At a crucial point in the season (just before tip-off when they are trying to generate excitement for the season) the association admits that at least 1/2 of its refs have violated both the letter and the spirit of the league's clearly defined rules, yet stern decides that it is indeed the rules which are outdated and out of line - not the officials..so stern decides that:

"Our ban on gambling is absolute, and in my view it is too absolute, too harsh and was not particularly well-enforced over the years," Stern said. "We're going to come up with a new set of rules that make sense."

compare this situation w/ last years playoffs:

At a crucial juncture (the real nba finals, with everyone watching) two high-profile players violate the letter but not the spirit of the league's clearly defined rules yet stern holds firm behind a ridiculous and outdated rule and suspends the players, ending one team's season and penalizing atheletes for being competative and caring about their teamates.

Isn't this just a coincidence that the first group are just 'upstanding' white guys who just want to have a little fun in the offseason,
while the second group consists of black atheletes who stern thinks must be pinned up, dressed up and kept under control or they might start attacking or stealing or kill and rape people.

This seems a little bit on the racist side to me. Go ahead and call me a racist.

I think it has more to do with Stern not wanting to own up to the fact that the integrity of his league is under fire. He is in denial/cover up mode.


[Edited by - Panos on 26-10-2007 12:20 PM]

Solace I don't expect you to get it.

Second of all, when he upheld the "letter of the law" in the other situation, was there not also a group of black athletes that also benefited from his decision? It was awful for one team, great for the other.

While it is very interesting to see how Stern will absolutely stick to the letter of the law in some situations and revert back to the spirit of the law in others, race has nothing to do with it.

[Edited by - mythfaze on 10-26-2007 12:34 PM]

Posted by playa2:



At a crucial point in the season (just before tip-off when they are trying to generate excitement for the season) the association admits that at least 1/2 of its refs have violated both the letter and the spirit of the league's clearly defined rules, yet stern decides that it is indeed the rules which are outdated and out of line - not the officials..so stern decides that:

"Our ban on gambling is absolute, and in my view it is too absolute, too harsh and was not particularly well-enforced over the years," Stern said. "We're going to come up with a new set of rules that make sense."

compare this situation w/ last years playoffs:

At a crucial juncture (the real nba finals, with everyone watching) two high-profile players violate the letter but not the spirit of the league's clearly defined rules yet stern holds firm behind a ridiculous and outdated rule and suspends the players, ending one team's season and penalizing atheletes for being competative and caring about their teamates.

Isn't this just a coincidence that the first group are just 'upstanding' white guys who just want to have a little fun in the offseason,
while the second group consists of black atheletes who stern thinks must be pinned up, dressed up and kept under control or they might start attacking or stealing or kill and rape people.

This seems a little bit on the racist side to me. Go ahead and call me a racist.

Are all reps white?
And also: is any non-black white?
Or Whites are just direct descendants of white slave owners from the South? So are all NBA reps coming from the South?

Had the league made an adjustment to its rule mid playoffs I'm sure playa would have been posting a theory about the NBA wanting the white Steve Nash to win a championship.

My guess is that he saw the amount of NBA officials that were involved with this situation. He knows if he fires all of them his league goes down the tubes. This probably has influenced his decision.

Is it possible that Stern's motivations are based on race? Yes. To me the evidence doesn't really point in that direction. Therefore I will do what I do with every other person on the face of the earth. Give him the benefit of the doubt and not try to guess as to what type of person he is. I don't know the situation so I don't know his reasoning. So it's unfair for me to call him a racist based on having 10% of the information.

You guys are alright, would have you over for dinner too bad we live to far away.

^^^ laugh ^^^

This flexible, common sense approach makes no sense given his dictator-like handling of the Spurs/Suns playoff debacle. His slippery ways seems to be catching up to him and he is making ish up as he goes along. I have no respect for this guy.

The worst of the big three commish, hands down.

Yo killa , I know what makes america what it is. Going to far ? ha ha coming from you that makes me wanna laugh.

Do you think people really care what's not being done to them...I don't think so.



[Edited by - playa2 on 27-10-2007 10:10]

Posted by playa2:

Solace I don't expect you to get it.

You do' carry a chip on your shoulder playa and no one can do anything for that.