetime "ban." And possibly even forget the forced "sale." They are gonna have to give Sterling another way out that is much more satisfactory to him and his property interests.
Sterling may be a racist pig, but he still has rights. Welcome to America, Assclapius.
You're conveniently ignoring the fact that the other owners hold the nuclear option.
They can vote to contract the league by one team. Simple as that. And if they do, his billion dollar franchise isn't worth jack shit.
Per Article 14A(a), Silver takes over the Clippers and can sell the team
The "termination" of the Clippers' membership may sound like a dire and disruptive outcome. It might trigger concerns that the Clippers would exist without a pro basketball league, or that it might lead to a dispersal draft of Clippers players. Those concerns are misplaced because of other constitutional language that prevents the Clippers from losing its relationship with the NBA and makes Silver the team's de facto owner.
According to 14A(a), when the membership of an NBA team is terminated, the commissioner automatically takes over the team. Silver would thus take over the Clippers immediately following a vote to sustain the charge against Donald Sterling and terminate the Clippers' membership. The team would continue to play its games and conduct business. The Board of Governors would be empowered to instruct Silver to sell the team or liquidate its assets. Silver presumably would then be instructed to begin a process to sell the team, and proceeds of the sale would be paid to the Sterlings.
Read More: How the NBA can oust Donald Sterling and sell the Clippers - NBA - Michael McCann - SI.com
Assclapius is talking out of his ass cheeks again.
It is far from surprising that a guy like Sterling would "own" the team via the mechanism of a trust.
That doesn't change a fucking thing in the dispute between Sterling and the NBA over the ban, the fine and the directive to sell the team.
It is actually fairly straightforward.
Until and unless the NBA can point to the appropriate provision(s) in its own NBA Constitution and by-laws and regulations and contracts, for both the AUTHORITY to do what it seeks to do and for the GROUNDS which would justify that action, then they are in trouble. And as I have noted before, the NBA Constitution and by-laws do NOT appear to give the NBA (the owners and the Commissioner) valid authority to do what they have purported to do.
IF they have no valid ground and/or they failed to follow necessary procedures, then their ruling cannot be hidden behind the clause that says a team owner cannot take the issue to court. That would work only if they had followed the proper procedure and relied on a valid ground in the Constitution and by-laws, regulations or contracts.
So, guess what? It looks a LOT like Sterling CAN take this matter to Court. And with no valid basis for the Commissioner's edict, that "ruling" is unlikely to stand up.
This is why the matter SHOULD get resolved OUT of Court. For that to happen, the NBA is most certainly going to have a lot of yielding to do. Forget the "fine." Fuck the lifetime "ban." And possibly even forget the forced "sale." They are gonna have to give Sterling another way out that is much more satisfactory to him and his property interests.
Sterling may be a racist pig, but he still has rights. Welcome to America, Assclapius.
You're conveniently ignoring the fact that the other owners hold the nuclear option.
They can vote to contract the league by one team. Simple as that. And if they do, his billion dollar franchise isn't worth jack shit.
Sure they can.....![]()
This is an interesting provision.
Per Article 14A(a), Silver takes over the Clippers and can sell the team
The "termination" of the Clippers' membership may sound like a dire and disruptive outcome. It might trigger concerns that the Clippers would exist without a pro basketball league, or that it might lead to a dispersal draft of Clippers players. Those concerns are misplaced because of other constitutional language that prevents the Clippers from losing its relationship with the NBA and makes Silver the team's de facto owner.
According to 14A(a), when the membership of an NBA team is terminated, the commissioner automatically takes over the team. Silver would thus take over the Clippers immediately following a vote to sustain the charge against Donald Sterling and terminate the Clippers' membership. The team would continue to play its games and conduct business. The Board of Governors would be empowered to instruct Silver to sell the team or liquidate its assets. Silver presumably would then be instructed to begin a process to sell the team, and proceeds of the sale would be paid to the Sterlings.
Read More: How the NBA can oust Donald Sterling and sell the Clippers - NBA - Michael McCann - SI.com
You're conveniently ignoring the fact that the other owners hold the nuclear option.
They can vote to contract the league by one team. Simple as that. And if they do, his billion dollar franchise isn't worth jack shit.
Sure they can.....![]()
derppppppppppp!
Of course they can.
Leagues have been contracted and expanded many times in the past.
Learn to fuck'n google, dipshit.
This is an interesting provision.
Per Article 14A(a), Silver takes over the Clippers and can sell the team
The "termination" of the Clippers' membership may sound like a dire and disruptive outcome. It might trigger concerns that the Clippers would exist without a pro basketball league, or that it might lead to a dispersal draft of Clippers players. Those concerns are misplaced because of other constitutional language that prevents the Clippers from losing its relationship with the NBA and makes Silver the team's de facto owner.
According to 14A(a), when the membership of an NBA team is terminated, the commissioner automatically takes over the team. Silver would thus take over the Clippers immediately following a vote to sustain the charge against Donald Sterling and terminate the Clippers' membership. The team would continue to play its games and conduct business. The Board of Governors would be empowered to instruct Silver to sell the team or liquidate its assets. Silver presumably would then be instructed to begin a process to sell the team, and proceeds of the sale would be paid to the Sterlings.
Read More: How the NBA can oust Donald Sterling and sell the Clippers - NBA - Michael McCann - SI.com
Assclapius is busy pretending that the "league" can invoke that provision without the Constitutional and by-law requirements for such an action having first taken place.
What Assclapius knows about how these things actually work couldn't fill a dimple in a thimble.
As far as I know, Asclepias had never welched on a bet.
So that's gotta count for something, no?
You're conveniently ignoring the fact that the other owners hold the nuclear option.
They can vote to contract the league by one team. Simple as that. And if they do, his billion dollar franchise isn't worth jack shit.
Sure they can.....![]()
derppppppppppp!
Of course they can.
Leagues have been contracted and expanded many times in the past.
Learn to fuck'n google, dipshit.
This is an interesting provision.
Assclapius is busy pretending that the "league" can invoke that provision without the Constitutional and by-law requirements for such an action having first taken place.
What Assclapius knows about how these things actually work couldn't fill a dimple in a thimble.
You are right. I don't much about it. However it seems I have more knowledge than you clowns wishing it was not so have on the issue. Dont be angry about that.![]()
Sure they can.....![]()
derppppppppppp!
Of course they can.
Leagues have been contracted and expanded many times in the past.
Learn to fuck'n google, dipshit.
Legally they can. But they won't.
Sports Leagues contract when the teams or the league are losing money. The Clippers are not losing money, nor is the league.....You're dumb.
Now go eat a bag of dicks......
Sure they can.....![]()
derppppppppppp!
Of course they can.
Leagues have been contracted and expanded many times in the past.
Learn to fuck'n google, dipshit.
mani should reconsider just how silly he sounds when he takes note of the fact that Assclapius is the moron "thanking" his post.
![]()