Uh, yeah, you do, you said, and I quote "...there's ten that say the opposite" and when asked about it, claimed those legal opinions were discussed in the first 18 pages of this thread. That many have NOT been discussed, so, you're a liar. You also said in post # 463 "...That's where every single poster here takes issue with your opinion on the matter." I don't take issue with it, in fact, I agree with AK's opinion, so, once again, you're a liar-and you do it so frequently that you don't even realize that you're doing it.
Yea, an antitrust lawsuit because that can't be waived. But he doesn't have an antitrust claim. He made an agreement with the Association. I'm sure maybe there is some kind of way he can postpone the vote or something. But it's pretty straightforward. He gave his soul to the owners. Their decision is final, binding, and he can not sue to fight it.
FWIW Ric Bucher/Bill Simmons on Simmons podcast said they think the reason the vote is being held up is because the owners want to make a statement and make it 29-0, however, not all owners want this so it might be a reason why its being delayed. Another reason could just be trying to decipher how the legal process would play out...
Yeah.
And that these guys aren't just sitting around waiting for someone to call a meeting this Friday. They're busy people.
I think what Silver is doing is just getting the pre-work together. He met, if I am correct, with their finance committee first to discuss selling the team, then they will meet to discuss the hearing process. Then presumably have the hearing after that. After the hearing they vote.
I don't know man, this is fairly difficult to get around...
“The decisions of the Association made in accordance with the foregoing procedure shall be final, binding, and conclusive, and each Member and Owner waives any and all recourse to any court of law to review any such decision.”
If he did have a case it would have to be more on whether the Constitution itself is legal. And considering the fact he agree to it, I just can't see it. But an argument as to whether he violated the Constitution or not... the Constitution says will be decided by the owners. So he can't argue he didn't willfully violate a clause, because the owners gave themselves the rights to determine that.
I am not sure why you guys are still indulging Ak in this endless circle jerk. The only basis for his opinions is his unquestioning belief in his own brilliance. He obviously does not even have a passing familiarity with how long things take to sort out in our legal system when both sides have deep pockets.
He is confusing his desired outcome with the most likely outcome.
He is confusing his desired outcome with the most likely outcome.
According to the Constitution it will take about 20 days. They want to get the owner out as quick as possible. And you guys are doing the same thing by saying this will go on forever because you watch so much law & order that you think because he is rich he can just hold this up. Like I said from the beginning, the NBA has the ultimate say in who is in the association, not some court.
First of all, don't tell me who I should and shouldn't post to, If you don't like my post, ignore them. you are a liar(the proof of which is in this thread for all to see, so it's no surprise that you're carefully avoidig addressing that issue-and, btw, we have spoken before o. this forum, so, you lied about THAT, too. Like I said, you lie a lot..
Your moral outrage has been duly noted. I am surprised you don't "solve" the forum's "problem" by "depriving" the forum of your "influential" presence. Of course, by continuing to refuse to respond to my actual comments, it is very obvious that you have no reply to what I said, and that you're a pompous, lying hypocrite, to boot. But DO carry on NOT getting into a pissing.contest with me, lol.
