ImageImageImage

Sarver ESPN story

Moderators: bwgood77, Kerrsed, Qwigglez, lilfishi22

User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 79,098
And1: 46,936
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#301 » by bwgood77 » Thu Nov 11, 2021 6:46 pm

Barkley6 wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Barkley6 wrote:
I think it was more the "imagine that was your kid" and "I'm holding you personally responsible" comments in conjunction with that. I could see how that could be interpreted as a threat to someone's family.


This is speculation by me, but my guess is the person that said "I took it as a threat" was McD just kind of exacerbating things. Just a gut feeling. It was after the "bridges burned, etc".

Anyway, even if it was viewed as a threat by someone', I doubt they really felt their kids were threatened.

Not sure what people could would expect the threat is..in general..not even talking kids. But then especially when it comes to kids. I doubt anyone thought Penny was talking about putting out a hit on the kids.


We don't know who those messages were sent to, but the idea of 'holding someone responsible' kind of implies some kind of action is going to be taken. I don't think anyone is going after anyone's kids. But the idea of holding someone responsible makes me ask the question...HOW are they intending to do that?


Fair point, though I think it's more than just a phrase to make him feel bad like he might be responsible for her kids getting beat up at at school.
Barkley6
Veteran
Posts: 2,645
And1: 2,093
Joined: Jul 08, 2013
       

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#302 » by Barkley6 » Thu Nov 11, 2021 7:12 pm

bwgood77 wrote:
Slim Charless wrote:
Barkley6 wrote:
70 people being interviewed for the story means it has legs.

Sarver admitted to publicly pantsing a young staffer. That in and of itself is enough to call into question if this workplace is being run appropriately.

We can debate whether or not the NBA investigation will yield anything that causes major changes in the franchise, but this is not a situation where we can say the allegations are false. There are 70 people confirming various allegations. Brendan Kleen on Locked On Suns recently said this week he independently confirmed with someone who worked for the Suns and was not interviewed for the ESPN article that Sarver made jokes about condom sizes. Which makes Sarver's denial of talking about condoms pretty cringe.

The story has legs. What we don't know is how far those legs will carry it.



"Those n-words need a n-word coach"


I wouldn't be surprised if he said "They need a Black coach" as he felt he might better connect with them culturally and been an ex player, etc. I seriously doubt he walks around the office using the N word like that or we'd know for sure.

If he did say that, THAT would be in the article and not some thing about Draymond Green using it and Sarver bringing that up and saying "Why can Draymond use the N word and it's ok".

They wouldn't use something like that if they had a quote like the one you suggest.

But I know you will stop at no lengths not to twist things to make things sound much worse than they likely are for whatever reason.

I mean, we all want him gone..or at least most of us....but that's doubtful.



I can definitely see him saying that as a joke, thinking it would be a funny/shocking thing to say to someone he thought would be receptive to the joke.

I've had this happen to me a number of times, where I'll say something critical of the Democratic party, Biden, etc. and all of a sudden the person I'm talking to starts spouting QAnon talking points and MAGA stuff thinking I feel the same way, when I'm actually attacking the Democrats from the left LOL.

If ANYTHING this article tells me that Sarver doesn't know how to read a room and doesn't know when is the right time to be professional, and the right time to tell jokes. Whether he has malicious intent or not is impossible to know, but regardless of the man's personal beliefs, he created a negative work environment.
WeekapaugGroove
RealGM
Posts: 17,933
And1: 13,255
Joined: Feb 07, 2010

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#303 » by WeekapaugGroove » Thu Nov 11, 2021 7:17 pm

We'll see what actually is proven and comes of this but to me all the circumstantial evidence added up equals someone whos not fit to own a team. Not sure if the league will force a sale but the sooner he's gone the better. Just very poor judgment and character even if just the petty stuff is proven.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming Wow! What a Ride!-H.S.T.
Slim Charless
Analyst
Posts: 3,747
And1: 2,326
Joined: May 10, 2019
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#304 » by Slim Charless » Thu Nov 11, 2021 7:18 pm

bwgood77 wrote:
Slim Charless wrote:
Barkley6 wrote:
70 people being interviewed for the story means it has legs.

Sarver admitted to publicly pantsing a young staffer. That in and of itself is enough to call into question if this workplace is being run appropriately.

We can debate whether or not the NBA investigation will yield anything that causes major changes in the franchise, but this is not a situation where we can say the allegations are false. There are 70 people confirming various allegations. Brendan Kleen on Locked On Suns recently said this week he independently confirmed with someone who worked for the Suns and was not interviewed for the ESPN article that Sarver made jokes about condom sizes. Which makes Sarver's denial of talking about condoms pretty cringe.

The story has legs. What we don't know is how far those legs will carry it.



"Those n-words need a n-word coach"


I wouldn't be surprised if he said "They need a Black coach" as he felt he might better connect with them culturally and been an ex player, etc. I seriously doubt he walks around the office using the N word like that or we'd know for sure.

If he did say that, THAT would be in the article and not some thing about Draymond Green using it and Sarver bringing that up and saying "Why can Draymond use the N word and it's ok".

They wouldn't use something like that if they had a quote like the one you suggest.

But I know you will stop at no lengths not to twist things to make things sound much worse than they likely are for whatever reason.

I mean, we all want him gone..or at least most of us....but that's doubtful.


He's a crap owner and always has been. We should ALL want him gone for those reasons alone. This ESPN thing-(which no one has managed to disprove btw) just adds terrible, racist, women hating, sexual assaulting icing on the cake.

FTR: I'd be saying the same things even if we had an owner that I didn't detest.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 79,098
And1: 46,936
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#305 » by bwgood77 » Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:10 pm

Barkley6 wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Slim Charless wrote:

"Those n-words need a n-word coach"


I wouldn't be surprised if he said "They need a Black coach" as he felt he might better connect with them culturally and been an ex player, etc. I seriously doubt he walks around the office using the N word like that or we'd know for sure.

If he did say that, THAT would be in the article and not some thing about Draymond Green using it and Sarver bringing that up and saying "Why can Draymond use the N word and it's ok".

They wouldn't use something like that if they had a quote like the one you suggest.

But I know you will stop at no lengths not to twist things to make things sound much worse than they likely are for whatever reason.

I mean, we all want him gone..or at least most of us....but that's doubtful.



I can definitely see him saying that as a joke, thinking it would be a funny/shocking thing to say to someone he thought would be receptive to the joke.

I've had this happen to me a number of times, where I'll say something critical of the Democratic party, Biden, etc. and all of a sudden the person I'm talking to starts spouting QAnon talking points and MAGA stuff thinking I feel the same way, when I'm actually attacking the Democrats from the left LOL.

If ANYTHING this article tells me that Sarver doesn't know how to read a room and doesn't know when is the right time to be professional, and the right time to tell jokes. Whether he has malicious intent or not is impossible to know, but regardless of the man's personal beliefs, he created a negative work environment.


I don't know..maybe those words seem like a lot bigger deal to me, but I can't see someone using it in a work environment even as a "joke" or even in any environment. I haven't ever even used those words.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 79,098
And1: 46,936
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#306 » by bwgood77 » Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:19 pm

WeekapaugGroove wrote:We'll see what actually is proven and comes of this but to me all the circumstantial evidence added up equals someone whos not fit to own a team. Not sure if the league will force a sale but the sooner he's gone the better. Just very poor judgment and character even if just the petty stuff is proven.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app


Yeah, but that's a bit of a slippery slope if you are just coming up with certain criteria as to why a person is not fit to own a team.

But if there is any racist or sexist stuff in there that stuff can't be tolerated.

So much of this seems so old too, and if it isn't racist/sexist, and we are here with James Jones as GM and Monty Williams as coach for team that made the finals and all the players raving about the culture, then it seems good.

I would be curious to see an anonymous survey from current staff as to how they think the work environment is. And maybe from the last 4-5 years. Of course you also have Kerr, Babby, James Jones, Shaq, etc, all already saying they never saw any of this stuff.

The more you see the more it seems like it's an ex coach and an ex gm with axes to grind along with another owner wanting to take over....and then a few other stories thrown in there.

I'd welcome a good owner...good being key. But I also like where our team is right now for the most part, especially considering where it has been for a long time. So a major shake up isn't necessarily always positive.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 79,098
And1: 46,936
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#307 » by bwgood77 » Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:26 pm

Slim Charless wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Slim Charless wrote:

"Those n-words need a n-word coach"


I wouldn't be surprised if he said "They need a Black coach" as he felt he might better connect with them culturally and been an ex player, etc. I seriously doubt he walks around the office using the N word like that or we'd know for sure.

If he did say that, THAT would be in the article and not some thing about Draymond Green using it and Sarver bringing that up and saying "Why can Draymond use the N word and it's ok".

They wouldn't use something like that if they had a quote like the one you suggest.

But I know you will stop at no lengths not to twist things to make things sound much worse than they likely are for whatever reason.

I mean, we all want him gone..or at least most of us....but that's doubtful.


He's a crap owner and always has been. We should ALL want him gone for those reasons alone. This ESPN thing-(which no one has managed to disprove btw) just adds terrible, racist, women hating, sexual assaulting icing on the cake.

FTR: I'd be saying the same things even if we had an owner that I didn't detest.


Now you are upgrading to sexual assault? OK. The more severe and excessive you get the harder it is to take seriously. Anyway, I didn't see any women hating or racist stuff other than the one on one discussion with Watson when alone where he apparently used the N word.

And then "haven't seen anyone disprove" isn't really the way things work. It's like telling someone to prove they didn't cheat on their wife when there is no real evidence outside of someone saying it happened.

It's kind of like Jalen Rose's story about what Sarver said about Ayton's contract...the words he used. No one can disprove that. Of course ESPN retracted the fact that Jalen Rose heard or suggested he said that and was just making stuff up.

That whole incident right there kind of shows you how SOME people will just believe everything they hear or read and make a lot of assumptions.
Slim Charless
Analyst
Posts: 3,747
And1: 2,326
Joined: May 10, 2019
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#308 » by Slim Charless » Thu Nov 11, 2021 9:35 pm

bwgood77 wrote:
Slim Charless wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if he said "They need a Black coach" as he felt he might better connect with them culturally and been an ex player, etc. I seriously doubt he walks around the office using the N word like that or we'd know for sure.

If he did say that, THAT would be in the article and not some thing about Draymond Green using it and Sarver bringing that up and saying "Why can Draymond use the N word and it's ok".

They wouldn't use something like that if they had a quote like the one you suggest.

But I know you will stop at no lengths not to twist things to make things sound much worse than they likely are for whatever reason.

I mean, we all want him gone..or at least most of us....but that's doubtful.


He's a crap owner and always has been. We should ALL want him gone for those reasons alone. This ESPN thing-(which no one has managed to disprove btw) just adds terrible, racist, women hating, sexual assaulting icing on the cake.

FTR: I'd be saying the same things even if we had an owner that I didn't detest.


Now you are upgrading to sexual assault? OK. The more severe and excessive you get the harder it is to take seriously. Anyway, I didn't see any women hating or racist stuff other than the one on one discussion with Watson when alone where he apparently used the N word.

And then "haven't seen anyone disprove" isn't really the way things work. It's like telling someone to prove they didn't cheat on their wife when there is no real evidence outside of someone saying it happened.

It's kind of like Jalen Rose's story about what Sarver said about Ayton's contract...the words he used. No one can disprove that. Of course ESPN retracted the fact that Jalen Rose heard or suggested he said that and was just making stuff up.

That whole incident right there kind of shows you how SOME people will just believe everything they hear or read and make a lot of assumptions.


I was waiting for you to say something about the sexual assault. Let me ask you a question:

If tomorrow you went into wherever you work at and depantsed 1 of the your female coworkers. What do you think would happen to you? Do you think there might be charges?

PS: I know that it was a male who got pantsed. Doesn't change anything.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 79,098
And1: 46,936
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#309 » by bwgood77 » Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:12 pm

Slim Charless wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Slim Charless wrote:
He's a crap owner and always has been. We should ALL want him gone for those reasons alone. This ESPN thing-(which no one has managed to disprove btw) just adds terrible, racist, women hating, sexual assaulting icing on the cake.

FTR: I'd be saying the same things even if we had an owner that I didn't detest.


Now you are upgrading to sexual assault? OK. The more severe and excessive you get the harder it is to take seriously. Anyway, I didn't see any women hating or racist stuff other than the one on one discussion with Watson when alone where he apparently used the N word.

And then "haven't seen anyone disprove" isn't really the way things work. It's like telling someone to prove they didn't cheat on their wife when there is no real evidence outside of someone saying it happened.

It's kind of like Jalen Rose's story about what Sarver said about Ayton's contract...the words he used. No one can disprove that. Of course ESPN retracted the fact that Jalen Rose heard or suggested he said that and was just making stuff up.

That whole incident right there kind of shows you how SOME people will just believe everything they hear or read and make a lot of assumptions.


I was waiting for you to say something about the sexual assault. Let me ask you a question:

If tomorrow you went into wherever you work at and depantsed 1 of the your female coworkers. What do you think would happen to you? Do you think there might be charges?

PS: I know that it was a male who got pantsed. Doesn't change anything.


I think I would be fired. But what he did wasn't sexual assault. To claim it is is really minimizing how serious rape, unwanted fondling and forcing someone to perform sexual acts on you are.

Make no mistake, I think based on the article, there was definitely some sexist and racist stuff in there, and I hope he is replaced with a more professional, richer and better owner.

But I won't jump to conclusions based on what the media tells me or he said/she said 3rd party accounts.
Slim Charless
Analyst
Posts: 3,747
And1: 2,326
Joined: May 10, 2019
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#310 » by Slim Charless » Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:15 pm

bwgood77 wrote:
Slim Charless wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Now you are upgrading to sexual assault? OK. The more severe and excessive you get the harder it is to take seriously. Anyway, I didn't see any women hating or racist stuff other than the one on one discussion with Watson when alone where he apparently used the N word.

And then "haven't seen anyone disprove" isn't really the way things work. It's like telling someone to prove they didn't cheat on their wife when there is no real evidence outside of someone saying it happened.

It's kind of like Jalen Rose's story about what Sarver said about Ayton's contract...the words he used. No one can disprove that. Of course ESPN retracted the fact that Jalen Rose heard or suggested he said that and was just making stuff up.

That whole incident right there kind of shows you how SOME people will just believe everything they hear or read and make a lot of assumptions.


I was waiting for you to say something about the sexual assault. Let me ask you a question:

If tomorrow you went into wherever you work at and depantsed 1 of the your female coworkers. What do you think would happen to you? Do you think there might be charges?

PS: I know that it was a male who got pantsed. Doesn't change anything.


I think I would be fired. But what he did wasn't sexual assault. To claim it is is really minimizing how serious rape, unwanted fondling and forcing someone to perform sexual acts on you are.

Make no mistake, I think based on the article, there was definitely some sexist and racist stuff in there, and I hope he is replaced with a more professional, richer and better owner.

But I won't jump to conclusions based on what the media tells me or he said/she said 3rd party accounts.


OK let's change the situation from work to just some random person on the street. It's unwanted sexual contact and misconduct. No matter how you frame it. If you did that to some random person, you'd be facing a charge.

If it's true, Sarver is lucky all he's losing is his team (at a massive profit btw). He could be facing charges and monetary trial where'd he would have to write a big check to someone.
Barkley6
Veteran
Posts: 2,645
And1: 2,093
Joined: Jul 08, 2013
       

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#311 » by Barkley6 » Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:11 am

bwgood77 wrote:
WeekapaugGroove wrote:We'll see what actually is proven and comes of this but to me all the circumstantial evidence added up equals someone whos not fit to own a team. Not sure if the league will force a sale but the sooner he's gone the better. Just very poor judgment and character even if just the petty stuff is proven.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app


Yeah, but that's a bit of a slippery slope if you are just coming up with certain criteria as to why a person is not fit to own a team.

But if there is any racist or sexist stuff in there that stuff can't be tolerated.

So much of this seems so old too, and if it isn't racist/sexist, and we are here with James Jones as GM and Monty Williams as coach foa team that made the finals and all the players raving about the culture, then it seems good.

I would be curious to see an anonymous survey from current staff as to how they think the work environment is. And maybe from the last 4-5 years. Of course you also have Kerr, Babby, James Jones, Shaq, etc, all already saying they never saw any of this stuff.

The more you see the more it seems like it's an ex coach and an ex gm with axes to grind along with another owner wanting to take over....and then a few other stories thrown in there.

I'd welcome a good owner...good being key. But I also like where our team is right now for the most part, especially considering where it has been for a long time. So a major shake up isn't necessarily always positive.


It seems to me like Sarver tends to, from the article, pick on people he knows he can exercise authority over. People he perceives as weak. Young staffers, inexperienced coaches, etc.

The reason to me that it doesn't just seem like Watson and McD having axes to grind is that they interviewed 70 people. I'm sure anything in that article was confirmed by multiple people. If Watson and McD were making stuff up, I doubt it would have so much corroboration.

Additionally, no one has come out and said "I was in the locker room when the incident Watson described took place and that's not how I remember it at all"
Funky Tut
Rookie
Posts: 1,215
And1: 651
Joined: Nov 29, 2012
         

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#312 » by Funky Tut » Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:12 am

Dan Bickley needs to be fired
Barkley6
Veteran
Posts: 2,645
And1: 2,093
Joined: Jul 08, 2013
       

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#313 » by Barkley6 » Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:15 am

bwgood77 wrote:
Slim Charless wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Now you are upgrading to sexual assault? OK. The more severe and excessive you get the harder it is to take seriously. Anyway, I didn't see any women hating or racist stuff other than the one on one discussion with Watson when alone where he apparently used the N word.

And then "haven't seen anyone disprove" isn't really the way things work. It's like telling someone to prove they didn't cheat on their wife when there is no real evidence outside of someone saying it happened.

It's kind of like Jalen Rose's story about what Sarver said about Ayton's contract...the words he used. No one can disprove that. Of course ESPN retracted the fact that Jalen Rose heard or suggested he said that and was just making stuff up.

That whole incident right there kind of shows you how SOME people will just believe everything they hear or read and make a lot of assumptions.


I was waiting for you to say something about the sexual assault. Let me ask you a question:

If tomorrow you went into wherever you work at and depantsed 1 of the your female coworkers. What do you think would happen to you? Do you think there might be charges?

PS: I know that it was a male who got pantsed. Doesn't change anything.


I think I would be fired. But what he did wasn't sexual assault. To claim it is is really minimizing how serious rape, unwanted fondling and forcing someone to perform sexual acts on you are.

Make no mistake, I think based on the article, there was definitely some sexist and racist stuff in there, and I hope he is replaced with a more professional, richer and better owner.

But I won't jump to conclusions based on what the media tells me or he said/she said 3rd party accounts.


Yes it is. Unwanted touching and exposing someones body to others without their consent is sexual assault. Additionally, anyone who was in the room and witnessed the event could file a sexual harassment complaint against Sarver because they witnessed it.
WeekapaugGroove
RealGM
Posts: 17,933
And1: 13,255
Joined: Feb 07, 2010

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#314 » by WeekapaugGroove » Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:21 am

bwgood77 wrote:
WeekapaugGroove wrote:We'll see what actually is proven and comes of this but to me all the circumstantial evidence added up equals someone whos not fit to own a team. Not sure if the league will force a sale but the sooner he's gone the better. Just very poor judgment and character even if just the petty stuff is proven.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app


Yeah, but that's a bit of a slippery slope if you are just coming up with certain criteria as to why a person is not fit to own a team.

But if there is any racist or sexist stuff in there that stuff can't be tolerated.

So much of this seems so old too, and if it isn't racist/sexist, and we are here with James Jones as GM and Monty Williams as coach foa team that made the finals and all the players raving about the culture, then it seems good.

I would be curious to see an anonymous survey from current staff as to how they think the work environment is. And maybe from the last 4-5 years. Of course you also have Kerr, Babby, James Jones, Shaq, etc, all already saying they never saw any of this stuff.

The more you see the more it seems like it's an ex coach and an ex gm with axes to grind along with another owner wanting to take over....and then a few other stories thrown in there.

I'd welcome a good owner...good being key. But I also like where our team is right now for the most part, especially considering where it has been for a long time. So a major shake up isn't necessarily always positive.
I should have worded that differently. Whether he gets legally removed from ownership will come down to what gets proven. What I was trying to say was we have years of evidence that this dude is a turd and is never changing. he simply doesn't have the make up of a good owner.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming Wow! What a Ride!-H.S.T.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 79,098
And1: 46,936
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#315 » by bwgood77 » Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:43 am

Slim Charless wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Slim Charless wrote:
I was waiting for you to say something about the sexual assault. Let me ask you a question:

If tomorrow you went into wherever you work at and depantsed 1 of the your female coworkers. What do you think would happen to you? Do you think there might be charges?

PS: I know that it was a male who got pantsed. Doesn't change anything.


I think I would be fired. But what he did wasn't sexual assault. To claim it is is really minimizing how serious rape, unwanted fondling and forcing someone to perform sexual acts on you are.

Make no mistake, I think based on the article, there was definitely some sexist and racist stuff in there, and I hope he is replaced with a more professional, richer and better owner.

But I won't jump to conclusions based on what the media tells me or he said/she said 3rd party accounts.


OK let's change the situation from work to just some random person on the street. It's unwanted sexual contact and misconduct. No matter how you frame it. If you did that to some random person, you'd be facing a charge.

If it's true, Sarver is lucky all he's losing is his team (at a massive profit btw). He could be facing charges and monetary trial where'd he would have to write a big check to someone.


Someone could maybe file an assault charge but not a sexual assault one. You're reaching and really minimizing was sexual assault victims go through by making such comparisons.

As for the 2nd part, no one has filed charges or brought a lawsuit against him. This is just random stories this Baxter guy looked for maybe at the behest of Nahafi, McD, etc.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 79,098
And1: 46,936
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#316 » by bwgood77 » Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:47 am

Barkley6 wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Slim Charless wrote:
I was waiting for you to say something about the sexual assault. Let me ask you a question:

If tomorrow you went into wherever you work at and depantsed 1 of the your female coworkers. What do you think would happen to you? Do you think there might be charges?

PS: I know that it was a male who got pantsed. Doesn't change anything.


I think I would be fired. But what he did wasn't sexual assault. To claim it is is really minimizing how serious rape, unwanted fondling and forcing someone to perform sexual acts on you are.

Make no mistake, I think based on the article, there was definitely some sexist and racist stuff in there, and I hope he is replaced with a more professional, richer and better owner.

But I won't jump to conclusions based on what the media tells me or he said/she said 3rd party accounts.


Yes it is. Unwanted touching and exposing someones body to others without their consent is sexual assault. Additionally, anyone who was in the room and witnessed the event could file a sexual harassment complaint against Sarver because they witnessed it.


If pantsing ever goes to court it is usually charged as a sexual harrassment charge...not assault.

But if you are saying his underpants were removed as well and he was completely exposed and touched, then yes, there coudld be more. I was thinking it was just down to his shorts. But typically sexual assault involves some sort of sexual act, whether forced upon or forced to do. I haven't seen anyone other than you two refer to the depantsing as sexual assault though and didn't seem to have the details you guys must have. Seems it would have mentioned a little more about the specifics in the article.
Barkley6
Veteran
Posts: 2,645
And1: 2,093
Joined: Jul 08, 2013
       

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#317 » by Barkley6 » Fri Nov 12, 2021 1:36 am

bwgood77 wrote:
Barkley6 wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
I think I would be fired. But what he did wasn't sexual assault. To claim it is is really minimizing how serious rape, unwanted fondling and forcing someone to perform sexual acts on you are.

Make no mistake, I think based on the article, there was definitely some sexist and racist stuff in there, and I hope he is replaced with a more professional, richer and better owner.

But I won't jump to conclusions based on what the media tells me or he said/she said 3rd party accounts.


Yes it is. Unwanted touching and exposing someones body to others without their consent is sexual assault. Additionally, anyone who was in the room and witnessed the event could file a sexual harassment complaint against Sarver because they witnessed it.


If pantsing ever goes to court it is usually charged as a sexual harrassment charge...not assault.

But if you are saying his underpants were removed as well and he was completely exposed and touched, then yes, there coudld be more. I was thinking it was just down to his shorts. But typically sexual assault involves some sort of sexual act, whether forced upon or forced to do. I haven't seen anyone other than you two refer to the depantsing as sexual assault though and didn't seem to have the details you guys must have. Seems it would have mentioned a little more about the specifics in the article.


I dont think it would be difficult to establish that 1. this involved unwanted touching 2. taking someone else's pants off is sexual

Ergo, unwanted sexual touching.

If he ripped open a woman's blouse....would you say that was sexual assault?
Slim Charless
Analyst
Posts: 3,747
And1: 2,326
Joined: May 10, 2019
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#318 » by Slim Charless » Fri Nov 12, 2021 1:56 am

Barkley6 wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Barkley6 wrote:
Yes it is. Unwanted touching and exposing someones body to others without their consent is sexual assault. Additionally, anyone who was in the room and witnessed the event could file a sexual harassment complaint against Sarver because they witnessed it.


If pantsing ever goes to court it is usually charged as a sexual harrassment charge...not assault.

But if you are saying his underpants were removed as well and he was completely exposed and touched, then yes, there coudld be more. I was thinking it was just down to his shorts. But typically sexual assault involves some sort of sexual act, whether forced upon or forced to do. I haven't seen anyone other than you two refer to the depantsing as sexual assault though and didn't seem to have the details you guys must have. Seems it would have mentioned a little more about the specifics in the article.


I dont think it would be difficult to establish that 1. this involved unwanted touching 2. taking someone else's pants off is sexual

Ergo, unwanted sexual touching.

If he ripped open a woman's blouse....would you say that was sexual assault?


Seriously. This.

BW: You can't just put your hands on someone's genitals and/or forcibly remove their clothing without serious legal ramifications. The more I think about this, the more I wonder if he already thought ahead on that and offered check (and a legally binding gag order) to whomever he did this to.

That's serious case if that person wanted to pursue it legally. I mean imagine if you heard that Bezos was going around Amazon lifting up the skirts of the women WHO WORKED UNDER HIM?

Makes no sense.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 79,098
And1: 46,936
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#319 » by bwgood77 » Fri Nov 12, 2021 1:58 am

Barkley6 wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
Barkley6 wrote:
Yes it is. Unwanted touching and exposing someones body to others without their consent is sexual assault. Additionally, anyone who was in the room and witnessed the event could file a sexual harassment complaint against Sarver because they witnessed it.


If pantsing ever goes to court it is usually charged as a sexual harrassment charge...not assault.

But if you are saying his underpants were removed as well and he was completely exposed and touched, then yes, there coudld be more. I was thinking it was just down to his shorts. But typically sexual assault involves some sort of sexual act, whether forced upon or forced to do. I haven't seen anyone other than you two refer to the depantsing as sexual assault though and didn't seem to have the details you guys must have. Seems it would have mentioned a little more about the specifics in the article.


I dont think it would be difficult to establish that 1. this involved unwanted touching 2. taking someone else's pants off is sexual

Ergo, unwanted sexual touching.

If he ripped open a woman's blouse....would you say that was sexual assault?


I have no idea....all this stuff comes down to intent. I don't think it was sexual assault at all. You guys do. I think we can leave it there because I don't want to get into all these various scenarios.

I imagine when blouses get ripped open it is at the beginning of something, not the full act.

Anyway, the accusations are misogyny, sexist, racist and this is a guy that got his pants pulled down below his waste at a work party as a joke. Now obviously he didn't find it funny and it was very appropriate but as mentioned I don't see it as sexual assault. Nor did the article go there or anyone but you and Slim that I have seen. And it doesn't fall into the other category either.

If anything it is sexual harrassment.

Sexual assault is serious stuff. Maybe I take it a little more seriously because I have known victims.
Saberestar
RealGM
Posts: 15,362
And1: 10,863
Joined: May 21, 2010

Re: Sarver ESPN story 

Post#320 » by Saberestar » Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:37 am

After seemingly accusing Phoenix Suns owner Robert Sarver of using racist language toward Deandre Ayton during contract negotiations, ESPN's Jalen Rose has apologized and clarified his past comments.

Rose is currently out of the country but provided a statement through Stephen A. Smith on NBA Countdown Wednesday:

"We want to clarify a comment that was made on this program last Friday. When we were discussing the Robert Sarver controversy, Jalen Rose made a comment that, ‘When it's time to pay Deandre Ayton, and you're calling him a lazy N-word, what's going to now happen is it's going to affect your product on the floor.'

"As mentioned previously, Jalen is out of the country this week. But he wants us to make clear that he did not mean to suggest that Sarver actually spoke those words. And to be clear, ESPN has never reported that Sarver used those words to describe Deandre Ayton. Jalen used those words to try to express his personal opinion that the way Sarver handled Ayton's contract situation was demeaning to a black player and would be perceived that way by other black players.

"Jalen recognizes it was a mistake, and we apologize for the miscommunication."

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10017826-jalen-rose-apologizes-for-comments-about-suns-robert-sarver-on-nba-countdown

Return to Phoenix Suns