HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA
Uh, spectacular fail. Actually, in this context "willful" means:
intending the result which actually conies to pass ; [referring to acts which are intentional, conscious and directed toward achieving a purpose.]
In other words, you absolute moron, in order for the act to be 'willful' Sterling would have to have the conversation knowing the results of the conversation would result in bad publicity for the NBA. Which of course why a law professor was asking aloud how it could be willful and you substituted your comically - never been to law school, never read a legal brief or court opinion - ignorant judgement for the law professor's.
Remember, idiot "Law is Complex"
You little embarrassment, you.
he willfully made racist comments to a girl he presumed liked him in a private conversation
it's kinda silly to argue those comments were willfully intended to go public and bring damage to the league
somebody is helping to make a case for his opposition
it's kinda silly to argue those comments were willfully intended to go public and bring damage to the league
somebody is helping to make a case for his opposition
ARod can return after one year, Sterling is banned for life. Not quite the same, don't you think? ARod can return to baseball by accepting his suspension. I admit that ARod is at an age where a whole season could potentially mean a lifetime ban, but I'm sure in ARod's mind he's coming back. Sterling is done if he accepts his punishment. Not the same scenario. I won't pretend I know what Sterling will do, could see it going either way.
plus there's a precedent established already and people have been punished. A better analogy would be how they tried to make A-Rod's punishment much worse than anyone else's, and he actually was successful in having them rescind unprecedented penalties.
So A-Rod is a great example, for Sterling
You know perfectly well that A-Fraud's ban is almost certainly a lifetime ban, but that isn't even the point: A-Fraud is a member of a club of sorts, where a 3rd party intervened, and made a ruling he didn't like, just like Sterling will. A-Fraud initially threatened to sue everybody with a pulse, just like Sterling is. After cooling down and examining the situation(and, presumably, getting some legal advice from lawyers who wouldn't take on a losing case just to get a fat check), A-Fraud quietly dropped his lawsuit threads. Now, Sterling is a litigious asshole, he has, in the past, forced players that he owed money to take him to court-and lost-and been taken to court for discrimination, and paid the largest settlement of its kind at the time to the plaintiffs, so, I'm not gonna flatly state that he'll fold his tent, but I AM saying, if he DOESN'T, he's got no shot. The NBA founders didn't cobble that agreement together in 10 minutes on the fly, I'm confident that they structured their club to be able to jettison scum like Sterling with a minimum of muss and fuss.
Lol, that's according to federal/state laws. Not according to the NBA Constitution. The NBA owners do not need to prove if he knew or didn't know that he was being recorded. Means absolutely nothing according to their Association.
Like I said, you know very little about just everything. Lol. Willful in the context of the NBA Constitution simply means he committed an act that adversely affects the Association. They don't even need to prove it.
WTF are YOU talking about? The following makes it clear that the Yankees are saving a big chunk of the money owned him, including the incentive laden bonuses, which in his delusional mind, he probably believes he can still achieve. Last but not least, what are you, his agent? How do YOU know if he doesn't care if he plays again?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbad...million-today-despite-season-long-suspension/
