• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Nice Michael Ray Richardson article

OldtiredGRiz

Well-known member
DONOR
Stumbled across this today, hope it hasn't been posted previously.

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/137306230/micheal-ray-richardson-nets-canada-coach?partnerId=ed-9501803-658620023
 
can't read a story like that without wondering if the griz would be interested in bringing him back as a coach.
 
Ty Lawson, the Denver point guard recently traded to Houston, just picked up his fourth DUI. It is well known that he had another that went unreported, and that he often showed up to practice stinking of alcohol. For this behavior he has received two two-game suspensions, and one three-game suspension. Another suspension looms.

Lawson is not the first NBA player with a drinking problem. Another famous case was that of Chris Mullin, then of the Warriors, who missed so many practices he was suspended by the team, and later traded. This behavior occurred during the same period that Micheal Ray was having his drug problems, leading to a life-long suspension. (Remember, the suspension was revoked after two years, and Micheal Ray could have returned, but chose to stay in Europe.)

At that time, Richardson complained that there was a double standard: Alcohol abuse was pretty much tolerated, while cocaine meant a lifetime suspension.

Mullin went into rehab after about four years, and claimed he never took a drop of alcohol after that. Lawson is headed to rehab as we speak. But those four DUI's are still on the books, and it will be interesting to see how the NBA rules on his case.

All by way of saying, I believe Micheal Ray's contention is probably true: You can't separate the "War on Drugs" from racism. This war is really on the drugs used by black people; not the alcohol we white guys drink. Lawson, Richardson and Mullin had the same problem: They were ill. But the treatments were very different. Why?
 
Same reason white players are never referred to by sportscasters as "natural athletes" and black players are never praised for their "intelligence?"
 
Cocaine was and is illegal....alcohol was and still is legal....let's not put race on every problem in the world, because in your own example Lawson has been treated the same as Mullin for the same infraction...
 
sacstateman said:
Cocaine was and is illegal....alcohol was and still is legal....let's not put race on every problem in the world, because in your own example Lawson has been treated the same as Mullin for the same infraction...

This isn't "every problem in the world."
This is about ONE problem in the world.
Drugs.
Alcohol is a drug.
Cocaine is a drug.
Why are they treated differently?
That is the issue.
I've suggested an answer.
What's yours?
 
citay said:
Ty Lawson, the Denver point guard recently traded to Houston, just picked up his fourth DUI. It is well known that he had another that went unreported, and that he often showed up to practice stinking of alcohol. For this behavior he has received two two-game suspensions, and one three-game suspension. Another suspension looms.

Lawson is not the first NBA player with a drinking problem. Another famous case was that of Chris Mullin, then of the Warriors, who missed so many practices he was suspended by the team, and later traded. This behavior occurred during the same period that Micheal Ray was having his drug problems, leading to a life-long suspension. (Remember, the suspension was revoked after two years, and Micheal Ray could have returned, but chose to stay in Europe.)

At that time, Richardson complained that there was a double standard: Alcohol abuse was pretty much tolerated, while cocaine meant a lifetime suspension.

Mullin went into rehab after about four years, and claimed he never took a drop of alcohol after that. Lawson is headed to rehab as we speak. But those four DUI's are still on the books, and it will be interesting to see how the NBA rules on his case.

All by way of saying, I believe Micheal Ray's contention is probably true: You can't separate the "War on Drugs" from racism. This war is really on the drugs used by black people; not the alcohol we white guys drink. Lawson, Richardson and Mullin had the same problem: They were ill. But the treatments were very different. Why?

Sorry...I missed your answer in there....please point it out again....and cocaine is still illegal and alcohol is legal...I just pointed out a possible reason for the different ways players were treated was because one substance was legal while the other was not hence one player was breaking the law while the other was not and that the black player, when abusing a legal substance was punished the same as the white player who abused legal substances....Chris Herron (a white player) was also run out of the league for cocaine and heroin abuse....can you name one white player who was using illegal drugs and got caught who didn't get the same punishment as a black player who did the same???? I'm not saying it didn't happen but I can't remember an instance where it did....
 
sacstateman said:
citay said:
Ty Lawson, the Denver point guard recently traded to Houston, just picked up his fourth DUI. It is well known that he had another that went unreported, and that he often showed up to practice stinking of alcohol. For this behavior he has received two two-game suspensions, and one three-game suspension. Another suspension looms.

Lawson is not the first NBA player with a drinking problem. Another famous case was that of Chris Mullin, then of the Warriors, who missed so many practices he was suspended by the team, and later traded. This behavior occurred during the same period that Micheal Ray was having his drug problems, leading to a life-long suspension. (Remember, the suspension was revoked after two years, and Micheal Ray could have returned, but chose to stay in Europe.)

At that time, Richardson complained that there was a double standard: Alcohol abuse was pretty much tolerated, while cocaine meant a lifetime suspension.

Mullin went into rehab after about four years, and claimed he never took a drop of alcohol after that. Lawson is headed to rehab as we speak. But those four DUI's are still on the books, and it will be interesting to see how the NBA rules on his case.

All by way of saying, I believe Micheal Ray's contention is probably true: You can't separate the "War on Drugs" from racism. This war is really on the drugs used by black people; not the alcohol we white guys drink. Lawson, Richardson and Mullin had the same problem: They were ill. But the treatments were very different. Why?

Sorry...I missed your answer in there....please point it out again....and cocaine is still illegal and alcohol is legal...I just pointed out a possible reason for the different ways players were treated was because one substance was legal while the other was not hence one player was breaking the law while the other was not and that the black player, when abusing a legal substance was punished the same as the white player who abused legal substances....Chris Herron (a white player) was also run out of the league for cocaine and heroin abuse....can you name one white player who was using illegal drugs and got caught who didn't get the same punishment as a black player who did the same???? I'm not saying it didn't happen but I can't remember an instance where it did....

You did not miss my answer.
You said, "Let's not put race one every problem in the world."
So you got my answer.
Racism.
My answer as to why cocaine is illegal, subject to a total ban from the league.
While alcohol, an equally dangerous potentially destructive drug, is legal. Subject to a suspension of a couple of games here and there.
Both can become addictions.
One is treated as an illness.
The other as a criminal act, subject to onerous prison sentences.
That's my issue here.
Not Chris Herron.
What's your answer to that?
 
Great article on MRR.

Being drugs and alcohol have been brought into the discussion. I say legalize it all. Seriously, if a person wants to use whatever drug they want to use, they will, regardless if it is legal or not. People will throw their lives away, legal or not. Why in the hell continue to waste our the hard earned money on treatment after treatment on addicts? Why continue to have a system the money they spend go to criminals? Legalize it and tax the hell out of it!!! Once someone is a legal adult, they should have the right to choose what one puts into their own body! If someone want to throw their lives away with drugs, do what we can to help them beat the addiction. Yet, if they chose to not get well, then let them throw away their life over whatever drugs. I don't mean to sound harsh, but sometimes I think society is fighting a losing cause in drugs, and spending way too much money on the users. Legally, hold people responsible for any troubles they cause from the use, not for the use itself, just like alcohol.

Personally, legal or not, I will never touch any drugs. Seriously, if a person is stupid enough to use and rely on that crap, does it make a difference or not if it is legal or not?
 
I guess citay we will have to agree to disagree because I don't think racism is the reason for the difference in punishments between MRR and CM and TL...and for your information, I am a recovering alcoholic- addict who has been clean since July 9, 1990....
 
sacstateman said:
I guess citay we will have to agree to disagree because I don't think racism is the reason for the difference in punishments between MRR and CM and TL...and for your information, I am a recovering alcoholic- addict who has been clean since July 9, 1990....

Congrats on the recovery. That is a rough road. My dad traveled that road too. 1 rehab stint was needed. Fortunately, he has had it under control since then. I have a great friend, like a brother to me having gone through a rehab, he is reaching 3 months sober and drug free. I am praying that 1 stint is all he will need too.

Ironic, my Dad and my friend each have said, they are thankful for programs, but feel people need held accountable for their actions, and society should not be responsible for treatment after treatment. Each treatment runs into the 100's of thousands dollars. They both met drug and alcohol addicts in for multiple rehab stints. They both feel the majority of the multiple time rehabs will never recover.

I am happy for anyone who beats an addiction. The temptation is there every day of life. I am happy for you. :thumb:
 
mtgrizrule said:
sacstateman said:
I guess citay we will have to agree to disagree because I don't think racism is the reason for the difference in punishments between MRR and CM and TL...and for your information, I am a recovering alcoholic- addict who has been clean since July 9, 1990....

Congrats on the recovery. That is a rough road. My dad traveled that road too. 1 rehab stint was needed. Fortunately, he has had it under control since then. I have a great friend, like a brother to me having gone through a rehab, he is reaching 3 months sober and drug free. I am praying that 1 stint is all he will need too.

Ironic, my Dad and my friend each have said, they are thankful for programs, but feel people need held accountable for their actions, and society should not be responsible for treatment after treatment. Each treatment runs into the 100's of thousands dollars. They both met drug and alcohol addicts in for multiple rehab stints. They both feel the majority of the multiple time rehabs will never recover.

I am happy for anyone who beats an addiction. The temptation is there every day of life. I am happy for you. :thumb:

The fact is, for the vast majority of addicts and alcoholics, one stint in treatment simply won't suffice. Relapse is a fact of recovery for most. And whatever you want to say about state-subsidized treatment centers, it is a proven fact that treatment is a much more economical and effective model for rehabilitation than prison. Even if you have to put a person through state-subsidized addiction treatment several times, it is still the FAR LESS expensive option than long-term incarceration. Each treatment runs "100's of thousands of dollars"?! That is totally ridiculous! Speaking from personal experience, you aren't even close. Most decent rehabs are perhaps $10-30K. And yes, there are ultra exclusive rehab centers that run $60-100K, but those are in the vast minority. State subsidized treatment centers tend to be far from luxurious.

The War on Drugs is a battle that can't be won. Addiction touches all of our lives, so how can you ever win a war against people that you love? Demand conquers all and it's not ever going away, so why fight it? The War on Drugs has been nothing but a boon for the cartels. Decriminalization takes the incentive out of the game for those that profit most from the War on Drugs, criminals.

Sorry for going off, this topic just gets me fired up. It's just disheartening to see so many addicts rotting away in prison when if they got treatment, they would stand a fighting chance to become productive members of society. It's ironic that they call it the "department of corrections". Cause so many come out of prison better people for the experience.Lol
 
gotgame75 said:
mtgrizrule said:
sacstateman said:
I guess citay we will have to agree to disagree because I don't think racism is the reason for the difference in punishments between MRR and CM and TL...and for your information, I am a recovering alcoholic- addict who has been clean since July 9, 1990....

Congrats on the recovery. That is a rough road. My dad traveled that road too. 1 rehab stint was needed. Fortunately, he has had it under control since then. I have a great friend, like a brother to me having gone through a rehab, he is reaching 3 months sober and drug free. I am praying that 1 stint is all he will need too.

Ironic, my Dad and my friend each have said, they are thankful for programs, but feel people need held accountable for their actions, and society should not be responsible for treatment after treatment. Each treatment runs into the 100's of thousands dollars. They both met drug and alcohol addicts in for multiple rehab stints. They both feel the majority of the multiple time rehabs will never recover.

I am happy for anyone who beats an addiction. The temptation is there every day of life. I am happy for you. :thumb:

The fact is, for the vast majority of addicts and alcoholics, one stint in treatment simply won't suffice. Relapse is a fact of recovery for most. And whatever you want to say about state-subsidized treatment centers, it is a proven fact that treatment is a much more economical and effective model for rehabilitation than prison. Even if you have to put a person through state-subsidized addiction treatment several times, it is still the FAR LESS expensive option than long-term incarceration. Each treatment runs "100's of thousands of dollars"?! That is totally ridiculous! Speaking from personal experience, you aren't even close. Most decent rehabs are perhaps $10-30K. And yes, there are ultra exclusive rehab centers that run $60-100K, but those are in the vast minority. State subsidized treatment centers tend to be far from luxurious.

The War on Drugs is a battle that can't be won. Addiction touches all of our lives, so how can you ever win a war against people that you love? Demand conquers all and it's not ever going away, so why fight it? The War on Drugs has been nothing but a boon for the cartels. Decriminalization takes the incentive out of the game for those that profit most from the War on Drugs, criminals.

Sorry for going off, this topic just gets me fired up. It's just disheartening to see so many addicts rotting away in prison when if they got treatment, they would stand a fighting chance to become productive members of society. It's ironic that they call it the "department of corrections". Cause so many come out of prison better people for the experience.Lol


FYI, I agree with you they should not be in prisons. Drug addiction should be treated the same as alcoholism. It is wrong to have addicts in jails and prisons. I agree the treatments are better out of prison. I think the only thing we disagree on is the number of rehabs covered by whatever program or programs. Let me rephrase my wording regarding the war on drugs. We need to legally focus on those who are illegally dealing the drugs, not the abusers and addicts. The dealers do belong in prisons. The war on drugs can be minimized. The war on so many being addicts is the tough part. On the other hand if anyone hurts anyone as a result of being on drugs or alcohol, yes they should face legal ramifications.
 
Just one more thing to say about this subject....I went to rehab for only 2 weeks because that is how much vacation time I had to use....the rehab people said I'd never stay clean because I didn't give it a decent chance....I told them that I would stay clean because I wanted sobriety badly and I wasn't there to satisfy anyone but myself....the whole thing comes down to how much YOU want to stay sober for yourself, not anyone else but yourself....if you aren't 100% ready to change it will not work....99% isn't good enough.....I am speaking from the position of someone who has been addicted to heroin, cocaine, and alcohol....I have done meth but never got addicted but that seems to be the drug that is causing more problems than any other right now....If the addict isn't totally committed there is no chance of treatment working.....trust me....I've lived it....
 
sacstateman said:
Just one more thing to say about this subject....I went to rehab for only 2 weeks because that is how much vacation time I had to use....the rehab people said I'd never stay clean because I didn't give it a decent chance....I told them that I would stay clean because I wanted sobriety badly and I wasn't there to satisfy anyone but myself....the whole thing comes down to how much YOU want to stay sober for yourself, not anyone else but yourself....if you aren't 100% ready to change it will not work....99% isn't good enough.....I am speaking from the position of someone who has been addicted to heroin, cocaine, and alcohol....I have done meth but never got addicted but that seems to be the drug that is causing more problems than any other right now....If the addict isn't totally committed there is no chance of treatment working.....trust me....I've lived it....


Pretty much my Dad's and friend's opinion after they did their rehabs.
 
mtgrizrule said:
sacstateman said:
Just one more thing to say about this subject....I went to rehab for only 2 weeks because that is how much vacation time I had to use....the rehab people said I'd never stay clean because I didn't give it a decent chance....I told them that I would stay clean because I wanted sobriety badly and I wasn't there to satisfy anyone but myself....the whole thing comes down to how much YOU want to stay sober for yourself, not anyone else but yourself....if you aren't 100% ready to change it will not work....99% isn't good enough.....I am speaking from the position of someone who has been addicted to heroin, cocaine, and alcohol....I have done meth but never got addicted but that seems to be the drug that is causing more problems than any other right now....If the addict isn't totally committed there is no chance of treatment working.....trust me....I've lived it....


Pretty much my Dad's and friend's opinion after they did their rehabs.


Just alcohol for me... but I agree with sacstatesman. It depends upon how much YOU want to be free of addiction. I drank from the age of 18 until last year, in a slowly descending spiral of self abuse. Very tough on my family, though I was not abusive toward them.

I told myself occasionally over the years I had to stop, finally making a commitment about three years ago... but still couldn't break the addiction until about a year ago when I started telling myself: "You don't need a drink right now. Wait an hour or two." Now I do a lot of daily self talk to the effect that "I feel pretty good, alert and clear-headed right now... So why mess things up with a drink?"

I consider myself fortunate that I don't really have cravings anymore (knock on wood). I DO often tell myself that it feels a hell of a lot better being clear-headed than in a constant fog and that carries me a long way, believe it. Ironically, I don't have much sympathy for those unable to break the chains (sorry), because I also believe it MUST be an internal decision made by each individual. I can't help someone who can't make that decision and act on it.
 
Well put GJ. I have struggled with alcohol (mainly beer) my whole life. Yes, I do drink beer, but nowhere as heavily as I did up to early 30's. I always remind myself that I don't want to put my family, friends, and co workers through everything my Dad did when he was struggling with drinking too much. I also have learned to minimize the number of times I put myself in a drinking environment.

I do feel bad for those with addictions. I lose all empathy for the situation after 2 rehabs. Like you, I feel it is a human decision, and if someone finds changing for the better more important than the addiction, they can quit the addiction, or at the very least minimize it to quit controlling their life. The thing is, most addicts know for fact they must change things for the better, yet still don't.
 
sacstateman said:
I guess citay we will have to agree to disagree because I don't think racism is the reason for the difference in punishments between MRR and CM and TL...and for your information, I am a recovering alcoholic- addict who has been clean since July 9, 1990....

Your sobriety is high quality and admirable. Congratulations and best wishes for it to continue, from someone who knows what it means to be " a friend of Bill".
 
citay said:
sacstateman said:
Cocaine was and is illegal....alcohol was and still is legal....let's not put race on every problem in the world, because in your own example Lawson has been treated the same as Mullin for the same infraction...

This isn't "every problem in the world."
This is about ONE problem in the world.
Drugs.
Alcohol is a drug.
Cocaine is a drug.
Why are they treated differently?
That is the issue.
I've suggested an answer.
What's yours?

Except one is a legal drug and one is an illegal drug. Surely you see the difference.
 
Back
Top