Knicks · Apparently Jim Rome and David Stern were arguing on radio and it got heated... (page 2)

loweyecue wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

loweyecue wrote:I have never listened to Rome before, I see no reason to change that. Stern was right in the way he parried a loaded question. What did Rome think he would say? Yes it was fixed.??

I agree the question was insulting but I disagree about Stern being right. Stern's response was at best undignified and at worst embarrassing. Can you imagine if every time he was asked an insulting, unfair question, President Obama acted like David Stern?

Maybe true. The way I saw it, the dude asked the question with the express desire of irritating Stern. They both knew that if Stern said no it wasn't fixed it wouldn't change anybody's opinion. So I don't think the question has any value at all. He was trying to get under Stern's skin, and Stern gave him a taste of his own medicine. Good for Stern.

He didn't give Rome a taste of his own medicine. He gave Rome exactly what he (Rome) wanted: an immature reply that would get played countless times on the internet and TV, thereby giving Rome tons of publicity. Imagine if Stern actually had the maturity to realize what Jim Rome was up to and gave Rome the last thing he wanted: a boring one word, two letter answer: No.

Bonn1997 wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

loweyecue wrote:I have never listened to Rome before, I see no reason to change that. Stern was right in the way he parried a loaded question. What did Rome think he would say? Yes it was fixed.??

I agree the question was insulting but I disagree about Stern being right. Stern's response was at best undignified and at worst embarrassing. Can you imagine if every time he was asked an insulting, unfair question, President Obama acted like David Stern?

Maybe true. The way I saw it, the dude asked the question with the express desire of irritating Stern. They both knew that if Stern said no it wasn't fixed it wouldn't change anybody's opinion. So I don't think the question has any value at all. He was trying to get under Stern's skin, and Stern gave him a taste of his own medicine. Good for Stern.

He didn't give Rome a taste of his own medicine. He gave Rome exactly what he (Rome) wanted: an immature reply that would get played countless times on the internet and TV, thereby giving Rome tons of publicity. Imagine if Stern actually had the maturity to realize what Jim Rome was up to and gave Rome the last thing he wanted: a boring one word, two letter answer: No.

I will concede that, I don't really know what Rome is like. I just thought stern got under Rome's skin as much as Rome got under his. If he had said "No", Rome may have continued to probe.

I wouldn't doubt the lottery being fixed. Part of the agreement to sale the hornets was that they get number one pick.

loweyecue wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

loweyecue wrote:I have never listened to Rome before, I see no reason to change that. Stern was right in the way he parried a loaded question. What did Rome think he would say? Yes it was fixed.??

I agree the question was insulting but I disagree about Stern being right. Stern's response was at best undignified and at worst embarrassing. Can you imagine if every time he was asked an insulting, unfair question, President Obama acted like David Stern?

Maybe true. The way I saw it, the dude asked the question with the express desire of irritating Stern. They both knew that if Stern said no it wasn't fixed it wouldn't change anybody's opinion. So I don't think the question has any value at all. He was trying to get under Stern's skin, and Stern gave him a taste of his own medicine. Good for Stern.

He didn't give Rome a taste of his own medicine. He gave Rome exactly what he (Rome) wanted: an immature reply that would get played countless times on the internet and TV, thereby giving Rome tons of publicity. Imagine if Stern actually had the maturity to realize what Jim Rome was up to and gave Rome the last thing he wanted: a boring one word, two letter answer: No.

I will concede that, I don't really know what Rome is like. I just thought stern got under Rome's skin as much as Rome got under his. If he had said "No", Rome may have continued to probe.

Rome is always highly dramatic. I think he was just having fun.

Vmart wrote:I wouldn't doubt the lottery being fixed. Part of the agreement to sale the hornets was that they get number one pick.

It would be quite hard to do that since a representative from each team is there. They'd have to in some non-obvious way modify the balls so that the ones from New Orleans were guaranteed to be selected. Or perhaps pay-off the representatives of each team.

stern could have just said he gets tired of answering that question, said no, of course not - highlight the steps they take to make sure its fair, hype the auditor and how they wouldn't stand for it, even if he wanted to fix it.

And move on.

Instead, his response, to me, shows that he must be hiding something, and he wants people to stop asking him about it.

Clearly, it is fixed- and I am only half kidding...

People love conspiriacy.

I don't get how one could be done. By that, does Stern actually benefit from a fix?

He is paid by the owners. If he fixed it to benefit one owner, that means he would deliberatly penalizing another.

I can't imagine the penalty of such a disclosure would incur. The civil (monetary) penalty and perhaps incarceration might also be pretty severe for a fraud of such size.

Logic dictates there is no fix.

I like Rome but he is a dick. He knows how to press buttons and get under the skin.

This put him on the map:

IrishKnickFan wrote:

VCoug wrote:Jim Rome is a complete tool and David Stern was completely right about how he's made his career.

It was embarrassing for an NBA commissioner to behave that way. I dont like Jim Rome at all but Stern really came off like a jerk. I mean asking Jim rome if he stopped beating his wife id low even for a know degenerate

agreed^.
1st of all, its a valid question because so many people are on either one side of the fence or the other bust, most have an opinion.
2nd -Jim Rome works for the Entertainment, Sports Network while Sterm is the Commissioner or a major sports organizations. The onus to act like a person with some respect an integrity was on Stern, not Rome who is expected to do what he does. To respond like that just show how little respect Stern has for the audience and pretty much everyone in general.

3rd - Stern is a dik.

I will give stern the benefit of doubt since he froze the envelope that vot us ewing

VCoug wrote:Jim Rome is a complete tool and David Stern was completely right about how he's made his career.

+1

SupremeCommander wrote:

VCoug wrote:Jim Rome is a complete tool and David Stern was completely right about how he's made his career.

+1

If Stern feels that way, then why go on the show? I think Stern came off as unprepared. He seemed to have no idea that such a question might be coming.

Nalod wrote:People love conspiriacy.

I don't get how one could be done. By that, does Stern actually benefit from a fix?

He is paid by the owners. If he fixed it to benefit one owner, that means he would deliberatly penalizing another.

I can't imagine the penalty of such a disclosure would incur. The civil (monetary) penalty and perhaps incarceration might also be pretty severe for a fraud of such size.

Logic dictates there is no fix.

I like Rome but he is a dick. He knows how to press buttons and get under the skin.

This put him on the map:

I don't get that video. Is there some context I'm unfamiliar with? Why would Rome keep calling a guy by the wrong name?

Bonn1997 wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

VCoug wrote:Jim Rome is a complete tool and David Stern was completely right about how he's made his career.

+1

If Stern feels that way, then why go on the show? I think Stern came off as unprepared. He seemed to have no idea that such a question might be coming.

Rome asked a ridiculous question and got an appropriate answer. Then Rome starting pouting. I don't see why Stern should have to put up with that shit regardless of whether or not he's the comissioner. The friggin NBA Finals are on and he's asking loaded conspiracy questions. Also, I always change the channel when Rome is on so I agree with Stern on Rome's career

SupremeCommander wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

VCoug wrote:Jim Rome is a complete tool and David Stern was completely right about how he's made his career.

+1

If Stern feels that way, then why go on the show? I think Stern came off as unprepared. He seemed to have no idea that such a question might be coming.

Rome asked a ridiculous question and got an appropriate answer. Then Rome starting pouting. I don't see why Stern should have to put up with that shit regardless of whether or not he's the comissioner. The friggin NBA Finals are on and he's asking loaded conspiracy questions. Also, I always change the channel when Rome is on so I agree with Stern on Rome's career

But by merely going on the show, you're endorsing the interviewer. At any given moment there are several thousand people who would be happy to interview Stern. By going on the show, Stern is saying "you (Rome) are the one who's most worthy of my time." Stern's actions and comments about Rome are incoherent.

Bonn1997 wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

VCoug wrote:Jim Rome is a complete tool and David Stern was completely right about how he's made his career.

+1

If Stern feels that way, then why go on the show? I think Stern came off as unprepared. He seemed to have no idea that such a question might be coming.

Rome asked a ridiculous question and got an appropriate answer. Then Rome starting pouting. I don't see why Stern should have to put up with that shit regardless of whether or not he's the comissioner. The friggin NBA Finals are on and he's asking loaded conspiracy questions. Also, I always change the channel when Rome is on so I agree with Stern on Rome's career

But by merely going on the show, you're endorsing the interviewer. At any given moment there are several thousand people who would be happy to interview Stern. By going on the show, Stern is saying "you (Rome) are the one who's most worthy of my time." Stern's actions and comments about Rome are incoherent.

good point. I personally would have no desire to appear on Rome Is Burning

Bonn1997 wrote:

Nalod wrote:People love conspiriacy.

I don't get how one could be done. By that, does Stern actually benefit from a fix?

He is paid by the owners. If he fixed it to benefit one owner, that means he would deliberatly penalizing another.

I can't imagine the penalty of such a disclosure would incur. The civil (monetary) penalty and perhaps incarceration might also be pretty severe for a fraud of such size.

Logic dictates there is no fix.

I like Rome but he is a dick. He knows how to press buttons and get under the skin.

This put him on the map:

I don't get that video. Is there some context I'm unfamiliar with? Why would Rome keep calling a guy by the wrong name?

He is calling Jim as Chris Everett meaning he is a woman. In reference to female tennis player Chris Evert. Kinda like calling Reggie Miller...Cheryl Miller.

I don't like Jim Rome. I can never sit through anything he does for more than 1 minute. Guy is definitely a tool.

NYKBocker wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Nalod wrote:People love conspiriacy.

I don't get how one could be done. By that, does Stern actually benefit from a fix?

He is paid by the owners. If he fixed it to benefit one owner, that means he would deliberatly penalizing another.

I can't imagine the penalty of such a disclosure would incur. The civil (monetary) penalty and perhaps incarceration might also be pretty severe for a fraud of such size.

Logic dictates there is no fix.

I like Rome but he is a dick. He knows how to press buttons and get under the skin.

This put him on the map:

I don't get that video. Is there some context I'm unfamiliar with? Why would Rome keep calling a guy by the wrong name?

He is calling Jim as Chris Everett meaning he is a woman. In reference to female tennis player Chris Evert. Kinda like calling Reggie Miller...Cheryl Miller.

Oh, I get it. Thanks. That was pretty lame on Rome's part though.

If you ask me they are both douchebags

knickslions wrote:If you ask me they are both douchebags

I agree but I have higher character expectations for the NBA commissioner than guy with a radio show.

I kind of like the way Stern shot back.

I think Rome got his answer but he wanted the cheap thrill and he got it.

Rome kind of never let up on it. I thought Stern was being a dick when he called SAS "important"! ANd I loved it!

SAS is a clown of sorts too.

This is the media and they have no respect (not saying this about SAS). Rome went too far on a question that was done many times before and Stearn has answered it many times. Rome wanted more and Stern is no fool.