The NYT Declan Hill Piece Was So Big, I Didn't Even Include My Second Pre-World Cup Point Of The Day

Shows how much of a dork I can be sometimes.

I said there were two major stories already surfaced on the World Cup, and only gave the first one.

The second was a friendly held in the UK between Scotland and Nigeria this past Wednesday (May 28, 2014).

The BBC reported on the day before the match that the home federation, the Scottish Football Association, had been alerted to the possibility that this match (and other international World Cup tune-ups) could be on the verge of being fixed events (not unlike the matches outlined in the New York Times piece I talked about earlier today).

Reactions were predictably guarded, and the match was on.

This, then, happened:

It's the 32nd minute, and Nigeria leads 1-0.

There's no dispute in this video -- the Nigerian goalkeeper, Azubuike Egwuekwe (who is on the provisional team list for Nigeria for Brazil 2014), literally throws the ball away from a header and into his own net.

The goal is disallowed for a foul, however.  The fact remains, without dispute, that Egwuekwe threw the ball into his own net for an own goal.

Courtesy of CBSSports.com's article on this incident and other games of the international soccer day, here's the Nigerian defense successfully scoring for Scotland 20 minutes later to give Scotland a 2-1 lead.

THIS MATCH WAS FIXED.  And not just by Egwuekwe, but he's the first you look at.

Ladbrokes had odds of 13-10 (+130) for the Over on 2.5 goals.

Nigeria would score late to level the match at 2-2, the final result.  A draw would've gotten you 11-5 odds (+220).

This World Cup Is Going To Be A Bigger Farce Than Usual

We are now less than two weeks from kicking off the World Cup in Brazil.

I have at least one report from Brazil which indicates this blog MAY be forced to boycott this event too.

I have two more which indicate it probably won't matter -- that this World Cup is about to become the most corrupt in history.

The story which might force the boycott comes retweeted from Declan Hill:  Homeless children in Brazil are actually being killed to "sanitize" Brazil for the World Cup next month.

In the months preceding the World Cup, Declan Hill reported on his blog that gunfights, common in the streets of Rio de Janiero, had prompted a violent police crackdown, killing dozens.

Now, it apparently has gone further, in that homeless children appear to be being killed to sanitize an increasingly-agitated and violent Brazil in the weeks proceeding soccer's biggest event.

If that's not enough to spur calls for the cancellation of the World Cup in the nation which was formerly (but no longer) soccer's greatest nation, listen to these two bombshells from Declan Hill and others.

The first is a New York Times two-part revelation by Declan Hill and Jerè Longman on match-fixing surrounding the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.

Only part one has been published as of the writing of this blog post, and it's already explosive:

• The May 31, 2010 pre-World Cup friendly between South Africa and Guatemala was fixed, as well as four other matches in the lead-up to the World Cup tournament.
• The referee of the aforementioned match was paid $60,000 to fix the match for the hosts.  Especially suspicious were two handball penalties called where the ball never touched the hands of the players -- one ball was chested down legally and called a penalty.  Video of this and other indiscretions of this referee can be found in this report.  South Africa would win the match 5-0.
• This paid off handsomely for match-fixers on the "over" on the total, which had started at approximately 2 2/3 goals, but would balloon to about 3.5 by kickoff, and 4 in in-match wagering.
• He was also given a number of commemorative South African coins to augment his deposit, which was believed to total as much as $100,000 in dirty money.
• The referee in question, from Niger, was two years from FIFA's mandatory retirement age for referees, and FIFA (quite conveniently) held off long enough to brush aside the allegations after this referee was retired.

However, the most devastating portions of this first part of the report come in the details:

• The referee, one Ibrahim Chaibou, was appointed not by any sanctioning body for the friendly match.  Instead, he was installed for the match by an organization named "Football 4 U International", which, as part of a referee exchange program, promised to provide African referees which were FIFA-certified for the pre-World Cup friendlies, in exchange for South African referees who would be refereeing matches in the Middle East going forward.
• "Football 4 U" is a Singaporean company which is a front for the match-fixers in Singapore.
• One of them is named Wilson Raj Perumal, who is an executive with "Football 4 U".  He claims to be the world's most prolific match-fixer.  Perumal, later in 2010, actually sent a team of amateur imposters, masquerading as the national team of Togo, to play Bahrain in a supposed "match".  (Chaibou was also the official of this match.)

Another "Football 4 U" associate offered three different South African officials bribes to allow "Football 4 U" to circumvent the normal FIFA processes of match official selection to install their officials instead.  Two took this associate up on the offer.

• In addition to the four other matches which were fixed previous to the tournament, ten other matches were targeted, including the United States friendly with Australia, which both countries caught on to and promptly averted disaster.  The three Bosnian officials assigned by the cheats to that game would all be life-banned later for match-fixing.  Three South Africans did the match instead.
• After the match with Guatemala, the (non-corrupt elements of the) South African federation caught on, and demanded no further funny business for a final tune-up friendly for the hosts against Denmark.
• Three Tanzanian crooks referees were installed by "Football 4 U" for this match.  The front company had also attempted access to the officials at halftime of this and other matches it was involved in.
• One was backed out of the situation for some unknown reason, and two different officials (one installed by "Football 4 U" -- Chaibou! -- and one installed by the proper authorities (a respected South African, which, though unusual, was deemed necessary under the circumstances)) were preparing to replace him.
• Chaibou was actually jailed in a locker room during the match by the respected officials, and the South African presided over the match.
• The "total" on that match was three goals, but, with a fair official, only one was scored (South Africa got it to win).  This cost the match-fixers at least a million dollars.
• This prompted death threats against the South African officials...
• ... who appeased "Football 4 U" by allowing them to select the officials (and, hence, fix) the match between Nigeria and North Korea the next day.  Many legitimate bettors were taken to the cleaners in the 3-1 Nigerian win.

Perhaps the most explosive claim of this part is that Perumal actually gave a price for the fixing of a 2010 World Cup match!

• After the World Cup began, it was clear Perumal wanted to make the statement that he could fix any match, so he sought out officials on the World Cup list who could be bought.
• He found a potential target and offered him $400,000 to fix a World Cup match.
• Thankfully, the official was aware of Perumal's reputation and refused the offer, but only on the grounds that the official felt Perumal would talk about it too much.

Does anybody want to continue to believe that we, at best, are not going to see a replay of the clearly-fixed South Korea/Japan World Cup 12 years ago, where heavyweights Italy and Spain were both ousted in fixed matches by South Korea through suspicious calls?


Especially in a once-beautiful country in which the veneer is now clearly coming off??

I May Have To Stand Seriously Corrected

The hearing to expel Donald Sterling has been cancelled.  The proposed sale to Ballmer and the incapacitation ruling on Donald have placated, at the very least, the concerns of the NBA as to Donald Sterling.

The NBA, through the Associated Press, announced the move tonight.

The only questions remaining now are the ones surrounding Ballmer, and whether the $2 billion sale will be approved by the owners.

With Donald Sterling (as least as far as the league is concerned, the lawsuit will go forward) out of the picture, the sale would appear, now, to be legal, since Rochelle was never banned from dealings with the Clippers -- only that the players and league didn't want Rochelle involved in the Clippers going forward.

It now appears that, as long as no real objections come up, Steve Ballmer will have rewritten the entire sports landscape in North America with this bold move.

Because every valuation of a North American pro sports franchise now has to double, if not triple.

Final NBA Conference Finals Study

EASTERN CONFERENCE

INDIANA PACERS (1 seed) VS. MIAMI HEAT (2)

(Miami wins series 4-2.  This is Miami's fourth consecutive Eastern Conference Championship.  The Heat are only the third team in NBA history to do this, in either conference.  The Celtics won the Eastern Conference for a solid decade, with 9 titles between 1957 and 1966.  The Lakers won the Western Conference every year from 1982 to 1985, winning two titles in those four years.)

Game 1 (May 18):  Indiana 107 - Miami 96

Miami was the favorite, 2 - 2.5 at most places, 1.5 at the Wynn, 3 at the Papermill.  (UPSET)
O/U:  181.5 - 182.5 183 at the Atlantis.  (OVER by 20+!)

Free Throws:  Indiana 29-37  Miami 10-15

ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME???

This is either a wildly-deliberate means to extend the series, a massive mind-fuck on Vegas (who was big on Miami), or something else is going on here.

Game 2 (May 20):  Miami 87 - Indiana 83

Miami was a 2 - 3 point favorite.  (COVER)
O/U:  184.5 - 185.5 with 186 at Jerry's Nugget.  (UNDER)

Free Throws:  Miami 11-18  Indiana 10-15

Wow.  22 less free throws for Indiana, and the series goes tied.  What a coincidence!

Game 3 (May 24):  Miami 99 - Indiana 87

Miami was a 6 - 6.5 point favorite.  (COVER -- was coming down from 7, so money was the wrong way.)
O/U:  Anywhere from 182 to 183.5, depending on where you got it.  (OVER)

Free Throws:  Miami 15-20  Indiana 19-25

Game 4 (May 26):  Miami 102 - Indiana 90

Miami was a 6 - 6.5 point favorite.  (COVER)
O/U:  182 - 183.  (OVER)

Free Throws:  Miami 30-34  Indiana 11-17

Three-peat train a-rolling...

Game 5 (May 28):  Indiana 93 - Miami 90

Many books had this game a Pick, but those that didn't had Miami by 1 - 1.5. (UPSET at those.)
O/U:  183 at some books, but 183.5 - 184 at others.  (PUSH at 183, UNDER at 183.5-184.)

Free Throws:  Indiana 13-22  Miami 7-8

OH!!!!  So 54 free throws in Miami for Games 3 and 4, EIGHT in Game 5, a game Miami bolted to a large run to get a decent halftime lead.  YEAH RIGHT!!!

And LeBron doesn't take the final shot to try to get it to overtime. 7 points, and 5 fouls in 13 minutes.  Yeah, they didn't want a Game 6...

Game 6 (May 30):  Miami 117 - Indiana 92

Miami was a 8 - 8.5 point favorite, with a 7.5 at the Mirage.  (BIG COVER)
O/U:  182.5 - 183.5.  (BIG OVER)

Free Throws:  Miami 18-21  Indiana 18-24

Series in Review:  Miami makes it four straight Eastern Conference titles, just three games over the minimum.  And anyone paying attention knows the two in this series were both gift-wrapped Indiana home wins, so it was clear from Jump Street that Miami had no real competition in the first place, and pretty much waltzes to a fourth consecutive NBA Finals.

But as of about 10 PM Pacific time, as I formulate the rest of this, some joker on Wikipedia actually had, on the NBA Champions page, Oklahoma City defeating the Heat in seven games.  Let's see how long that stays up. (ETA 5/31/14 1557:  Since removed.)

Miami covered the four games it won, they were the favorite in all six games.  (Favorite 4-2 SU and ATS.)
Over was also 4-2.
 
WESTERN CONFERENCE

SAN ANTONIO SPURS (1 seed) VS. OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDER (2)

(San Antonio wins series 4-2.  Two in a row for the Spurs (last year's Finals went seven).  Sixth Western Conference title since the Jordan Rules finally shoved Foolish and Wretched Ballhog out the door.)

Game 1 (May 19):  San Antonio 122 - Oklahoma City 105

San Antonio was a 6 point favorite on most of the Strip, 5.5 at the Stations and the Wynn (BIG COVER)
O/U:  208.5 - 209.5 with 210 at the South Point and the Golden Nugget (OVER)

Free Throws:  San Antonio 13-17  Oklahoma City 19-23

Game 2 (May 21):  San Antonio 112 - Oklahoma City 77

San Antonio was a 5 - 5.5 point favorite.  (BIG COVER -- money was coming in the wrong way!)
O/U:  210.5 - 211 (UNDER)

Free Throws:  San Antonio 21-23  Oklahoma City 5-10

Is the MVP run over, or are we going to see something like the 2006 Finals later in the series?

Game 3 (May 25):  Oklahoma City 106 - San Antonio 97

Oklahoma City was a 2.5 point favorite, with a 2 at the Golden Nugget.  (COVER)
O/U:  Again, depending where you got it, anywhere from 208 to 209.5.  (ALL UNDER)

Free Throws:  Oklahoma City 26-31  San Antonio 15-16

I guess not!!

Game 4 (May 27):  Oklahoma City 105 - San Antonio 92

Oklahoma City was a 2 -2.5 point favorite.  (COVER)
O/U:  Again, depending where you got it, anywhere from 207.5 to 209.  (ALL UNDER)

Free Throws:  Oklahoma City 24-31  San Antonio 17-22

Game 5 (May 29):  San Antonio 117 - Oklahoma City 89

San Antonio was a 5 point favorite, 5.5 at the Peppermill.  (BIG COVER)
O/U:  206.5 - 208 (UNDER -- SUCKERS bet it off the push at 206!)

Free Throws:  San Antonio 26-30  Oklahoma City 13-20

This series is so obviously going seven.  The league has it's hands around this series' throat.

Game 6 (May 31):  San Antonio 112 - Oklahoma City 107 (OVERTIME)

Oklahoma City was a 3-4 point favorite.  (UPSET)
O/U:  206.5 - 207 with a 206 at the Atlantis.  (OVER with the overtime, needed it, as regulation was 101-101.)

Free Throws:  San Antonio 25-34  Oklahoma City 29-33

Series in Review:  The NBA had it's pulse on this series the whole time, and, basically, the team-wide strength of San Antonio as the NBA's star power in the Post-Ballhog Era won out over Kevin Durant's first NBA MVP award.

Favorites were 5-1 against the number, four of them quite large victories against the line.
The over was 2-4.

Game 1, Thursday night, in San Antonio.

Southeastern Conference Chief: Autonomy or Secession

Enjoy that March Madness tournament?

Might be the last one you get.

Today, Southeastern Conference commissioner Mike Silva basically said that the Big Five conferences (the BCS/CFP-confederated conferences) can no longer work under the NCAA model and will either need autonomy to create their own by-laws, or they will be forced to secede the five conferences to a Division IV model.

These comments are made less than two weeks before the beginning of the long-awaited O'Bannon trial on suing the NCAA for an illegal business model.  Because of limitations on what damages they can seek, this trial will be only before a judge, making it less likely that bribe-able fans can alter the outcome.

Silva basically has said that the day of the NCAA, as it has stood, is over:

""We hope everyone realizes we are moving into a new era and this is the way to retain your collegiate model. It would be a disappointment and in my view a mistake not to adapt the model. This is a historic moment. If we don't seize the moment, we'll make a mistake.""

Basically, he either wants the NCAA to give him Division IV, or the SEC will lead in taking a Division IV model.

Sterling To Sue: That Took About Fifteen Hours For Two Billion Not To Be Enough

According to NBC News on their Twitter account:

"Donald Sterling to sue the NBA for $1 billion http://nbcnews.to/1mS8zbb  pic.twitter.com/JOvPeLev7g "

That should basically put the kibosh on the Ballmer sale, for several of the reasons outlined in the Michael McCann SI article last night.  (Review all of the points in his list, save the Seattle one.)

This, on the same day that we now find out that the reason Donald Sterling was ruled mentally incompetent is that he is diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease.

It's On -- The Shit Has Hit The Fan

Steve Ballmer has purchased the Los Angeles Clippers -- at least as far as Donald and Rochelle Sterling are concerned -- for $2 billion.

Many media reports have broken the story late Thursday night, Pacific time.

This, almost certainly, represents about a 9.0 on the NBA's Richter Scale.

At the end of the day, this gets the Sterlings out of the NBA, and, one would think, at first, that will satisfy everybody.

Nope.

There are a number of problems with this sale:

1) Who has the authority to do this in the first place?  According to SI.com (from ESPN), Donald Sterling has now been declared mentally incompetent for his own affairs.  This was done today.

I guess my first thought of the matter is:  How convenient!!!  Rochelle basically gets her husband declared what he almost-certainly IS.  The guy is probably dangerously mentally incompetent for what he can do with his money and the like with how far his brain probably is gone.

So I have no dispute as to the declaration, with how he's been conducting himself.

That said, you would think the NBA would want some degree of words on this, and, not only that, there still is the point that it has become clear that Rochelle Sterling is also no longer welcome in the National Basketball Assocation either...

2) ... which, according to the main SI report on this subject, is not going to be the case:

"The agreement with Ballmer could also allow Shelly Sterling to maintain some association with the team, according to ESPN.com.  "

That's not going to fly.  It has long been speculated that an end-around to try to keep Rochelle Sterling or Donald Sterling somehow involved with the team, and it appears that speculation is correct.

With the NBPA still threatening a strike if at least Donald is not gone, I'd be very pressed to think this includes Rochelle.

So I think this, alone, will torpedo the deal.

3) And then there's the Seattle question.

Yes, Ballmer said this (main SI article, linked above):

“If I get interested in the Clippers, it would be for Los Angeles,” Ballmer said [earlier this month to the Wall Street Journal]. “I don’t work anymore, so I have more geographic flexibility than I did a year, year-and-a half ago. Moving them anywhere else would be value destructive.”

So, Steve, it's value-destructive enough to keep the Clippers in Los Angeles, and NOT value-destructive enough to create a gaming system that you try to ram through the public at E3 2013 that is not only invasive to the gamer's play, but to their very lives (and then get your ass ripped so badly that you've backtracked so far that the only way you might get equity in the current-generation's video-game console battle is for Sony to effectively bankrupt itself.

In my opinion, Steve Ballmer is a bombastic shyster, and there's no way in Hell I think he would pay $2,000,000,000 for that team and not stab LA in the back as a final FUCK YOU from the Sterlings to LA and the NBA...

In short, I think he's a lying sack of shit.

4) What this sale will (regardless of who ends up owning the team, or what price) do to the landscape of American sports and the franchises with which they are played.

My main-contributor friend came up with a wonderful point earlier tonight -- before the reports of the Ballmer sale:

If the Clippers just went to being worth $2,000,000,000, what does that make even the Jacksonville Jaguars (the LEAST valuable NFL franchise) worth?

(Much less the Cowboys...)

It almost takes any valuable franchise of professional sports in North America, and doubles the value of that franchise instantaneously -- at minimum!!!

And that's going to have a seismic effect on sports in this country.

Getting back to the sale itself, Michael McCann, sports-law expert for SI, has posted an article with six points the NBA will probably attempt to enforce before this sale would be allowed.

Here are my thoughts on those six points.

1) Sterling's gone from the NBA, and he won't challenge it.

Perhaps the best case (and my friend has already brought this up) for this sale, if all other factors fall in line, the "long national nightmare" of the NBA can be brought to a quick end, with as little mayhem as possible.

I have believed, since the first I heard of the process to try to get a wet-ink signature for the team by the Tuesday 1 PM EDT hearing to throw LACBC out of the NBA, that this sale by the Sterlings was an effort to effectively sue the NBA for trying to throw them out, without suing the NBA for trying to throw them out (because they can't under the Constitution and By-Laws).

Today's developments about Sterling's mental capacity, though they should come as no surprise to anybody, should bring into further question how it took into 2014 before the league finally said "No more!"

And then there's the question as to whether Donald will challenge the fitness ruling Rochelle has received.

On top of that, one has to wonder if this is additional legal maneuvering to basically counteract the charge that his statements are those of LACBC Inc.

Thumbs down, because of the allowance that Rochelle will still have involvement.

2) The Sterling mental ruling doesn't present it's own problems.

Frankly, it presents MANY problems (above and beyond control of this accelerated sale), from not only the act of expelling LACBC Inc., to whether the NBA is, in fact, negligent for allowing LACBC Inc. to stick around so long with such a clearly incompetent (and the jury can now be out as to how legally you take that statement!) owner...

Could somebody with an axe to grind state the NBA, in allowing such an incompetent person to own a team, has violated it's own Duty to Loyalty to put on contests with highest integrity?

Thumbs down, because, unless Donald Sterling is all but dead, I can't see this passing muster on any number of levels!

3) Rochelle Sterling is gone.

Thumbs down, the reports say she will have a role within the Clippers.

4) Releases from the Sterlings against each other ("mutual release") and with the NBA.

And given Donald's "sterling" reputation of lying through his teeth, I don't even think they'd accept a legal release from him at this point, competent or not.

Thumbs down.

The league would need to make sure both Sterlings don't take further action against each other to spurn this sale, and, later, don't sue the NBA for this action (this being not unlike a criminal plea deal -- a release from later action is always considered part of a plea agreement).  This, to me, would be against anything Donald is about.

5) The lifetime ban and fine payment stand.

Thumbs down, at least on the fine payment, especially if the incompetency ruling is retroactive to the tapes or beyond -- there could be a challenge that he was out of his mind when he said them, and is, hence, not responsible for his conduct.

6) The team must stay in Los Angeles.

This is probably the one step of the situation that I can only call on personal bias on.

I can only state that I cannot believe Ballmer would pay $2 billion and keep the team in LA on my feelings with respect to his conduct at Microsoft, especially the spewing bullshit he pulled last year at the announcement of the XBox One.

I do not believe the NBA will approve this sale, on any number of grounds, as I outline above.

I do not believe the intention of this sale is for the NBA to approve it.

I believe this is an attempt by the Sterlings, knowing that they still have the league by the balls to a certain extent, to maximize their legal leverage.

Two Billion Dollars of Excrement Is About To Hit the Air Circulator

Oh no...

ESPN, through the Los Angeles Times, has received the top bidders in the first round of the (IMHO, illegal) sale of the LA Clippers orchestrated by Rochelle Sterling.

And, safe to say, this court battle is going to get joined hardcore.

At least three of the potential bidders have exceeded a billion dollars in the first round of bidding:

Tony Ressler and Steve Karsh have apparently offered $1,200,000,000.

David Geffen has offered the Sterlings $1,600,000,000.

But the current leader in the clubhouse is former Microsoft head Steve Ballmer, who has, in the first of two rounds of bidding in a process which is supposed to complete Monday, offered $2,000,000,000 for the Los Angeles Clippers.

No word on his plans with respect to Seattle...

And now, let's let it get even MORE confusing!!!!

SI.com reports that Sterling has disavowed any such effort for Rochelle Sterling to attempt to sell the Los Angeles Clippers, even though Rochelle is claimed to have billion-dollar bids already on the table.

WTF is going on here...

Sterling: And the Excrement Gets Even Deeper

Well...

Here are the latest two fronts on the Sterling war against the NBA and all good taste...

1) Shelley Sterling has gone ahead with her (IMHO, illegal) attempt to sell the team, with early bids coming in to her believed to be in the range of $1 - 1.2 billion, ESPN reports.

This is becoming so obviously a tactic to force the situation into open court, it's not even funny.

On surface, the maneuver actually makes sense.

Sterling can't directly sue the NBA for the banishment or the almost-certain decision (though I no longer believe it will be unanimous, unless Mark Cuban is forced, through gritted teeth, by Commissioner Silver to make it so) for the removal of LACBC Inc. from the league, scheduled for June 3 at 1 PM EDT.

So what he does instead is, in violation of his banishment from the league on April 29 (and probably to set up a court battle to overturn it), he gives up his share of control over the Clippers to Rochelle Sterling and allows Rochelle to begin the process to sell the team.

What he's probably done is forced the league to contract the Clippers.

It is now believed that an agreement-in-principle will be reached on Monday (after a second round of bidding this weekend), and the Sterlings believe that will be enough to placate the NBA and the like.

Too bad the NBA has to approve any sale.

I would have to believe that the result of this will be a protracted ownership fight in court with the NBA vs. the Sterlings and whoever wins this bidding war, and that will force the league to attempt to contract the Clippers (because this sale is, as of April 29, a complete illegality to the fact that Sterling cannot associate with or make any business decisions regarding the Clippers).

As much of a shithead slimeball this idiot Donald Sterling is, I think it's clear he has a solid strategy here:

a) Simultaneous with this effort, challenge the removal under the By-Laws and Constitution -- I'll get to that in a bit.
b) Have a buyer in place before the June 3 vote.
c) Once he loses the vote, the league would then have to approve the new buyer.
d) But since that buyer came from an illegal action by Sterling (only the new NBA-installed CEO has the power that the Sterlings assert), the NBA would probably be forced to reject this buyer.
e) At which point Sterling sues for his property rights (the actual property of the Clippers), since he believes that, by the banishment, he is deprived of his property rights without due process of the law.
f) This probably forces the league to contract the Clippers, or conduct next season with 29 teams and basically put Blake Griffin, Chris Paul, etc. on the free-agent market immediately.

Which brings us to the second piece of Sterling news...

2) The official Sterling written challenge to the charges has been filed and made public.

A sizeable .PDF file from ESPN (the NBA did not provide a copy of the response -- it actually was found by the Associated press) is linked here.

The NBA did, however, through the Associated Press, highlight five main legal challenges that the Sterlings have:

Point One: The Living Room Defense

It starts right off the top with the Introduction to the response:

"On the basis of remarks made in a living room during a “lovers’ quarrel,” which were illegally recorded and then disclosed months later in retaliation for a lawsuit by Mr. Sterling’s wife, the NBA seeks to forcibly strip Mr. Sterling and his wife of their ownership interest in the Los Angeles Clippers. The NBA’s use of this illegal recording constitutes a clear and blatant violation of Mr. Sterling’s California constitutional rights. The authors of the charge did not have the courage, decency, or honesty to acknowledge the circumstances surrounding Mr. Sterling’s jealous rant or even that the source of their information was borne from the “fruit of the poisonous tree.”

It basically brings into the fore that this is actually an action against who Donald Sterling is as a person, not what he is as an owner (which, of course, should immediately be countered with his team's winning percentage over this tenure, the worst in the history of North American pro sports with 15+ years as owner) or a businessman.

I think it's time the courts really take a look at -- especially in the day and age of social media and how people are routinely getting fired for stupid statements they make on social media about their jobs or supervisors -- the freedom of speech as it relates to a person's job, especially when it does (as in Sterling's case) play into criminally-illegal acts he is known and stipulated to have committed with respect to racism in housing practices and probably employment practices with the Clippers as well.

No secret can be made that this is an action out of convenience -- a failure to expel Sterling probably terminates play, possibly permanently with such an extended litigious situation. He's gone, or the bulk of the NBA players are gone.

Because of his racism, revealed here, the NBA cannot continue play with him involved with the league in any capacity.

So regardless of where Silver and the other Owners/Governors got this information, they either act or fold their cards.

Point Two: How Many Parties Must Consent -- Which State's Laws Decide?

There's another problem with the previous (and subsequent) claims: Sterling asserts his rights under the California Constitution, where the NBA's actions take place under the New York Constitution.

I do believe the NBA has been extremely sloppy over Donald Sterling (in fact, the continued questions of how Sterling's racism could've been allowed under the David Stern investigation probably should've been brought up by Sterling's lawyers here, in saying that most of the charges relate to the tapes they believe to be illegal).

But this almost forces the situation into an open court battle, since the NBA will state that, since Sterling agreed to the NBA Constitution, he agreed to all challenges being done under New York law (where only one party needs to consent to a recorded conversation), so his claims of California protection (in which both parties need to consent) are void.

Point Three: Consistency of Punishments

Here, Sterling may have a point.

Whether it's worth anything is another question.

Why is Mark Cuban allowed to remain in the league after $1.6 million in fines for comments against the integrity of the league and it's officiating?

(Side comment: I could easily see that particular case being addressed shortly after the June 3 meeting. I can't think that Cuban's comments to that one conference are not going to be investigated by the league.)

How about Kobe Bryant and his homophobic slur against the official?

(Side comment: I do agree that I believe that Bryant should've been banned for the playoffs and perhaps a significant portion of the following season, but I also believe it clear that the NBA ensured that Bryant's Lakers (and, later, Joachim Noah's similar slur against a fan ensuring for the Bulls) were eliminated quickly in the playoffs -- leaving basically Cuban's Mavericks as a no-choice.)

That's just two examples, but there is no precedent for such a removal under the NBA's rules. The closest precedent is the removal of Marge Schott from ownership of the Cincinnati Reds, but is that going to fly with the NBA?

And so he then asks why, for similar offenses (and, in this way, he is correct -- the NBA's policy of inclusion especially), Bryant and Noah are still in the league and they are trying to get rid of him.

Point Four: The Time Frame

This one, he will lose, because he does not have the rights, as he would as a criminal defendant, to waive a speedy trial.

The NBA sets forth a strict timetable for this purpose: Charge -- Five Days -- Response -- Ten Days -- Hearing.

He won't be able to challenge that, again, through that he agreed to the NBA Constitution in the first place.

Part Five: See Above. Who Would the New Owners Be?

I think Sterling's best cases here are on the consistency question and on the question of who is next?

The more I read information on this subject, the more I believe the simplest/best/only non-players-strike solution to the issue (because an injunction against the league to keep the Clippers and the Sterlings in will almost certainly result in a league-wide work stoppage) might be The Nuclear Option of Zot -- fold the Clippers, create a new expansion franchise, wave your hands and take your chances.

Between this and the O'Bannon lawsuit, we are going to be in court a lot over the summer.

Daniel Carcillo needs a lot more than ten games...

Daniel Carcillo of the New York Rangers has just received a minimum and mandatory 10-game suspension during the playoffs for this:

You see him strike the official in the jaw with his elbow twice-replayed in the clip.  It certainly appears intentional.

The actions took place in a scrum after an incident just earlier in the period, where Montreal's Brandon Prust got a two-game suspension for a high and late shot on a Ranger player.

But that doesn't excuse this.  Carcillo gets the referee with an elbow right in the jaw.

That should be, at minimum, the rest of the playoffs + the first 10 of next year.  That is almost equivalent to a short punch to the jaw of the official.

Here's another angle, from the opening of the Canadian TSN SportsCentre -- yes, TSN is Canada's ESPN -- when the punishments were handed out.

He elbows the linesman 3 times. The one in the jaw is the LAST one.

10 games means he's eligible if the Rangers win the Eastern Conference in 7, and then the Stanley Cup Finals go 7.  He would be eligible for Game 7.

Ban his fucking ass. Playoffs + 10. Playoffs + all of the 2014-15 season and playoffs... Something...

The O'Bannon Lawsuit Will Go To Trial

... and, Friday, the judge set a very short date for the trial to start.

The Ed O'Bannon, et. al. antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA (largely seen as, at the very least, a large step toward the end of that organization) has been ordered to trial. All delaying motions have been denied, and ESPN reports that the trial will begin on June 9.

Sounds like we'll be spending a lot of time in court this summer...

After Cuban's Comments, the Sterling Charges Were Becoming Fishy Enough...

Things just got fishier today.

Media reports are coming out today that Rochelle Sterling is prepared to agree to a forced sale of the Clippers as long as money terms can be agreed with by the NBA.

Reports have been coming out in a number of media outlets that Rochelle Sterling and the NBA are in discussions as to agree to sell the Clippers before the proposed June 3 hearing to expel LACBC Inc. from the league entirely. Reports which surfaced at TMZ (who broke the tapes in the first place) and ESPN indicate that Donald Sterling has officially surrendered the Clippers.

Given the comments released yesterday by Mark Cuban, this is very suspicious.

Doubly, given the banishment from the league of Sterling about three weeks ago by Commissioner Adam Silver, he is in no legal position to authorize such a sale at this time.

The question is, at this juncture, does this not make this process moot by Rochelle, effectively forcing the June 3rd hearing...

Which brings us back to the first reason that the timing on this comes across as quite suspicious: Mark Cuban.

After having a day to reflect on his comments (and, more correctly, their timing and ramifications thereof), today's reports come across as especially puzzling, because, as Mike Lupica of the New York Daily News put it, that was the best news Sterling's lawyers could've gotten.

The longer I muse on the comments, the more certain I become: The NBA has to charge Cuban for many of the same offenses they charge Sterling with under the NBA Constitution. (Most prominently that, by making his own statements with complete disregard of the ramifications for the league's case against Sterling, Cuban has violated his Duty of Loyalty to the NBA.)

Failure to do so turns the entire mess into a witch hunt that could tear the league asunder if Silver and the legal team at the NBA are not very careful.

That said, there is a very simple counter to today's news:

Null and void.

Donald Sterling cannot legally make any action with respect to the Clippers, due to his banishment from the league April 29.

The only person who could actually give Rochelle that authority is NBA-selected CEO of the Clippers Richard Parsons (who has now run into trouble of his own when it was discovered his basketball resume was false!!!), because Sterling's business-ownership interests in the Clippers now reside with Parsons, until the June 3 meeting has the NBA fully seize the team.

The more I read into this, the more I am beginning to believe the only real grounds the NBA have about LACBC Inc. number two:

1) The players strike if Sterling is still in the NBA.
2) The refusal to pay the $2,500,000 fine.

Mark Cuban had best get very careful, very fast...

Two recent stories about the outspoken Dallas Mavericks owner

The first one, a few days ago, sparked an interesting comment to my blog from NFLRanking (he of the 2002 Lakers-Kings series videos), about a story which has surfaced about Mark Cuban and the 2006 NBA Finals.

There are, as of yesterday, now conflicting stories as to the involvement of an FBI agent who, for whatever reason, is rumored to have been investigating the 2006 NBA Finals between Cuban's Dallas Mavericks and the Miami Heat -- the Shaquille O'Neal Miami Heat.

Taking from the Oregonian's John Cazano, Cuban was consulting with an FBI agent after the loss, considering a lawsuit against the NBA for fixing the Finals for the Heat.

The agent, Warren Flagg, 20 years with the FBI, is said by the report to have told Cuban:

"Flagg said of the 2006 Finals. "I told him, 'Sue and you'll win your case,' but he knew he'd be killing the Golden Goose.""

It is believed that the free throws were just far too slanted toward the Heat in the series.

Let's see what we find:

Game 1 (June 8):  Dallas 90 - Miami 80

Dallas 20-26  Miami 7-19

Shaq was 1-9 from the line in Game 1.

Game 2 (June 11)  Dallas 99 - Miami 85

Dallas 23-28  Miami 20-32

Shaq 1-7.

Dallas now leads the series the two games in Dallas to none.  It would be the last game in this series Dallas would win.

Game 3 (June 13)  Miami 98 - Dallas 96

Miami 20-34  Dallas 18-26

Wade was 13-18 from the line in this game.

Dallas was up 83-71 with 8:36 to play.

Game 4 (June 15)  Miami 98 - Dallas 74

Miami 23-36  Dallas 21-27

Pretty balanced here, though Dallas had only 7 fourth quarter points.

Game 5 (June 18)  Miami 101 - Dallas 100 (OVERTIME)

Dallas 21-25...

DWAYNE WADE 21-25!!!

Miami actually got FORTY-NINE free throw attempts in Game 5, making 32.

Only four dozen times, according to Basketball-Reference.com, since 1985, has one team received 49 or more free-throws in a playoff game.

The team receiving that many free-throws is 41-7 (and, once, it happened for both teams). 

Game 6 (June 20)  Miami 95 - Dallas 92

Miami 23-37   Dallas 19-23

Wade was 16-21.

Pretty convincing case that they wanted to give Wade and Shaq a title, eh?

The comment NFLRanking made was simple:  Is someone trying to leak this (almost certainly either the Sterlings or someone with their backing) to force at least Cuban (who is, by far, the most visible owner in the NBA) to back down...

It's certainly likely.

I'd almost bet on it now after today's Fox Sports article...

Speech yesterday at a company conference in Tennessee, and he said a number of interesting things about the Sterling case.

I'm going to take them out of order, because I think that there are some things which need to be said under the context of understanding who Mark Cuban is (with relation to a regular person, and with respect to this Donald Sterling situation).

"On how to keep bigotry out of the NBA: "You don't. There's no law against stupid.""

Actually, Mark, yes there is.  And if you can't keep bigotry out of the NBA, the NBA can no longer (and I use the Statement of Charge against Sterling as a framework) "promote diversity and inclusion".

In fact, the entire statement of charge is an attempt to legislate, LEGALLY, against Sterling's accepted stupidity.

What Mark Cuban does not understand here is that the concept that we declare "natural rights" does not exist in this country.

One does not have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in this country.

One is only afforded the privileges of liberty and pursuing happiness under the condition that those actions do not inhibit the liberty and pursuit of happiness of others.

I can safely say, given my experiences with law enforcement, multiple schools, and various other entities that there is no sufficient manifestation of my own personal rights which do not sufficiently inhibit those of others.

Hence, I do not have those rights on an a priori basis, and the only question as to action/discipline comes to the level of importance (some locally, some far less so) of the victim.

Donald Sterling doesn't have those rights either, when he uses his own to stomp all over Federal housing laws, Federal workplace laws, etc. and so forth.

That's why there most certainly ARE "laws against stupid", and, in fact, the entire claim the NBA has against Sterling is EXACTLY THIS -- that Donald and Rochelle Sterling are so damned stupid that they have damaged the NBA irreparably, and that the only way to go forward (a players' strike by the African-American player base being the only feasible alternative!) is their immediate expulsion from the league, to the point that the NBA will seize the Clippers in a little less than two weeks.

Or will they?

"On stupidity in general: "I'm the one guy who says don't force the stupid people to be quiet — I want to know who the morons are.""

There's a problem with that when The Stupid/El Stupido is so prevalent that it burns to the point where just about everybody could be considered "stupid" in one form or another.

That's why there are laws against "stupid", because the law and government declare what is "stupid". And, often, what is stupid for one person is not for another.

In fact, the entire point of the law, in many cases, is to marginalize/silence/eliminate the "stupid". For the record, it doesn't do a very good job of it because many laws are, at best, enforced capriciously.

Unfortunately, by speaking in this manner, for who he is, and what he basically has to do within two weeks, I'd almost have to say Cuban has stepped well into "stupid"/"moron" territory this time. He's under significant fire for his comments, and, frankly, a case could be made that, by speaking out in this manner, he has rendered himself actionable under the NBA Constitution and By-Laws.

And these are the worst of the comments, as far as a lot of people are concerned:

"On bigotry in general: "I know I'm prejudiced and I know I'm bigoted in a lot of different ways. If I see a black kid in a hoodie on my side of the street, I'll move to the other side of the street. If I see a white guy with a shaved head and tattoos, I'll move back to the other side of the street. None of us have pure thoughts; we all live in glass houses.""

(Cuban has specifically apologized to the Trayvon Martin family for the hoodie reference, but stands behind the comments made as a whole.)

On surface, he is right. I've had more than one discussion with African-Americans on this subject.

When I get intelligent discussion on the matter, it's either "I can't blame you, with the position you are in." or "This kind of stuff happens when neither side understands the other's culture."

I'm the same way as Cuban, and will use what I see (and hear) to try to ascertain conduct. At the end of the day, yes, I can be considered racist in the same "Avenue Q" ("Everyone's a little bit racist, sometimes...") motif.

But Mark Cuban, in saying this at this time and in this context, has put himself in a lot of trouble.

I'm afraid I must agree with some of the more... reactionary... elements to say that the NBA may now have to examine Mark Cuban's comments here on the basis of when he said what he said, not necessarily just what he said.

The NBA, as a predominantly-Black player league, is in serious damage control over the course of the last month for actions which have "damaged and continues to damage the NBA and its teams."

Given the timing of these comments, Mr. Cuban, have you done the same?

This is another reason the "Duty of Loyalty" charge is so devastating, because, now, someone can easily come back and say Cuban has similarly violated that duty.

Even though Chris Kluwe today took to the Internet to agree with Cuban (if to take him to task for adding some context and the like), I look at these comments, and now do have to question whether the June 3 vote will be unanimous.

And I say that with full understanding with what I've said in the past: That the NBA will look at any vote to retain Sterling as a similar violation of the league's Duty of Loyalty.

And the latest case of why football needs to go...

I've basically had a belief for a long time that Major League Baseball was part and parcel with steroid, HGH, and PED use during the Steroid Era.

However, in the latest accusation that appears to continue the thread that, if we had laws in this country to punish the economically important, football would cease to exist:

Eight former NFL players, including three members of the 1985 "Super Bowl Shuffle" Chicago Bears championship team, have sued the NFL.

Their charge:  The NFL provided drugs and narcotics to the players to allow them to keep playing.

The NFL, according to the lawsuit, is drug-running painkillers and illegally-obtained drugs to allow players to get back on the field faster.

I mean, this is drug-pushing (several of the players reported being addicted to the pills by the end of their careers) to allow players to play, especially in high-profile contests.

If this is proven true...  Hello, RICO Act, anybody?

The article lists Percodan, Percocet, Vicodin, Ambien, and "cocktail" combinations...

One drug, injected through the butt, Toradol, would numb the entire body and allow clearly injured players to play without pain.

How bad could it get?  Former Bear Keith Van Horne alleges he actually played an entire season with a broken leg -- and didn't find out the leg was broken for a half-decade!!!

It is hoped this goes to trial, but widespread use of the Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination are expected.

How much more before someone basically takes the law into their own hands and tries to step in?

Wild Thing, I Don't Want You To Move Me

It's bad enough to get thrown out of a baseball game.

It's 100 times worse when you're "Wild Thing" Mitch Williams, and it's 2014, and you're working for MLB Network as a studio analyst...

... and you're thrown out of your son's youth baseball tournament because you are ordering the pitcher to bean another player because he's a "pussy".

Little League Parent Gone Wild

Well, guess what, Mitch?  You're gone from MLB Network, at least for now.

Hopefully, that "leave of absence" will be made permanent by your bosses at MLBN...

I talk to friends of mine who lament on how far people go to mistreat all of us.

If you want a great example of this, you've got a former major-leaguer, cushy job with MLB, and he's got to be the big man to order a "pussy" to get beaned.

Oy fucking vey.

I Have My Answer on the "Clippers Going Forward" Question..

Just needed some research, and this could become a sticky "property rights" discussion if one really wanted to examine it.

But it's there in Article 14A of the NBA Constitution, .PDF file here at NBA Media Central.  (Bottom of page 29 of the document, top of page 30)

Basically, it IS a Forced Sale.

The Clippers would be seized by the league (formally run by the Commissioner's Office), and all funds would be dealt with to pay the employees and the fine and any balance...

... would go to the motherfucking Sterlings.

The Sterling Charges Come Down, But What Do They Mean?

This is going to be a long post, a complicated one, and I'm not sure I'm going to get all my points across correctly.

On May 19^th, the NBA formally charged Donald Sterling with numerous violations over a three-decade period, culminating in the racist tapes.

This begins a five-day period in which Sterling will have to respond, and, once he does, a ten-day period then ensues until a meeting of the NBA Board of Governors to remove him.

… or is that what the NBA actually is trying to do?

You see, in reading the actual Statement of Charge – the actual written statement required under the NBA Constitution to start the clock – I see more questions than answers.

And, even if I don't get around to it, I want to use this opportunity, in going through this Statement of Charge, to show how fouled up our sports culture is in this country, that a “man” like Sterling can be an owner of a professional sports franchise in North America in the 21^st century, and no one bats an eyelash.

In talking about the Statement of Charge, I am going to use the .PDF copy the NBA itself provided in it's Media Center.

"Summary of Sterling Termination Charge

Below is a summary of the charge that was initiated by the NBA on May 19, 2014 against LAC
Basketball Club, Inc. (“LAC”), which owns the Los Angeles Clippers and is itself indirectly owned
in equal shares by Donald and Rochelle Sterling. If the NBA Board of Governors sustains the
charge, the ownership interests of Mr. and Mrs. Sterling in the Clippers will be terminated.”

Seems simple enough, right?

There's one major problem: The charge is in fact against the corporation owning the Clippers, not just Donald and Rochelle Sterling.

This is very important later on, but it's clear that they are not only trying to get Donald out, but Rochelle as well, which should be obvious to anyone.

Now, they lay out the case before making the charge itself in the “Key Facts Supporting Charge”:

"As evidenced by the recording made public on April 26, 2014, and by a subsequent media interview, Donald Sterling has taken discriminatory actions and supported discriminatory positions that have had (and will continue to have) a material adverse impact on the NBA and its teams. Among other things, Mr. Sterling:”

Any remaining doubt that the NBA fixed Games 5 and 6 of the Oklahoma City series to eliminate the Clippers as quickly as possible should go away here. Also, there should be no doubt that there is no coincidence that the charge is filed on the first Monday after the elimination.

An important factor to keep in mind: The NBA recognizes that it will continue to be damaged for Sterling ever having been associated with it.

• “disparaged African Americans and “minorities”;
• denigrated the contribution of NBA players;
• directed a female acquaintance not to associate publicly with African Americans;
• admonished that acquaintance for posting pictures of herself with African Americans on social media;
• directed that acquaintance not to bring African Americans to Clippers games;
• andcriticized African Americans for not supporting their communities.”

The more that I read of this, the more I become convinced that the only reason Donald Sterling is not in a jail cell right now is because of the fact he is worth several billion dollars.

This isn't “freedom of speech”. This level of racist conduct is known to be civilly illegal (through numerous civil penalties against Sterling), and is almost certain, on some level, to be criminally illegal.

But none of this was really not known already. This was basically on the tapes.

The most important factor here: The NBA, Adam Silver, and all relevant parties basically openly state that this is an African-American league – that the predominance of players in the league are African-American, and that community must have full acceptance within the NBA for it to continue to function in any respect at all.

These actions and positions

• significantly undermine and call into question the NBA’s commitment to diversity and inclusion;
• damage the NBA’s relationship with its fans;
• harm NBA owners, players and Clippers team personnel;
• and impair the NBA’s relationship with marketing partners and licensees, as well as with government and community leaders.”

This is something Silver would probably do better to be honest with, especially given something I will say later: The NBA does not play next year with Donald Sterling in the league in any capacity. Period.

This next part is not widely known:

"In the course of the investigation into Mr. Sterling’s conduct, it was discovered that relevant evidence was destroyed, false and misleading evidence was provided to the NBA’s investigator, and LAC issued a false and misleading press statement regarding this matter.”

Now you definitely have criminality here. The level of criminality involved depends on the actual ability of the investigators to force truthful statements under penalties of law, but there's clearly some form of obstruction going on – on top of everything else!!!

Finally:

Mr. Sterling also has refused to pay the $2.5 million fine imposed on him by Commissioner Silver on April 29, 2014, despite receiving a Notice of Default from the NBA. Through outside counsel, Mr. Sterling has claimed that “no punishment” is warranted for his conduct.”

This is probably the quickest slam dunk they have, but it is relevant to add to the list.

Frankly and bluntly, I would actually think the NBA would be remiss if it didn't add one more supporting charge to the list.

The predominance of players in the league being African-American, Sterling’s racism is a contributing factor to Donald Sterling and LAC Basketball Club Inc. being the worst owners in the history of North American professional sports – that Sterling and LACBC Inc. have the worst winning percentage in any major North American professional sports league with 15 or more years at the position of ownership.

Now, they go into the specific Constitutional “Basis for Termination”:

Charge One: Violations of Constitution 13 (d) – The Tapes

An NBA membership may be terminated if a member or owner fails or refuses to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Association, its Members, Players, or any other third party in such a way as to affect the Association or its Members adversely.”

Note that specific terminology from the NBA Constitution – they are actually charging the owning corporation of the Clippers with offenses which can terminate membership within the Assocation.

That raises a huge question I will address at the end of the document.

"LAC violated this provision because the acts described above constituted:

the taking or supporting of a position or action which may have a material adverse impact on the league or its teams, in violation of an agreement made by LAC, Mr. Sterling, and Mrs. Sterling in favor of the NBA and its members;”

This is one of the things I ask people to take a look at on a much higher level – this and the next statement:

"a failure to use best efforts to see to it that the sport of professional basketball is conducted according to the highest moral and ethical standards, in violation of the league’s joint venture agreement among LAC and all other NBA members”

Wait – wouldn't the mass epidemic of NBA tanking go with this?

Now you have to ask the question vis-a-vis resting players...

And I'll get to another article which revealed that Mark Cuban was prepared to do a lot more about the 2006 Finals than at first most thought – could that also be a violation of 13 (d)?

"and a violation of the contractual duty of loyalty to support the league in the attainment of its proper purposes, which include among other things the league’s commitment to diversity and inclusion.”

Would you expect a league like the NFL to do more than lip service in this regard?

Didn't think so.

On expansion of this last point:

Charge Two: Violation of the Duty of Loyalty

Under New York law [Blogger's Note: since the NBA's main offices are in New York, the NBA Constitution is administered under the laws of the State of New York], all member teams of the NBA owe each other a duty of loyalty to support the League in the attainment of its proper purposes.

LAC breached this duty of loyalty through the acts described above, which were injurious, harmful, and disruptive to the NBA.”

There is, in fact, legal precedent to indicate that a “faithless servant” (an employee who fails to observe Duty of Loyalty) may be forced to return compensations given him which he is such an employee.

New York, in fact, is one of the most stringent states in this regard.

The NBA, in my opinion, is planning to use this charge in a very specific manner, again to be explained at the end.

However, this charge has serious ramifications in the current sporting regime. Any league which has this clause in it's by-laws, etc., should be examining the role of the owners very carefully, because of the very definition of “Duty of Loyalty”:

"Duty of Loyalty is a term used in corporation law to describe a fiduciaries' "conflicts of interest and requires fiduciaries to put the corporation's interests ahead of their own."”

The owner of the Marlins?

The McCourts, before their expulsion??

Most any owner who is more than willing to put out a crap team year after decade?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

And I'll give you a second serious ramification, this one specific to the Board of Governors meeting:

This charge ensures a 29-0 vote to expel LACBC Inc., and it will by no means be a “fair trial”.

Why?

Any NBA owner/member of the Board of Governors voting no will join him in expulsion, as I am almost certain the NBA will view that as a charge-able offense in and of itself under Duty of Loyalty.

Charge Three: Violation of Constitution Article 13 (a) – Obstruction of “Justice”

"An NBA membership may be terminated if a member or owner willfully violates any of the provisions of the Constitution and By-Laws, resolutions, or agreements of the Association.

Various provisions of the Constitution were willfully violated when LAC destroyed evidence, provided false and misleading evidence, and issued a false and misleading public statement, as described above.”


This, combined with Duty of Loyalty, could make for serious criminal and civil sanctions, above and beyond the NBA itself. I think it's clear that the NBA is probably (if it's allowed – the reverse is not, but Sterling will almost certainly try to sue, the over-under I give is about Wednesday morning the 21^st of May) attempt to recover many millions of dollars from Mr. Sterling.

Charge Four: Violation of Constitution Article 13 (c) – The Fine

“An NBA membership may be terminated upon the failure of a member or owner to pay any indebtedness owing to the league.

This provision has been violated because LAC (through the acts of Mr. Sterling) has not paid, and has stated a refusal to pay, the $2.5 million fine that was imposed on Mr. Sterling on April 29, 2014.”

Pretty straight-forward.

Now, here's the money quote, and here's what brings forth the main questions I have with the entire situation:

"Termination of LAC’s entire membership – including Mrs. Sterling’s interest in the team – is called for by the Constitution and related agreements and is the only viable means for bringing Mr. Sterling’s interest in the Clippers to an end. Under the Constitution and related agreements, Mr. Sterling's words, actions, and views are attributable to and deemed to be the actions of LAC itself. More specifically, if the Board, by a 3/4 vote, sustains termination charges on the basis of Mr. Sterling’s words, actions, and views, the Constitution calls for the entirety of LAC’s membership in the NBA to be “automatically” terminated.”

Ladies and gentlemen, in my own opinion, and in mine alone, that last statement in the Statement of Charge indicates to me that the Nuclear Option – the option of the complete expulsion of the Los Angeles Clippers from the National Basketball Association, and all it implies – has just been invoked.

I believe (as of the time of writing, and I will attempt fan communication with the NBA for clarification the moment I post this) the headline most people are reading on this is incorrect – that this is NOT simply an action to force Sterling to sell the team.

I have been remiss or a bit sloppy in previous blog posts (as readers have pointed out) – if the Los Angeles Clippers are allowed to continue to exist, then LACBC Inc. and the Sterlings get all proceeds (minus the fine). If the Clippers are expelled, then the league gets the proceeds of whatever comes afterward.

I will admit to more than a bit of wishful thinking that I am correct in what I have just said: That we are about to see a Billion-Dollar Willy Wonka moment...

"YOU GET NOTHING!! GOOD DAY, SIR!!!!”

In moving against LACBC Inc. and going for termination of their membership in the National Basketball Association, they are going to remove the owners of the Clippers from the league.

It is my belief as I post this, and I may well be wrong in this, that by terminating their membership, and not simply ownership, that there will be 29 teams in the NBA the moment this vote goes through.

Again, look at Duty of Loyalty, and the strict nature in which New York addresses it and allows for sanctions of pay received.

Look at that they are charging the corporation to get both Sterlings out, and that they are moving for removal of membership, and not simply ownership...

It just got real.

Consider what happens if the Clippers are thrown out of the league by this action:

Mayweather/de la Hoya attempt to put a team in Las Vegas?
Paul Brown trying to put another team in Seattle?
Perhaps another attempt at Canada?

Oh boy...

The Latest In The Clippers Saga: Off the Court Edition

Before I get to that, just so it's there, here's the current Round 2 studies up to tonight's end of Miami/Brooklyn and San Antonio/Portland.

Donald Sterling did it again Monday night, the night before Game 4.

Anderson Cooper, on his CNN show, AC360, interviewed Sterling.

If there was any doubt that Donald Sterling should consider himself lucky some LA big-shot hasn't offed him with a bullet to the brain, that Donald Sterling may be the biggest monster in all of sports, some of the shots he took Monday just ratcheted this up another level or two.

Deadspin with the gory details.

Here's how Donald Sterling really feels about Magic Johnson:

"Here is a man.. he acts so holy. He made love to every girl in every girl in America in every city and he had AIDS. When he had those AIDS, I went to my synagogue and I prayed for him.

What has Magic Johnson done? He's got AIDS. Did he do any business? Did he help anybody in south L.A.? I think he should be ashamed of himself. What does he do for the black people? I'm telling you he does nothing. It's all talk.

I spent millions on giving away and helping minorities. Does he do that? That's one problem I have. Jews, when they get successful, they will help their people.

And some of the African-Americans, maybe I'll get in trouble again. They don't want to help anybody. What has Magic Johnson really done for Children's Hospital which kids are lying in the hallways. They are sick. They need a bed. What has he done for any hospital? What has he done for any group?"

Someone needs to lock him up.  I don't care if it's simply psychiatric, but the fact of the matter is that someone needs to lock Donald Sterling up for his own protection.

The NBA needs to get rid of the Sterlings (both friends I've talked to and Deadspin now believe Shelly, his wife, might be the bigger problem).

Here's the thing:  It's pretty much on the table, barring some sort of emergency mediation on the part of Adam Silver, that there will be a players' strike next year barring the Sterlings going out.

Something's going to happen, Nuclear Option (folding the Clippers) or otherwise.

I really hope the franchise is straight nuked.  That this asshole is going to get a billion dollars for incompetence, and, frankly, he should be left to rot....

The Latest in the Clippers' Saga: On The Court Edition

(Oh, I'll get to that bat in the Anderson Cooper interview.  Would've last night, but was too tired after doing some off-blog stuff.)

But, last night, the old guard of the NBA stuck up it's ugly head.

Controversial calls at the end of the Clipper-Thunder game give the game to the home team.

104-102 Clippers, they have the ball.  17.8 left.  (1:51 of the clip.)

So here's problem #1:  There's no shot clock here.  The Clippers have two time outs of some stripe, so there's really no reason for the play to get this far to begin with. 

The ball is ripped out of the hands of the Clipper player with apparent good defense, no call. 

Oklahoma City gets the ball back, goes up for a layup, and the ball is out of bounds.  (1:59 of the clip, 11.3 to go in the game.)

The back-side official (referee #25) makes the immediate call of Oklahoma City possession, and they get 3 free throws to win the game after being down 16 -- and down 5 with Los Angeles with the ball with 1 minute to go.

At 2:27 of the clip (2:38 and onward gives a great slow-mo), it's clear that the ball is not touched by Barnes near Barnes.  And I mean NOT REALLY CLOSE.

But the call is made from the back-side official who could not have seen that angle in any respect.

And then the foul on top of it (6.6 left, 3:30 of the clip).

I mean, this is 90's NBA obvious -- the complete ignorance of the reality of anything on the court.

3:48 shows the replay:  HE DOESN'T TOUCH HIM.

Ladies and gentlemen, that game was fixed.

You have a steal which almost certainly would've been called a foul on Westbrook.

Then you have an inexplicable back-side call to have OKC keep the ball.

Then you have the classic "assumed foul" to give the winning free-throws.

---

Brian Tuohy has long maintained that there was no way the Clippers were going to do anything in these playoffs because of the Sterling mess.

And he has a compelling case.

I'm still 50-50, even after last night.  I think it's clear the Clippers win tomorrow night to force Game Seven, blah blah yadda yadda.

As I'll talk about in the next post when I get to that, the Anderson Cooper interview shows Donald Sterling as a complete old bat whom I cannot be convinced how this guy has not been shot by some big-wig in Los Angeles. 

So it would be compelling to try to get the story to go away and have as more than one Tweet I've seen today has it:  LeBron vs. the MVP:  Heat vs. Thunder in the Finals.

I mean, that would appear to be obvious.

Except for one scenario that talking to friends of mine who've gotten information on the subject of next season has reinforced:

The National Basketball Players Association (the NBA's PA) had it's first vice president, Roger Mason, on Jim Rome recently.

Mason stated the following:

"If it's not handled by ... the start of next season, I don't see how we're playing basketball. I was just in the locker room with LeBron. At the end of the day, you know we have leaders, we have player reps, we've got executive committee members. ... Leaders of the teams, they're all saying the same thing: 'If this man is still in place, we ain't playing.' "

Now, the article claims that James might be backing away from that, but you can't tell me (especially after the old bat basically all-but-insinuated Magic Johnson was disseminating the AIDS virus to all of his lovers) that there wouldn't be enough players this October, if the Sterlings took the league to court to prevent a forced sale, to basically shutter the NBA until the Sterlings (all of them!) are out.

Since forcing a sale might not be able to be pulled off in time, you might be looking at The Nuclear Option:  If he doesn't accept the ruling of the Board of Governors to sell by an X Date, the league folds the Clippers, puts a successor franchise as the 2nd LA franchise, and pockets the entire bit of money.

I'm going to state it now:  If the Sterlings are not out of the NBA entirely by October, there's a player's strike.  There's no way that's going to be avoided.

And, if they can't convince them to sell or enforce it through a (NBA-)constitutional vote, then the league might be forced to fold the Clippers, create a successor franchise, and then they get all the money Magic-Guggenheim/Geffen/Mayweather/whomever puts in.

That's the only way I could see the Clippers winning the title -- but there are enough murmurs out there!!!

El Stupido, All Over the Net...

So it's been a bit more than 24 hours, and the asses are showing themselves.

Two stories out of the most predictable bunch of asses in the NFL, the Miami Dolphins, who, in the course of a week, have done their attempts at image-repair no favors at all.

First, Mike Pouncey opens his fat trap...

No sooner had the Dolphins drafted Ja'Wuan James with their first pick in the 2014 Draft, Pouncey emitted this:

"Great pick!  I can't wait for our gifts he's getting us lol"

This, by a "man" on a team still under the gun for bullying, including (relevant to this) forcing rookies to pay through the nose as part of their initiation with the veterans.

Mike Pouncey has left Twitter, and I cannot think of his own choice.

But, with that going on, a second Dolphin made an even more egregious idiocy of himself:

As ESPN themselves had this to say about Michael Sam being drafted:

"Putting football aside, the Rams made a historic move in using the 249th overall pick on Missouri defensive end Michael Sam. Sam became the first openly gay player drafted to the NFL. There will be plenty of time to discuss how he fits the defense, his chances of making the roster and everything else a draft pick entails. But for now, the Rams should be applauded for taking an important step that will have a lasting impact well beyond the confines of a football field."

And as ESPN, correctly, as a sports-news story, was at Sam's house with the raw emotion of the entire moment pouring through, and with the very appropriate moment of affection with his significant other, Don Jones spewed tweets of "OMG" and "horrible"...

Jones was ordered to delete those tweets and has already been fined by the Dolphins for the indiscretion.

Jones, ironically, was a 7th-round pick himself, and made the team on special teams last year.

It's time for Goodell to take a good hard look at smacking the Dolphins harder.  This is the kind of environment the likes of Jonathan Martin create.

Also the kind of environment the likes of Martin create was exposed yesterday, in not only tweets to myself, but a myriad of tweets Deadspin collated on the entire subject, of not only Sam being drafted, but also his emotional affection with his significant other.

I'm not going to give these motherfuckers the dignity of being quoted here.  You can read them for yourself.

I'm left with two thoughts:

1) Do you idiots honestly believe that a touchdown/home run/great dive/gold medal/etc. is worth less, if not worthless, if the person performing the athletic feat is GLBT?

(If so, fuck you and the horse you rode in on...)

and

2) I'll let Sean Newell speak to it:

"There's nothing new about a draftee celebrating with a significant other, or cameras focusing on her. Hell, sometimes they are openly drooled over; Lauren Tannehill almost broke Twitter when she showed up during the draft. It's not even the first time someone's been drafted and kissed his girlfriend. But since it's two gay men kissing and embracing, it's too much for people (even the ones who say they aren't homophobic!)."

Exactly.  That's the thing about all this:  This guy was the Defensive Co-Player of the Year in the best conference in the land, and the homophobia of the NFL dropped him into the supplemental portion of the final round.

Period.

Will he make the team?  Odds aren't great -- he's probably a situational pass-rusher and a special teams player...

But he's here.  It's 2014.  GLBT athletes can perform the same athletic feats that you would otherwise applaud if you didn't know they were GLBT (Hello, Greg Louganis...)

Would we all like it not to be that we have to make this the story?  Yes.

But until the day that all groups are treated equally and given that equal chance on the fields, in the boardrooms, in the offices, etc. and so forth, this will be a story.

And if you can't handle that, that's not my problem.

Nor is it Michael Sam's.

Have to Play Fair Again...

I was about 20 minutes from writing one of my most vitriolic posts ever.

I had resigned myself to a fate that I was certain of about three months ago, even though many draft boards had Michael Sam between rounds 3 and 5.

When I got to my computer after finishing my day's work at about 3:30 PM PDT, there were about 15 picks to go, the supplementals at the end of the NFL Draft, and Michael Sam of Missouri, the first openly-gay NFL Draft prospect, was still undrafted.

And then, as I was batting back some of the comment-homophobes on ESPN's comments on the article thereto (and, of course, they would never admit to it), I popped over to the NFL Draft ticker on FOX.

Michael Sam has been drafted, with a supplemental 7th-round pick to the St. Louis Rams, #249 overall, seven picks from Mr. Irrelevant.

(Boy, would that have been interesting...)

I think the FOX Sports brief comment (one is done on every player drafted) on their draft ticker once Sam was drafted says everything that needs to be said:

"No big deal. The NFL's first openly gay player has found a home! Actually, it is a big deal. A very awesome deal. Congratulations, Mr. Sam! Now get to work."

EDIT TO ADD 4:18 PM PDT 5/10: John McClain of the Houston Chronicle, a man with 35 years covering the NFL, said this in two tweets today:

Tweet 1: "I can honestly say in my 35 years of covering the draft, I've just witnessed a landmark moment. Congrats to Michael Sam."

Tweet 2: "Jeff Fisher is ideal coach for Michael Sam. Fisher is all business, no nonsense. He'll keep normalcy while others try to make it a circus."

NBA Playoff Study Round 2 Complete

And that does it for round two...

EASTERN CONFERENCE

INDIANA PACERS VS. WASHINGTON WIZARDS

(Indiana wins series 4-2)

Game 1 (May 5): Washington 102 - Indiana 96

Indiana was a 4 point favorite, with a 3.5 at the Atlantis and a 4.5 at Coasts. (UPSET)
O/U: 183.5 - 184.5 (OVER)

Free Throws: Indiana 22-27 Washington 22-31

Game 2 (May 7): Indiana 86 - Washington 82

Indiana was a 4.5 - 5 point favorite. (NO COVER)
O/U: 187, with a couple of 186's. (UNDER)

Free Throws: Indiana 18-21 Washington 5-12

Gee, Indiana with their backs to the wall and we get this...

Game 3 (May 9): Indiana 85 - Washington 63

In Washington, no less...

Washington was a 4.5 - 5 point favorite, with money coming in on them all the way through. (UPSET)
O/U: 183.5 - 184, with a 184.5 at the Peppermill. (UNDER)

Free Throws: Indiana 16-21 Washington 11-21

Game 4 (May 11):  Indiana 95 - Washington 92

Washington was a 3.5 point favorite with a 4 at the Wynn.  (ON WHAT BASIS?  UPSET!!)
O/U:  179.5 - 180 with a 180.5 at the Mirage. (OVER)

Free Throws:  Indiana 19-29  Washington 15-19

Oh ho, huge second-half comeback for the preferred team here...

55-38 Washington at the half.  Got it to 62-44 in the 3rd.  End of the 3rd:  72-71 Washington.

3rd quarter FTs:  Indiana 5-9  Washington...  ZERO.

Evened out a bit in the 4th, but STILL...

Game 5 (May 13): Washington 102 - Indiana 79

In Indiana no less! Gee, talk about wanting it to go at least six.

Indiana was a 5 - 5.5 point favorite. (UPSET)
O/U: Anywhere between 180 - 182. (First game that it truly DEPENDS WHERE YOU GOT IT.)

Free Throws: Washington 15-19 Indiana 13-22

Game 6 (May 15): Indiana 93 - Washington 80

Washington was a 4 - 4.5 point favorite in this game.  (SUCKERS!!!!)
O/U: 180.5 - 181.5 (UNDER)

Free Throws: Indiana 17-25 Washington16-20

Series in Review:  Indiana was more in threat in the first round!  I mean, it's clear they're probably putting all the cards on the table, and, as some Clippers fans assessed a couple nights ago, it may be getting pointless to wait for anything but Indiana-Miami (which we now have) and Miami-Oklahoma City (which we might get).

Betting favorites got brutalized.

The favorite was 0-6 against the number.  Only time they won in the series was Indiana in Game 2.
Over was 2-3.

MIAMI HEAT VS. BROOKLYN NETS

(Miami wins series 4-1.)

Game 1 (May 6):  Miami 107 - Brooklyn 86

Miami was an 8 point favorite, with a 7.5 at the William Hill and the LVH.  (BIG COVER)
O/U:  191.5 - 192.5 (JUST SNEAKED OVER at 193)

Free Throws:  Miami 14-16  Brooklyn 10-17

Game 2 (May 8):  Miami 94 - Brooklyn 82

Miami was an 6.5 - 7 point favorite, as money came in on Brooklyn.  (COVER -- Miami is 5-1 vs. the number in these playoffs.)
O/U:  191.5 - 192.5 with a 191 at Stations. (UNDER)

Free Throws:  Miami 14-18  Brooklyn 8-14

Did the NBA really want Heat/Nets?

Game 3 (May 10):  Brooklyn 104 - Miami 90

They may well have!

Miami was a very small 1 - 1.5 point favorite.  (UPSET)
O/U:  188 - 188.5 with a 189 at the Stratosphere.  (OVER)

Free Throws:  Brooklyn 13-17  Miami 20-25

But not for lack of trying, it seems...

Game 4 (May 12):  Miami 102 - Brooklyn 96

Miami was an 2 point favorite, with a 2.5 at the Treasure Island and the Wynn.  (COVER -- Miami now 6-2 against the spread.)
O/U:  186.5 - 187.5 with a 186 tip at the Atlantis.  (OVER)

Free Throws:  Miami 20-27 (with LeBron getting 49 by going 14-19 from the line)  Brooklyn 23-28

Game 5 (May 14):  Miami 96 - Brooklyn 94

Miami was an across-the-board 7 point favorite.  (NO COVER)
O/U:  188.5 - 189 with a 190 at the Atlantis.  (OVER, sans a PUSH at the Atlantis.)

Free Throws:  Miami 29-31  Brooklyn 12-15

Series in review:  Not much to speak about, and no reason why Tim Donaghy really should've felt the Nets were going to make the NBA any bank in Miami's procession to the Eastern Conference Finals at 8-1 straight up and 6-3 against the spread.  Large free-throw margins in Games 3 and 5 toward the Heat also lay things on the table here too.

Miami was 3-2 as the favorite.
The over was 4-1.

WESTERN CONFERENCE

OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDER VS. LOS ANGELES CLIPPERS

(Oklahoma City wins series 4-2.)

Game 1 (May 5): Los Angeles 122 - Oklahoma City 105

Oklahoma City was a 5.5 point favorite with a 5 at the Treasure Island) (UPSET)
O/U: 212.5 - 213.5, tipped at 214 at Caesar's. (OVER)

Free throws: Los Angeles 17-30 Oklahoma City 18-23

Game 2 (May 7):  Oklahoma City 112 - Los Angeles 101

Oklahoma City was a 5 - 5.5 point favorite.  (COVER)
O/U:  215 - 216 with a 214.5 at the Mirage.  (UNDER)

Free Throws:  Oklahoma City 16-22  Los Angeles 18-23

Game 3 (May 9):  Oklahoma City 118 - Los Angeles 112

Los Angeles was a 4 - 4.5 point favorite.  (UPSET -- both May 9 games went to road dogs)
O/U:  214.5 - 215.5 with a 216 at the Stratosphere.  (OVER)

Free Throws:  Oklahoma City 24-28  Los Angeles 21-25

Game 4 (May 11):  Los Angeles 101 - Oklahoma City 99

Los Angeles was a 5 point favorite, with a 4.5 at the Peppermill and a 5.5 at the Atlantis.  (NO COVER)
O/U:  214.5 - 215.5 with a 214 at the South Point. (UNDER)

Free Throws:  Los Angeles 20-29  Oklahoma City 26-34

A rout for the better part of three quarters, and ANOTHER made-for-TV comeback by the NBA-controlled Clippers!

9:14 to go in the fourth, 82-66 Oklahoma City.

Free throws after that were rather even:  8-9 LAC 6-7 OKC.

Still, though...  Two of these on the 11th??

Game 5 (May 13):  Oklahoma City 105 - Los Angeles 104

Oklahoma City was a 5 - 5.5 point favorite.  (NO COVER)
O/U:  214 - 214.5 with a 213 at the Treasure Island.  (UNDER)

Free Throws:  Oklahoma City 32-36  Los Angeles 16-20

That was a massive FUCK YOU to Donald Sterling. 

Game 6 (May 15):  Oklahoma City 104 - Los Angeles 98
Los Angeles was a 3.5 - 4.5 point favorite.  (UPSET)
O/U:  You could get anywhere from 211.5 at a number of places to 214 at the William Hill. (UNDER)
 Free Throws:  Oklahoma City 29-33  Los Angeles 12-20

Series in Review:  And that was an even bigger one...

Take a snapshot of that, because that's probably the last you will see of a relevant Los Angeles Clippers organization for some time to come, unless someone literally slaps some Sterlings to their senses.

From the night of the Anderson Cooper interview:

FT's, Games 5 and 6:  Oklahoma City 61-69, Los Angeles 28-40.

Game, set, and match.

Favorites were 1-5.
Over was 2-4.

SAN ANTONIO SPURS VS. PORTLAND TRAILBLAZERS -- SERIES OVER

(San Antonio wins series 4-1.)

Game 1 (May 6):  San Antonio 116 - Portland 92

San Antonio was a 6.5 point favorite with a 6 at the Wynn.  (BIG COVER)
O/U:  207 - 208 with a 206 at the South Point (OVER on the Strip, PUSH at the Nuggets and Stations at 208)

Free Throws:  San Antonio 21-25  Portland 26-31

Game 2 (May 8):  San Antonio 114 - Portland 97

San Antonio was a 6 - 7 point favorite, depending on where you could find it.  (BIG COVER)
O/U:  207.5 - 209.  (Snuck OVER at 211.)

Free Throws:  San Antonio 6-14  Portland 10-10

Wow.  Whistles stayed in the pocket in both May 8 games.

Game 3 (May 10):  San Antonio 118 - Portland 103

Some books had it a Pick Em, the books that didn't had Portland a short 1 - 1.5 point favorite.  (UPSET)
O/U:  208 - 208.5.  (OVER)

Free Throws:  San Antonio 25-25  Portland 23-31

At least 2004 on back, according to NBA.com, only once in the playoffs has a team attempted more free throws than 25 and made them all.  Phoenix made all 29 attempts vs. Golden State on May 9, 1989.

Basketball-Reference.com confirms this to the present day.

Game 4 (May 12)  Portland 103 - San Antonio 92

San Antonio was a 4 - 5 point favorite.  (UPSET)
O/U:  210.5 - 212 (UNDER)

Free Throws:  Portland 10-13  San Antonio 11-19

Call this one "getting the series back to San Antonio -- thank you Portland and your fans for a wonderful year".

Game 5 (May 14):  San Antonio 104 - Portland 82

San Antonio was an 8.5 - 9 point favorite.  (BIG COVER)
O/U:  208.5 - 209.5.  (UNDER)

Free Throws:  San Antonio 11-16  Portland 11-17

Series in review:  Are you serious?  I mean, if you need any indication as to why about 2/3 of the teams in the NBA are now seen as tanking by the end of a given season, just understand that Portland made the Western Conference Semifinals...  only to lose by 24, 17, 15, and 22.

The four relevant teams in the NBA -- two of them are in the Conference Finals as of the 14th, and the other two might join them on the 15th.

Favorites were 3-2.
Over was 3-2 as well.

--

And, with that, the only four relevant teams in the National Basketball Association this season:

The Miami Heat
The Indiana Pacers
The San Antonio Spurs
and The Oklahoma City Thunder

will play on for the championship.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...

Favorites in the conference semifinal round were 7-15 against the number, 11-11 straight up.
Over was 11-10 with one game that could go any way.

This makes the playoff numbers:

Favorites:  38-34 straight up, 23-49 against the spread.
Over is 42-29 with one indeterminate.