As further punishment, Donald Sterling should have to watch the last three decades of Clippers games.
— Stephen Colbert (@StephenAtHome) April 30, 2014
Karma can be a real bitch.
- Me
I wasn’t quite certain what to expect from NBA Commissioner Adam Silver. He’s been in his job a couple of months, having replaced David Stern and his 30 years of experience. That Silver’s first test was the Sturm ind Drang over Donald Sterling’s disgusting racist remarks couldn’t have been a pleasant experience. Judging by the lifetime ban and the fine handed down by Silver, I’d have to say he hit the metaphorical sweet spot…and I’m hardly alone in my assessment.
L’affaire Sterling had all the ingredients of a train wreck looking for a place to happen. The NBA’s player population is close to 3/4 African-American, and they weren’t about to stand idly by while Sterling was “disciplined” with a slap on the wrist. Sponsors were leaping off the Clippers’ sinking ship at a prodigious pace. Things could have turned ugly in a hurry, but Silver handed down the maximum fine allowed under the NBA Constitution. In doing so, he made it clear the NBA’s other owners were firmly behind him. The question now becomes what happens to the Clippers franchise- in these playoffs and in the future. There are too many questions and too few answers, but it’s still early. The wounds created by Sterling will take time to heal. The good news is that Silver’s swift and decisive action struck just the right note…never mind that it prevented what likely would have been a full-fledged player boycott…in the middle of one of the league’s best playoff seasons ever.
Fortunately for their fans, the Clippers are back on track and in good position to win their series with Golden State. Sunday, the question was whether the players would be able to put this mess behind them and focus on the task at hand. Understandably, they weren’t. They fell behind the Warriors 37-18 in the first quarter and went on to lose 118-97 in a game that was never as close as the score indicates. The Clippers took the floor with their warm-up gear on inside out in protest; given what they’d been dealing with, they never stood a chance.
Last night was a different. At home in the Staples Center in front of a boisterous and supportive crowd, the Clippers rolled Golden State 113-103 in a game they controlled from the opening tip. The win put them up 3-2 on the Warriors in their first round best-of-seven series.
Fortunately, basketball is only a game, but it’s been a refuge for the players. The controversy surrounding the Clippers and their owner has been anything but. At least now the players can get back to playing basketball and worrying about things they can control between the lines.
My only concern- and let me begin by stating unequivocally that I in no shape, manner, OR form support Donald Sterling- is that part of me wonders about the wisdom of tossing a person aside without allowing for a second chance. Yes, what Sterling said was horrific and impossible to justify…but was banning him for life really the best option? We live in a society steeped in the belief that everyone deserves a second chance…yet we’re applauding because Sterling has been banned for life with no hope of redemption. Think about that for a moment. All of us have screwed up at some point and asked/begged/pleaded for a second chance, an opportunity to make things right. Despite that, we’re OK with throwing Sterling out as we would a carton of milk past its expiration date.
Again, this isn’t meant in support of Sterling, but the idea here seems to be that redemption is denied to people guilty of something so heinous that the idea of a second chance is anathema. I can’t help but wonder; where’s that line…and who gets to draw it?
What I’m not clear on is what we gain by tossing a human being onto the ash heap of history. Sure, we can feel better about ourselves for having consigned a racist to a well-deserved living purgatory as a pariah unworthy of human fellowship. But what have we really done? What have we won? What does this say about us as a society? I ask because I don’t have the answers. Perhaps throwing Sterling to the wolves was the right thing done for the right reasons. Even so, I can’t help but wonder why, in a society predicated on second chances, we’re denying Sterling the opportunity to rehabilitate and right his wrongs.
IS he so far gone, so irredeemably objectionable and evil that he is deserving only of being shunned?
I understand that Donald Sterling is a miserable excuse for a human being, a man in name only who believes that his vast wealth allows him to place himself above others. I recognize that this is not the first bull he’s ridden in the racism rodeo, so perhaps it’s appropriate that we consign him to a living purgatory. I’m just profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of tossing a human being aside and washing our hands of him as if he’s below contempt and beyond redemption.
Lest anyone interpret this as an expression of support for Sterling, I’ll only reiterate that I was as offended as anyone by his comments. I suppose the best way to describe my feelings is that I lack the moral certainty so many hold regarding tossing him aside without a shot at redemption. I find myself with more questions than answers. Yes, this particular problem has been solved, but have we passed on an opportunity to allow for remorse and redemption? Have we foregone a shot at spotlighting a problem far larger and more pervasive than just Donald Sterling?
Let’s play ball, eh?
