OT: lawyer suing Spurs for sending home players

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Natebishop3

Natebishop3

Don't tread on me!
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
94,242
Likes
57,506
Points
113
God I hate lawyers...

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/8847216/san-antonio-spurs-sued-lawyer-resting-top-players

The San Antonio Spurs are being sued by a lawyer who is alleging the team violated the state's deceptive and fair trade practices law.

On Monday, Larry McGuinness filed a class-action suit in Miami-Dade County, stating Spurs coach Gregg Popovich "intentionally and surreptitiously" sent their best players home without the knowledge of the league, the team and the fans attending the Nov. 29 game against the Miami Heat. McGuinness contends that he, as well as other fans, "suffered economic damages" as a result of paying a premium price for a ticket that shouldn't cost more.
Click to expand...
 
I kind of see his point, although it seems like a bit of a stretch for a lawsuit.
 
If you buy a ticket to see the Spurs, you should get to watch the Spurs play.
 
^They did get to watch the Spurs play. Problem?
 
Even though players aren't guaranteed to play at any time, the lines are a little more blurred because teams charge fans more to attend games versus better teams. When asked how he thought the fans felt, Popovich admitted at the time that it wasn't ideal.

"If I was taking my 6-year-old son and daughter to the game, I would want them to see everybody," Popovich said. "And if they weren't there, I'd be disappointed."
Click to expand...

...
 
The inherent "entertainment value" aspect of this case bugs me, but even from that standpoint, the thing that they're missing is that if Pops was required to play all of his players, at all times, perhaps for the detriment of his own team, then that would cheapen the overall entertainment value of the NBA more than sitting them out for a single game.
 
NOVoodoo said:
The inherent "entertainment value" aspect of this case bugs me, but even from that standpoint, the thing that they're missing is that if Pops was required to play all of his players, at all times, perhaps for the detriment of his own team, then that would cheapen the overall entertainment value of the NBA more than sitting them out for a single game.
Click to expand...

The argument would be that healthy players need to be in the arena, not that they have to be given minutes.

That this can be an effective strategy shows how stupid an 82 game season is. The NFL is the most popular sport around and they play 5% as many games. If NBA teams only played a few games a week all the players would play and fans would care (and pay) a heck of a lot more for each game.
 
Draco said:
The argument would be that healthy players need to be in the arena, not that they have to be given minutes.

That this can be an effective strategy shows how stupid an 82 game season is. The NFL is the most popular sport around and they play 5% as many games. If NBA teams only played a few games a week all the players would play and fans would care (and pay) a heck of a lot more for each game.
Click to expand...

I've never known anyone who was happy that they got to see Manu Ginobili sit in a suit on the sidelines. The "entertainment value" argument absolutely revolves around them playing. Nobody is entertained by Tim Duncan sitting on a bench.

I've also got to disagree with your 82 game argument. You can't even start to compare NFL schedules to NBA schedules. The NFL can only have one game a week because of how ridiculously physically demanding the game is on their bodies. In the NBA, players can be out til 3 AM, show up to practice hungover, and have a great, entertaining game for the fans none the less.

82 games are perfectly reasonable for the players, the fans, and the game in general.
 
I am almost positive that the little writing on the back of your ticket will cover their ass on this.
 
Total bullshit. They bought tickets to see the Spurs play the Heat and that's exactly what they saw.
 
Natebishop3 said:
This is a different topic though. We aren't talking about the league punishing Pop, we're talking about some jackhole lawyer trying to get money.
Click to expand...

You're crazy! It's all about the same situation, the game vs Miami that Pop benched his studs.
 
ABM said:
They SHOULD sue. At least to get their money back. I know I'd want my money back if I had purchased tickets for that game.
Click to expand...

Restitution would be punitive damages that can be anywhere of up to 10 times the loss. If they paid $1,000 for the tickets; the damages would be $10,000 per restitution. How many are suing? If they have 100,000 worth of tickets; that's a $1,000,000 ding
 
Natebishop3 said:
This is a different topic though. We aren't talking about the league punishing Pop, we're talking about some jackhole lawyer trying to get money.
Click to expand...

Since you won't merge, I'll repost here what I posted there.

This is ridiculous. The lawyer alleges that the fans suffered economic damages because they were charged a premium for the game. However, the Spurs aren't the ones who set the pricing, or even received the gate revenue, so it is ludicrous to suggest that they would be responsible for the damages.

If they want to sue the league for allowing the premium pricing, then that's a different story. But since the Spurs don't actually do business in the state of Florida (in that they don't charge any consideration for any provision of goods and/or services), this state law should have no jurisdiction over them.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Since you won't merge, I'll repost here what I posted there.

This is ridiculous. The lawyer alleges that the fans suffered economic damages because they were charged a premium for the game. However, the Spurs aren't the ones who set the pricing, or even received the gate revenue, so it is ludicrous to suggest that they would be responsible for the damages.

If they want to sue the league for allowing the premium pricing, then that's a different story. But since the Spurs don't actually do business in the state of Florida (in that they don't charge any consideration for any provision of goods and/or services), this state law should have no jurisdiction over them.
Click to expand...

Yep the premium pricing is set by the resalers. The real lawsuit should be against them; since they received the premium. Then maybe those resalers would sue for restitution against the spurs (which they really wouldn't win anyway). It's just the way the cookie crumbles.
 
My entertainment value was unfairly decreased by the league when they totally unacceptably announced that we'd lost the coin flip for Akeem.
 
We should all sue the league for fixing games and coddling superstars!
 
Natebishop3 said:
God I hate lawyers...
Click to expand...

We hate you too.

But, this is a good example of defects in our tort system. There's two things here that are messed up. One is the class action system, where if the plaintiff wins each person in the class might get $10, but the attorney makes a bunch. And second, our tort system let's anyone sue. The problem is a bad lawsuit still costs the defendant to defend in legal fees. In the UK if you lose, you pay the other side's costs. It makes you think twice and significantly reduces lawsuits.

I'm in favor of reform for both.

Hating lawyers who work within the (defective) system makes no sense to me. Don't hate the player, hate the game!

My 2 cents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Nikolokolus
OT: Deja vu all over again?
Replies
15
Views
1K
Rastapopoulos
Rastapopoulos
BigGameDamian
Notice Should Trail Blazers sign-and-trade Jusuf Nurkic for Harrison Barnes? 17 trades to help Portland
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
Gronk Brady
Gronk Brady
SlyPokerDog
Politics Gavin Newsom sues Fox News for $787M in defamation case over Trump call
Replies
4
Views
203
MickZagger
MickZagger
Mr. J
Official Coaching News Thread
2 3
Replies
64
Views
6K
Mr. J
Mr. J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top