MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: GGGG on December 10, 2011, 06:47:54 PM
-
Ugh.
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/7338271/ryan-braun-milwaukee-brewers-tests-positive-performance-enhancing-drug
Potential 50 game suspension.
-
Watch the NL take away his MVP award.
-
Just broke on ESPN
50 game suspension
-
He faces a 50 game suspension and appealing everything
check the superbar too: http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=29052.0
-
Watch the NL take away his MVP award.
Isn't the award given by the Baseball Writers of America? Does the league have any influence over the award and can they take it away?
This would kill any chance the Brewers had this year.
-
The league could ask the writers to void the award.
-
The league could ask the writers to void the award.
I see. I was not certain of the answer when I asked it. I could see the Baseball Writers Association taking it away themselves without any influence by MLB, as well.
-
If this is true they should take it away and award it to Kemp. Asap.
-
What's the response from Attanasio? Does this cause the team to drop the pursuit of free agents, scale things back? Or does he look for someone else to try to be the "face of the franchise" and up the offer to Fielder? Milwaukee has always seemed to be a town that loathed PED users even more than most, having this happen to their biggest revenue generating piece is a killer.
-
What's the response from Attanasio? Does this cause the team to drop the pursuit of free agents, scale things back? Or does he look for someone else to try to be the "face of the franchise" and up the offer to Fielder? Milwaukee has always seemed to be a town that loathed PED users even more than most, having this happen to their biggest revenue generating piece is a killer.
First: I was legitimately shocked and distraught when I heard the news. Invested a lot in this team this year, and having a tough time settling everything up in this turbulent offseason.
That being said, looking ahead I think you follow the same plan you had before going after Fielder. Whatever was your bottom line before is your bottom line now. In the new NL central, a Brewers team without Braun but with Fielder can keep close enough those first 50 games to still be the favorite - thats assuming Braun comes back relatively close to the same player. No way anyone can guess what will happen with Braun's long term history right now, but I'll subscribe that he's still ridiculously talented and despite the long term affects on power, etc still being up in the air, gotta stay the course.
That being said, if you don't get Prince I really think you look at blowing things up. Without Prince or Braun through 50 games, this team is lucky to win 20. Even with Braun, the way the NL race is projected, I still don't think they're the favorites - plus you have to figure in the extra uncertainty as to the player Braun will be. With the uncertainty of Braun (you can shore some of that offensive uncertainty up if you get Prince, hence my different view of post-suspension Braun now) you have to invest in the future. Trade Greinke. Trade Marcum. Trade Hart. -- A huge shame. You probably lose the fanbase. But you have a better chance to get them back more quickly than if you're a .500 team for the next x years and your best player is a known PED user.
-
Strip the MVP award from him
-
Discuss
-
Superbar.
-
Sorry im on my phone... Just realized i didnt post this in the superbar.
-
Quick thoughts:
- 2nd test was negative
- Emphatic and aggressive denial from agent
- Numerous sources close to the situation saying they believe MLB will find him innocent
Don't get me wrong, I'm not optimistic, but remember that these are anonymous sources and there has been no official word from MLB. There is at least enough cause for doubt to wait until this plays out before closing the case. With that said, this is terrible. Terrible for the Brewers and their fans, as well as for the sport as a whole.
-
cheater
-
So ESPN sits on the Bernie Fine child sexual abuse tape till it is past the staute of limitations but broadcasts the Braun report despite insider knowledge it is bogus and follow up tests are negative. Nice!
-
MarqPTM, robmufan, and Jimbo were all at Ryan Braun's Graffito as the news broke before the MU game!
-
Of course the follow up tests were negative. But maybe he knew that whatever he took was already out of his system. That's why a negative test cannot negate a positive test. His reps are saying he didn't knowingly take something but we all know that excuse doesn't work. No player has ever arguef their way out of a suspension and it ain't gonna happen now.
-
Of course the follow up tests were negative. But maybe he knew that whatever he took was already out of his system. That's why a negative test cannot negate a positive test. His reps are saying he didn't knowingly take something but we all know that excuse doesn't work. No player has ever arguef their way out of a suspension and it ain't gonna happen now.
From Tom Hardricourt:
"I just talked to someone familiar with Ryan Braun's positive drug test and he insisted that the Brewers' star left fielder will be cleared on the appeal process and that this information never should have come out.
But a source familiar with the situation told the Journal Sentinel that a second test requested by Braun was negative and was being used in the appeal process to overturn the first results. That source also indicated the banned substance was not a performance-enhancing drug.
“The truth will prevail; I really feel good about that,” said the source. “It just stinks that this got out before the appeal process is finished. Initial positive tests have been overturned before, proving the player is innocent, and nobody ever knows.”"
I'll trust him that 1) It has happened before and 2) It very well may happen again.
For the record, I, a lifelong Brewers fan and fan of Ryan Braun's, have said for the last 2+ years that I think Braun probably HAD been on some kind of PEDs before. I didn't think recently had used them, but he was at the University of Miami while ARod was making a cool quarter billion and shooting up during the off season at The U. Figured he had done it during then.
-
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/will_carroll/12/10/braun-positive-test/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a4&eref=sihp (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/will_carroll/12/10/braun-positive-test/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a4&eref=sihp)
Link to a cnnsi article that lays out the testing process. Unfortunately I still think this ends very badly, but this is a nice outline of how the system works.
-
From Tom Hardricourt:
"I just talked to someone familiar with Ryan Braun's positive drug test and he insisted that the Brewers' star left fielder will be cleared on the appeal process and that this information never should have come out.
But a source familiar with the situation told the Journal Sentinel that a second test requested by Braun was negative and was being used in the appeal process to overturn the first results. That source also indicated the banned substance was not a performance-enhancing drug.
“The truth will prevail; I really feel good about that,” said the source. “It just stinks that this got out before the appeal process is finished. Initial positive tests have been overturned before, proving the player is innocent, and nobody ever knows.”"
I'll trust him that 1) It has happened before and 2) It very well may happen again.
For the record, I, a lifelong Brewers fan and fan of Ryan Braun's, have said for the last 2+ years that I think Braun probably HAD been on some kind of PEDs before. I didn't think recently had used them, but he was at the University of Miami while ARod was making a cool quarter billion and shooting up during the off season at The U. Figured he had done it during then.
I just read the article. The source Hardicourt uses is someone from Braun's camp, which lacks some credibility in my opinion. Every article I've read says that no player has ever overturned a positive test through an appeal. I just can't see how this one gets overturned, either. Especially with statements coming out from Braun's agent saying: "there was absolutely no intentional violation of the program". The source from that article also says that "That source also indicated the banned substance was not technically classified as a performance-enhancing drug", so they admit he used a banned substance (unless it is just poorly written by the author). Plus, MLB had a SECOND company double check the results, and the test came back as having synthetic testosterone. At this point, the only facts we know is that Braun had a greater than 4:1 testosterone ratio, and that the extra testosterone was synthetic. Pretty damning.
-
I just read the article. The source Hardicourt uses is someone from Braun's camp, which lacks some credibility in my opinion. Every article I've read says that no player has ever overturned a positive test through an appeal. I just can't see how this one gets overturned, either. Especially with statements coming out from Braun's agent saying: "there was absolutely no intentional violation of the program". The source from that article also says that "That source also indicated the banned substance was not technically classified as a performance-enhancing drug", so they admit he used a banned substance (unless it is just poorly written by the author). Plus, MLB had a SECOND company double check the results, and the test came back as having synthetic testosterone. At this point, the only facts we know is that Braun had a greater than 4:1 testosterone ratio, and that the extra testosterone was synthetic. Pretty damning.
I didn't mean to say Braun certainly would be cleared of this, I just meant to say, based on what this inside source said, that it has happened and that it may happen in this case. Maybe the source is incorrect and that it has never happened, but I don't know why he would say it has then. To be honest I haven't read much on this besides the JS blogs, so I really don't know if it has a chance to be overturned or not. From what I have heard MLB has not confirmed he failed a drug test. I guess time will tell
-
Sounds to me like all of the above is possible. There's some confusion over what constitutes an "appeal" that has never been successful. Guys have tested above 4:1 before, and then been cleared - but this is not the same as appealing and winning. Instead after testing above 4:1, the second sample came out below that level, or did not test for artificial testosterone, or for some other reason did not show PED use. This is not the same as winning an appeal, and never becomes public. Has probably happened to many guys.
An appeal only needs to happen once the second test of the same sample turns up impropriety. This is the level at which no defense has ever been successful
-
If this does indeed turn out to be true my attitude towards MLB will sink to all time low. Bud Selig continually gets praised as the commish and in my opinion outside of MLB making a ton money there is no integrity in the sport.
On another note, if I were Aaron Rodgers I would distance myself from Braun real quickly. We just saw Jim B. support his friend of 50 years and end up with a ton of egg on his face. Unfortunately in today's soceity you have to protect yourself now more than ever.
-
I think that's the other problem. MLB was accused of protecting it's stars for so long. I just can't see how MLB can overturn this one and not come off looking a little foolish.
-
If this does indeed turn out to be true my attitude towards MLB will sink to all time low. Bud Selig continually gets praised as the commish and in my opinion outside of MLB making a ton money there is no integrity in the sport.
I don't get this at all. They caught him. Palmeiro, Rodriguez, Ramirez have all been outed. What else do you want? You think the NFL is breeding 280lb linebackers that run 4.3 40s on a high protein diet?
-
If this does indeed turn out to be true my attitude towards MLB will sink to all time low. Bud Selig continually gets praised as the commish and in my opinion outside of MLB making a ton money there is no integrity in the sport.
On another note, if I were Aaron Rodgers I would distance myself from Braun real quickly. We just saw Jim B. support his friend of 50 years and end up with a ton of egg on his face. Unfortunately in today's soceity you have to protect yourself now more than ever.
Completely, completely different situations. If I had a friend in the MLB who was caught using PEDs and says its BS I would support them immediately (and publicly if I needed to/had the influence to). If I had a friend who was accused of molesting boys I would privately give him the support he needs, but there is no way I would go public. Being associated with a friend in a different sport who used PEDs is nowhere near the same as employing a friend who molests children and then call those victims liars.
-
Wadesworld---I think anyone that watches Rodgers play QB will say he is the best or in team photo of best QB today. He is already being talked about as the greatest ever. I am not saying Rodgers has cheated, but if he were Jay Cutler you can stay friends with Braun. Why would a guy at the height of his profession take any risks that are not needed.
Every person I talked to last night was shocked about the Braun news and never expected it. I was completely shocked because I bought into his hype. There are people who said he already was greatest Brewer ever and I thought he had chance to be. I personally do not think if I were Aaron Rodgers I would want distraction of being friends with a possible cheater.
-
If this does indeed turn out to be true my attitude towards MLB will sink to all time low. Bud Selig continually gets praised as the commish and in my opinion outside of MLB making a ton money there is no integrity in the sport.
On another note, if I were Aaron Rodgers I would distance myself from Braun real quickly. We just saw Jim B. support his friend of 50 years and end up with a ton of egg on his face. Unfortunately in today's soceity you have to protect yourself now more than ever.
You mean the Aaron Rodgers who will be the NFL MVP and who possesses new found incredible arm strength?
-
You mean the Aaron Rodgers who will be the NFL MVP and who possesses new found incredible arm strength?
Its a good thing the NFL doesn't test at the same levels at the MLB.
-
4ever---That is the Aaron Rodgers I was referring to.
-
Its a good thing the NFL doesn't test at the same levels at the MLB.
I sure hope this is sarcastic. If not, wow, it's amazing how jealous some people are!!
-
I sure hope this is sarcastic. If not, wow, it's amazing how jealous some people are!!
I'm a Packers fan.
-
I'm a Packers fan.
Haha, okay. I guess my sarcasm meter isn't the greatest!!
-
I'm a Packer fan as well and will be anxious to see how Rodgers plays today. Thus far he has had an historic run and probably should end today. Wouldn't it be something if the Pack's perfect season ended due to Braun.
I also wonder what Packer fans would think if the Bears were defending SB champs, 12-0, Cutler was putting up Rodger's numbers and if Cutler and Braun were tight buddies. My guess is there would be a lot of speculation.
-
If anyone is following the story, it sounds like it is not PEDs or steroids but some other prohibited substance. Also, Trenni said that ESPN has made some key errors in reporting the story as far as the facts go. Basically, this is turning into a very strange story and they are saying that they've never seen a case like this. Unfortunately, it may not be resolved until January.
-
Glad to hear Trenni is on top of things!!!
-
Quote from Braun when PED rumors surrounded A-Rod: "The best thing he can do is come out, admit to everything and be completely honest. The situation will die a lot faster if he tells the whole truth."
Take your own advice, Ryan. You cheated. Serve your time. Move on.
-
Glad to hear Trenni is on top of things!!!
[/quote
Man, I'd like to be a fly on the wall watchin' that.
-
per mlbtraderumors.com -
5:21pm: According to a source familiar with the case, Braun's original test for performance-enhancing drugs was "insanely high, the highest ever for anyone who has ever taken a test, twice the level of the highest test ever taken," writes Teri Thompson of the New York Daily News.
Sounds like encouraging news for Braun's appeal. This could get really interesting.
-
So you're saying he really, really, really cheated.
-
Has MLB made a statement? This is all from Outside the Lines. We experienced the Chicago Tribune articles first hand. There appears to be some question as to what the high test result was or if the test will utlimately be upheld.
As with the MU cases we witnessed this past year, I suggest people wait for this to play out before convicting Braun, much less Rodgers. Some real winning comments in this thread. ::)
-
Mac, his people have admitted he took a banned substance but that it just wasn't a PED. at this point its not a matter of if he cheated, just what he cheated with.
-
Mac, his people have admitted he took a banned substance but that it just wasn't a PED. at this point its not a matter of if he cheated, just what he cheated with.
I had not seen that they admitted anything. I only saw that they said he tested positive for a banned substance, which was not a PED or steroid, not that they admitted he took the banned substance. They also said they would be vindicated. That doesn't sound like someone who admitted taking a substance.
I was out yesterday, traveling and attending the Packer game. I had not seen anything beyond the morning news. If there is something, please link it (not questionning, but requesting).
-
Mac, his people have admitted he took a banned substance but that it just wasn't a PED. at this point its not a matter of if he cheated, just what he cheated with.
He never admitted to taking anything knowingly.
-
He never admitted to taking anything knowingly.
This is the link I am most familiar with: http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/135405518.html (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/135405518.html).
Again, it states it was not a PED or Steroid, but a "prohibited substance". They also state it was the first time ever that MLB had a result like that. It does not state he admits to taking any substance.
"A very good source on the Ryan Braun side of the drug testing controversy assures me that Braun did not test positive for a performance-enhancing drug, as reported by ESPN's "Outside the Lines."
ESPN reported that Braun tested positive for a PED that gave him an abnormally high testosterone level, which proved to be synthetic and therefore not produced by the body.
But my source -- and again, this is from Braun's end and not MLB -- familiar with the test's findings says the "prohibited substance" was not a performance-enhancing drug or steroid of any kind. And the source says there has "never" been a result like this in the history of the MLB testing program.
The source said MLB "knows that Ryan is telling the truth" and that source firmly believes the postive test will be overturned. Pretty amazing stuff, huh?
The source said more detail couldn't be provided at this time because of the ongoing legal process. But suffice it to say that this is getting more interesting by the minute. If the prohibited substance wasn't a PED, it still triggered a positive result in MLB's steroid-testing policy.
If the prohibited substance Braun tested positive for was a stimulant instead of a steroid, he wouldn't be facing a 50-game suspension. The first offense for stimulants results in a 25-game suspension."
-
He never admitted to taking anything knowingly.
Standard operating procedure after testing positive : initially deny everything, then backtrack to the "didn't knowingly take anything".
-
Standard operating procedure after testing positive : initially deny everything, then backtrack to the "didn't knowingly take anything".
Oh, I'm aware. Just refuting what that other dude claimed.
-
Standard operating procedure after testing positive : initially deny everything, then backtrack to the "didn't knowingly take anything".
Maybe, maybe not. But, the post said they have admitted to taking a substance. At this point, I have not seen evidence of that.
Your post is speculation of what "might" happen, not what is currently known.
-
Lots of wonderful insight on this board.
I'm going to chip in as well. Brauns second test came back negative fyi.
-
I had not seen that they admitted anything. I only saw that they said he tested positive for a banned substance, which was not a PED or steroid, not that they admitted he took the banned substance. They also said they would be vindicated. That doesn't sound like someone who admitted taking a substance.
I was out yesterday, traveling and attending the Packer game. I had not seen anything beyond the morning news. If there is something, please link it (not questionning, but requesting).
Mea Culpa. I spoke with a milwaukee friend last night that told me as much. But I just spent about 15 minutes looking for something and came up empty. Shame on me for posting without having anything to back me up beforehand. This appears to be the most comprehensive article out there at this point:
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/brauns-odds-of-avoiding-suspension-tough-q03d7l5-135420708.html
-
Mea Culpa. I spoke with a milwaukee friend last night that told me as much. But I just spent about 15 minutes looking for something and came up empty. Shame on me for posting without having anything to back me up beforehand. This appears to be the most comprehensive article out there at this point:
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/brauns-odds-of-avoiding-suspension-tough-q03d7l5-135420708.html
Thanks. I wasn't aware of anything ... but nothing surprises me anymore!
-
I didn't mean for my post about his test results helping his appeal to sound sarcastic (not sure if it was taken that way). I was totally serious. It would be very very odd for him to be the player he was then to start mainlining testosterone. I acknowledge the counter argument that he might have just cheated the tests this whole time, but with those kinds of results, thats a conspiracy that would have to run pretty deep. If its true that his test results were totally out of line with anything ever seen even by known cheaters, it (without the benefit of further evidence) at least seems to lend possible credence to: a) a faulty test or - more likely b) the absorption of a substance without his knowledge. Again, I'm not trying to sound like a fanboy, but such out of whack results means, at bare minimum, that there's some very important information yet to come out.
-
Again, I'm not trying to sound like a fanboy, but such out of whack results means, at bare minimum, that there's some very important information yet to come out.
In the womb Ryan was a twin, but during the 2nd trimester he ingested the other boy and now has the strength and testosterone of two men. Seems to explain it.
-
I didn't mean for my post about his test results helping his appeal to sound sarcastic (not sure if it was taken that way). I was totally serious. It would be very very odd for him to be the player he was then to start mainlining testosterone. I acknowledge the counter argument that he might have just cheated the tests this whole time, but with those kinds of results, thats a conspiracy that would have to run pretty deep. If its true that his test results were totally out of line with anything ever seen even by known cheaters, it (without the benefit of further evidence) at least seems to lend possible credence to: a) a faulty test or - more likely b) the absorption of a substance without his knowledge. Again, I'm not trying to sound like a fanboy, but such out of whack results means, at bare minimum, that there's some very important information yet to come out.
i was being sarcastic in my response.
-
I didn't mean for my post about his test results helping his appeal to sound sarcastic (not sure if it was taken that way). I was totally serious. It would be very very odd for him to be the player he was then to start mainlining testosterone. I acknowledge the counter argument that he might have just cheated the tests this whole time, but with those kinds of results, thats a conspiracy that would have to run pretty deep. If its true that his test results were totally out of line with anything ever seen even by known cheaters, it (without the benefit of further evidence) at least seems to lend possible credence to: a) a faulty test or - more likely b) the absorption of a substance without his knowledge. Again, I'm not trying to sound like a fanboy, but such out of whack results means, at bare minimum, that there's some very important information yet to come out.
Too many unknowns to me right now. I don't know the timing of both tests. Is it reasonable from the highest ever test to clean out of the system to then have a test within the limits?
As for if he took anything, he was injured this year. Wasn't it Andy Pettite who took some PED's or other substance to recover from an injury? Could Braun have done the same? In Pettite's situation, though, I believe he admitted right away and gave the reason for the substance.
-
This is just pure speculation.... but from what I can decipher in the multitude of incomplete and sometimes conflicting reports, my guess is one of three possible scenarios is going to play out here:
A) Braun's "A" test showed the highest levels of testosterone MLB has ever seen, but either i) his ratios were still within reasonable limits or ii) the level was so impossibly high indicating the sample was tainted or an error was made in testing, but the test on the "B" sample was performed any way; nevertheless, the "B" sample turned something up, be it PED or otherwise. Braun's camp is going to be making the "probable cause" argument on appeal... i.e. the "B" test should have never been performed because i) the "A" test was invalid or ii) that WADA used the "A" test to test for something outside the guidelines of what would be allowable in a "B" test given the "A" results (i.e. if someone has high testosterone, MLBPA may say that you can only test for specific things in the "B" sample). This is tantamount to a cop who executes a search warrant on the wrong house and finds a stolen car... even though the guy who had the stolen car won't be prosecuted for grand theft auto, he still stole the car.
or
B) Something turned up in the "A" or "B" sample that WADA and/or MLB has never seen before. Something like a trial cancer medication which is still in the R&D stage that has completely stumped the WADA (because they have no idea if it even falls into the "doping" category).
or
C) Braun tested positive for something that WADA is capable of testing, but which was either i) not permitted to be tested or ii) not a banned substance under the CBA that was in effect at the time (e.g. HGH).
Don't look for WADA, the MLBPA or MLB to fall on the sword here... even if it turns out Braun is indeed completely innocent, his reputation has suffered irreparable damage. But to have an appeal sustained or errors admitted would break the levy that would completely undermine and effectively defeat any chance of adaquate drug testing going forward. For that reason alone, I hope Braun did it, because the consequences of innocence would be tragic in this case.
-
Don't look for WADA, the MLBPA or MLB to fall on the sword here... even if it turns out Braun is indeed completely innocent, his reputation has suffered irreparable damage. But to have an appeal sustained or errors admitted would break the levy that would completely undermine and effectively defeat any chance of adaquate drug testing going forward. For that reason alone, I hope Braun did it, because the consequences of innocence would be tragic in this case.
I lost you here. One mistake (I'm not saying there was one) would ruin the legitimacy of the entire system? Courts make mistakes all the time, and appeals courts correct them. Judging by the fact we generally take our disputes there rather than pursuing other measures, I'd say that a mistake-prone body can still garner plenty of legitimacy.
And I guess I just have trouble with the statement that it would be more tragic to have an innocent party exonerated than it would be to continue with the half-truth. Again, not saying he's innocent, and I'm having a hard time even giving him a benefit of the doubt, but this story seems to have an iceberg underneath it, and I think baseball is worse off if they cover something up than if they admit a mistake in a testing procedure that is probably good enough that people can still believe in the system.
-
I'm confused by this statement in the ESPN.com article...
"A source close to Braun said that when he was told about the positive test, he immediately requested to be tested again. That second test, using a different sample that was tested by Braun's camp, the source said, was not positive."
Did Braun's people have a sample tested on their own/outside of MLB's standard testing procedures? Or did they simply request that MLB test another sample? If Braun's representatives did it on their own, I think that raises more questions than answers.
-
I took it to mean the test was administered by MLB. Also makes you wonder about the conflicting reports on whether this is PED or another substance, i.e. a stimulant. If it was a testosterone boosting substance that was twice the highest levels ever seen under the program and the second sample comes back completely clean it really calls into question the first test - you probably can't lower levels from crazy high to normal in two weeks. If it's a stimulant, just the opposite: no surprise at all if the second one comes back fine.
-
From what I understand, Braun took a 2nd sample after the fact through MLB (how long after we don't know for sure). It came back "non-positive" (which is different than negative mind you). However, MLB policy is that a negative sample cannot negate a positive sample, for obvious reasons.
-
I lost you here. One mistake (I'm not saying there was one) would ruin the legitimacy of the entire system? Courts make mistakes all the time, and appeals courts correct them. Judging by the fact we generally take our disputes there rather than pursuing other measures, I'd say that a mistake-prone body can still garner plenty of legitimacy.
And I guess I just have trouble with the statement that it would be more tragic to have an innocent party exonerated than it would be to continue with the half-truth. Again, not saying he's innocent, and I'm having a hard time even giving him a benefit of the doubt, but this story seems to have an iceberg underneath it, and I think baseball is worse off if they cover something up than if they admit a mistake in a testing procedure that is probably good enough that people can still believe in the system.
Given a) the money involved with pro sports contracts, b) the litigious nature of our society, and c) the willingness in sports to cave on any matter of principal so long as you're compensated --- if just one test can be overturned on a technicality - be that a technicality in due process or the in the testing process itself - every athlete's agent will attempt to use that result as precedent as to why their client's test was inaccurate/questionable/invalid/etc in the future, and honestly, I don't think MLB has the resources or desire to defend its policy against a bombardment of test appeals, even if the appeals have no merit whatsoever. I hate making slippery slope arguments, but there's significant value to the WADA and MLB in the deterrent that 0 for 12 on appeals has on those contemplating an appeal. Unless one player is greater than the MLB drug-testing policy, Braun is going to be the sacrificial lamb if he has any level of culpability whatsoever.
The only way Braun and MLB can come out unscathed is if there was deliberate misconduct or fraud by the WADA and some scientist in Montreal goes to jail.
-
http://deadspin.com/5867318/a-guide-to-the-medical-semantic-mess-of-ryan-brauns-ped-case
-
I guess my buddy was right, although I'm still not sure where the article found the admission, or if they are making a leap by piecing things together : "If we believe Braun's team, which acknowledges that he took a banned substance but denies that it's a PED..."
-
From what I understand, Braun took a 2nd sample after the fact through MLB (how long after we don't know for sure). It came back "non-positive" (which is different than negative mind you). However, MLB policy is that a negative sample cannot negate a positive sample, for obvious reasons.
No, his second test was with some group he hired. It was weeks later:
"According to drug testing experts, though, passing a subsequent test is not, in and of itself, a valid defense and actually fits the pattern of some previous doping cases. US Anti-Doping Agency CEO Travis Tygart has no specific knowledge of the Braun case, but says that a testosterone level that goes from normal, to high, to normal is typical of someone on a steroid cycle. "After a person stops using, the T:E ratio" -- that's the testosterone-to-epitestosterone ratio, which is 1:1 in most people, and above 4:1 in positive tests -- "goes back down to normal levels, and that could be in a matter of days or hours. It depends on how much they used, how long they've been using, and their own individual metabolism." Research done by German scientists showed that one particular drug boosted a patient's T:E ratio above 80:1 before it dropped back to normal only 12 hours later."
The second test doesn't matter. The fact that he was able to dodge tests in previous years doesn't clear him. He may have been the highest levels the MLB has ever found but not the highest anyone has ever found so don't start claiming that it was so high that it must be a mistake.
Get over it homers. Your MVP is a cheater.
-
The second test doesn't matter. The fact that he was able to dodge tests in previous years doesn't clear him. He may have been the highest levels the MLB has ever found but not the highest anyone has ever found so don't start claiming that it was so high that it must be a mistake.
Get over it homers. Your MVP is a cheater.
Glad we have the guy who gave Braun the test and made the readings on this board. Somebody who knows all of the facts about the situation to clear everything up for us. Could've saved us 3 pages and just told us this right away.
By the way, so is yours. I'll take a cheater who wins the MVP and a team that gets 96 wins, wins the NL Central, and goes to the NLCS over a team that wins 71 games, finishes 25 games back (and 19 out of the playoffs), and gives up their best player in the offseason to the team that won the division but doesn't cheat (I would assume you would know for sure that nobody on the Cubbies has ever taken PEDs or any illegal substance before).
-
Glad we have the guy who gave Braun the test and made the readings on this board. Somebody who knows all of the facts about the situation to clear everything up for us. Could've saved us 3 pages and just told us this right away.
By the way, so is yours. I'll take a cheater who wins the MVP and a team that gets 96 wins, wins the NL Central, and goes to the NLCS over a team that wins 71 games, finishes 25 games back (and 19 out of the playoffs), and gives up their best player in the offseason to the team that won the division but doesn't cheat (I would assume you would know for sure that nobody on the Cubbies has ever taken PEDs or any illegal substance before).
As usual, I don't say things and then you say that i think them. Your guy, won rookie of the year, made several all star teams, won an MVP and now got caught with sick levels of synthetic testosterone. Everyone on this board is bending over backwards to convince themselves that he's innocent. This has nothing to do with any other team in the league.
As for how you don't care about steroids use, I don't give a crap about it either. (WE AGREE!) I think the gov should start putting HGH in our water supply, that stuff is awesome. That said if a cub gets caught next year you won't hear me saying: "Well... two weeks after that he took his own test and he passed it... No way he did it!"
Just shrug and say: "Hey, guys cheat. Hope he's still good when he gets back. "
Not: "I refuse to think this because he has my teams jersey on."
-
As usual, I don't say things and then you say that i think them. Your guy, won rookie of the year, made several all star teams, won an MVP and now got caught with sick levels of synthetic testosterone. Everyone on this board is bending over backwards to convince themselves that he's innocent. This has nothing to do with any other team in the league.
As for how you don't care about steroids use, I don't give a crap about it either. (WE AGREE!) I think the gov should start putting HGH in our water supply, that stuff is awesome. That said if a cub gets caught next year you won't hear me saying: "Well... two weeks after that he took his own test and he passed it... No way he did it!"
Just shrug and say: "Hey, guys cheat. Hope he's still good when he gets back. "
Not: "I refuse to think this because he has my teams jersey on."
Interesting that you complain about not saying things and then having someone say that you thought them. This post is chock full of just that. Pot, meet kettle.
Who has said any of the quotes you provided? You placed them in quotations, so they were quotes, right? Oh, yeah, they were "thinking" them.
All I have seen in this thread are questions about what is accurate. So far, nothing official has been made public. Yet, you have appeared to have convicted Braun. You may be correct. Then again, leaping to conclusions based upon media reports can be a dangerous thing. Or wasn't that what you were thinking? ;)
-
As usual, I don't say things and then you say that i think them. Your guy, won rookie of the year, made several all star teams, won an MVP and now got caught with sick levels of synthetic testosterone. Everyone on this board is bending over backwards to convince themselves that he's innocent. This has nothing to do with any other team in the league.
As for how you don't care about steroids use, I don't give a crap about it either. (WE AGREE!) I think the gov should start putting HGH in our water supply, that stuff is awesome. That said if a cub gets caught next year you won't hear me saying: "Well... two weeks after that he took his own test and he passed it... No way he did it!"
Just shrug and say: "Hey, guys cheat. Hope he's still good when he gets back. "
Not: "I refuse to think this because he has my teams jersey on."
I've actually been saying for a long time (a couple years) to anyone that would listen that I bet Braun was on steroids. I will admit I didn't think he was doing them when I was saying it, but based on ARod doing them at the University of Miami during the time that Braun was playing at the University of Miami, and the guy was getting the biggest contract in the history of baseball, I thought it would be pretty easy to see that and think "Hey, it worked for him, I have easy access to this stuff with him doing it here, let's see how this goes..."
Having said that, I don't know what is going to come of this until it is all said and done, so I am not going to pretend that he was cheating (or knowingly cheating) this past season. If he was, he was and it isn't as shocking to me as most seem to consider it. If he wasn't, then I would be very happy because he doesn't have to sit 50 (or 25 if it isn't PEDs like some rumors have suggested) games.
-
Interesting that you complain about not saying things and then having someone say that you thought them. This post is chock full of just that. Pot, meet kettle.
Who has said any of the quotes you provided? You placed them in quotations, so they were quotes, right? Oh, yeah, they were "thinking" them.
All I have seen in this thread are questions about what is accurate. So far, nothing official has been made public. Yet, you have appeared to have convicted Braun. You may be correct. Then again, leaping to conclusions based upon media reports can be a dangerous thing. Or wasn't that what you were thinking? ;)
I wrote:
That said if a cub gets caught next year you won't hear me saying: "Well... two weeks after that he took his own test and he passed it... No way he did it!"
I was quoting what a potential version of me would say if I started huffing paint.
You are 100% right on the 'everyone else is bending over backwords'. It was a reactionary exageration.
As for convicting people, someone fails these tests for PED's (without any details) and perhaps they ordered something from GNC. You test for a high level of synthetic testosterone then you did it, and it wasn't the first time.
-
I've actually been saying for a long time (a couple years) to anyone that would listen that I bet Braun was on steroids. I will admit I didn't think he was doing them when I was saying it, but based on ARod doing them at the University of Miami during the time that Braun was playing at the University of Miami, and the guy was getting the biggest contract in the history of baseball, I thought it would be pretty easy to see that and think "Hey, it worked for him, I have easy access to this stuff with him doing it here, let's see how this goes..."
If he did take something, I'm not going for the conspiracy theory that he's been supping up for as far back as his Miami, Minor League, or even Brewers days and managed to ace a couple dozen tests along the way. Simpler than that: team in a division and perhaps pennant race, last year with Fielder, look no further than July 2011 and the nagging calf injury that was keeping him out, getting re-injured at least once.
-
nt
-
This article clarifies that the 2nd test was not done by MLB but by an independent facility. good article, some rehash, some new stuff:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/david_epstein/12/12/ryan.braun.test/index.html?eref=sihp&sct=hp_t11_a2 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/david_epstein/12/12/ryan.braun.test/index.html?eref=sihp&sct=hp_t11_a2)
Added: This appears to be the article rawdog was quoting from.
-
No, his second test was with some group he hired. It was weeks later:
"According to drug testing experts, though, passing a subsequent test is not, in and of itself, a valid defense and actually fits the pattern of some previous doping cases. US Anti-Doping Agency CEO Travis Tygart has no specific knowledge of the Braun case, but says that a testosterone level that goes from normal, to high, to normal is typical of someone on a steroid cycle. "After a person stops using, the T:E ratio" -- that's the testosterone-to-epitestosterone ratio, which is 1:1 in most people, and above 4:1 in positive tests -- "goes back down to normal levels, and that could be in a matter of days or hours. It depends on how much they used, how long they've been using, and their own individual metabolism." Research done by German scientists showed that one particular drug boosted a patient's T:E ratio above 80:1 before it dropped back to normal only 12 hours later."
The second test doesn't matter. The fact that he was able to dodge tests in previous years doesn't clear him. He may have been the highest levels the MLB has ever found but not the highest anyone has ever found so don't start claiming that it was so high that it must be a mistake.
Get over it homers. Your MVP is a cheater.
You're quoting a study that looked at T:E ratios in response to "one particular drug". I have not seen the study, but the brief description you gave indicates that the "drug" caused T levels to increase but as the "drug" metabolized, the T levels went back to normal. The difference between this and Ryan Braun is that this study you quote was measuring natural testosterone. What was supposedly found in Braun's test was synthetic testosterone, which is not as readily metabolized by the body. What I heard on WTMJ yesterday afternoon is that 10% of synthetic testosterone can remain in the system two weeks after IV injection.
I don't think Braun is innocent, but if you're going to trash a guy, at least quote the relevant facts/studies.
-
But if only 10% was remaining weeks later, the ratio may still be above 1:1 but not above the 4:1 threshold. Maybe this is why Braun's second test is being labeled by his people as non-positive (maybe a ratio of 3:1) instead of negative (1:1).
-
But if only 10% was remaining weeks later, the ratio may still be above 1:1 but not above the 4:1 threshold. Maybe this is why Braun's second test is being labeled by his people as non-positive (maybe a ratio of 3:1) instead of negative (1:1).
I don't think the second test has anything to do with ratios... I think the second test was to show that either i) he had no synthetic testosterone in his system or ii) his ratios are naturally above 4:1. I suppose the argument in the former would be that if the initial positive test for synthetic testosterone was accurate, then some level -- even perhaps a trace level -- of synthetic testosterone would have to remain in his system two weeks later.
-
Perhaps. Again, with the lack of details, it's mostly speculative. Just playing devil's advocate.
-
You're quoting a study that looked at T:E ratios in response to "one particular drug". I have not seen the study, but the brief description you gave indicates that the "drug" caused T levels to increase but as the "drug" metabolized, the T levels went back to normal. The difference between this and Ryan Braun is that this study you quote was measuring natural testosterone. What was supposedly found in Braun's test was synthetic testosterone, which is not as readily metabolized by the body. What I heard on WTMJ yesterday afternoon is that 10% of synthetic testosterone can remain in the system two weeks after IV injection.
I don't think Braun is innocent, but if you're going to trash a guy, at least quote the relevant facts/studies.
That quote came from an article on SI.com about braun. If he got the injection 4 days before the test and took the 2nd test 12 days later; your facts would be irrelevant.
-
I thought the second test didn't show as elevated of testosterone levels, but it still in-fact showed there were traces of synthetic testosterone in his system?
-
I thought the second test didn't show as elevated of testosterone levels, but it still in-fact showed there were traces of synthetic testosterone in his system?
I have seen articles all over the board on this. That is why I stated that the facts need to come out before a determination is made. I admit, I do not see this working out well for Braun, but I have not seen any of the facts.
This was released through back channels. MLB has not relesed anything publicly. The Braun camp has not released any specifics. He is due his day in court, so to speak. Until then, I will treat information that comes from unnamed sources with skepticism.
-
I hope this is true.
http://hirejimessian.com/2011/12/13/more-braun-than-brains/
-
I hope this is true.
http://hirejimessian.com/2011/12/13/more-braun-than-brains/
As hilarious as some might find that to be, I can't imagine Braun would be the first MLBer to be taking STD meds.
A co-worker of mine heard that Braun was taking meds because he couldn't "raise the sail" (to use her term). This, of course, begs the questions: Would you rather be the MVP on PEDs or the MVP with ED?
-
If he is taking anything however, I would have to believe even meds, and a PED isn't listed or something that raises his level...it is my understanding that he is still in trouble
-
You can take anything as long as it is for medical reasons, even steroids. You just have to clear it with MLB BEFORE you start using it. Even showing that you had a prescription for it won't clear you after the fact.
-
As hilarious as some might find that to be, I can't imagine Braun would be the first MLBer to be taking STD meds.
A co-worker of mine heard that Braun was taking meds because he couldn't "raise the sail" (to use her term). This, of course, begs the questions: Would you rather be the MVP on PEDs or the MVP with ED?
Is there a link between PED use and ED? Maybe he's both.
-
You can take anything as long as it is for medical reasons, even steroids. You just have to clear it with MLB BEFORE you start using it. Even showing that you had a prescription for it won't clear you after the fact.
This goes back to one of my theories... is it possible that WADA and MLB don't know what drug or substance it is that they're dealing with? I would assume that Valtrex or the like isn't exactly an unknown in the world of pro athletes, but maybe it's a lesser known or experimental drug whose active ingredient looks a lot like testosterone in a chromotography scan. I don't know.
-
I know for a fact that Brauny goes to Walgreens on Brady street in milwaukee, and yes he does have herpes, or is at least taking that medication. One of my friends works in the pharmacy. I've known this for months, I actually went to Walgreens to get his autograph from this info i knew.
Shhhhhh.
-
I hope this is true.
http://hirejimessian.com/2011/12/13/more-braun-than-brains/
If this is true, or anything similar, MLB may have some concerns. Some one at MLB or associated with it leaked the story. Before Braun had his arbitration. Now, if it is something like this, MLB may have some legal troubles with the leak(s). If it is a medical condition and a prescribed drug, I wonder how HIPPA might come into play.
This gets more interesting (or is it bizarre?) with each subsequent report. And we still have not heard anything official or factual from either side (limited from Braun's side, nothing from MLB).
-
If this is true, or anything similar, MLB may have some concerns. Some one at MLB or associated with it leaked the story. Before Braun had his arbitration. Now, if it is something like this, MLB may have some legal troubles with the leak(s). If it is a medical condition and a prescribed drug, I wonder how HIPPA might come into play.
This gets more interesting (or is it bizarre?) with each subsequent report. And we still have not heard anything official or factual from either side (limited from Braun's side, nothing from MLB).
I am 99.9999% positive that the leak came from WADA, not MLB. MLB has nothing to gain by leaking a story that tarnishes the reputation of its MVP. WADA on the other hand employs a bunch of unknowns who would pee their pants if OTL offered CDN$10,000 to give them some juicy (pun intended) info.
-
http://tracking.si.com/2011/12/19/report-ryan-brauns-positive-drug-test-triggered-by-medication/
-
On another note...
Anyone hear that this STD may not be herpes, but maybe the one that starts with H and ends in V?
-
On another note...
Anyone hear that this STD may not be herpes, but maybe the one that starts with H and ends in V?
hpv?
-
hpv?
HIV
-
hpv?
Gotta vaccinate.
-
HIV
I figured, but thought that would be the obvious answer and HPV seems to be dominating the news moreso than HIV these days.
-
I've heard rumblings, but even as a Braun hater I can't imagine this is the case.
-
I figured, but thought that would be the obvious answer and HPV seems to be dominating the news moreso than HIV these days.
I didn't think of HPV, so I thought it was funny.
-
If it's herpes I wonder if someone can find the link between Derek Jeter and Braun. It's got to exist.
(http://edge.ebaumsworld.com/mediaFiles/picture/569251/80507920.jpg)
-
The thing with the herpes rumors that never made sense was that I always thought herpes medication consisted primarily of antivirals. Looking up valtrex from the commercials (which is also used for shingles) it makes no reference to jacking up testosterone levels. Any medically inclined folks out there that could clear some of that up? It just has seemed like an explanation thats lacking.
-
Yes, the antivirals don't contain synthetic testy. May create a spike in epitesty. Regardless, you don't treat a virus (herpes) with testosterone. All sounds like total BS.
-
do you treat the hiv with testosterone? maybe he's on the magic johnson regimen(.
(anyone surprised that 4never knows a lot about herpes medication? i'm not.)
-
Dude, are you forgetting I'm a doctor?
-
Dude, are you forgetting I'm a doctor?
yeah, and I'm a rocket scientist. ;D
-
Oh, so that explains why you're deliverin' bottled water now. Blame it on the economy and government cutbacks.
-
Dude, are you forgetting I'm a doctor?
Glenn... we discussed this already. Just because we call you Doc, it doesn't mean you can perform surgery. Now quit slumming on the Scoop boards and focus on getting the Celtics back to the Finals this year.
-
yeah, and I'm a rocket scientist. ;D
(http://images5.cpcache.com/product_zoom/293108425v4_460x460_Back_padToSquare-true.jpg)
-
The thing with the herpes rumors that never made sense was that I always thought herpes medication consisted primarily of antivirals. Looking up valtrex from the commercials (which is also used for shingles) it makes no reference to jacking up testosterone levels. Any medically inclined folks out there that could clear some of that up? It just has seemed like an explanation thats lacking.
I was prescribed a combination of antivirals as well as a steroid for a viral infection, but I wouldn't think the steroid is needed for herpes treatment.
-
Really looks like it's time to lock this thread. Nothing new coming out, but some really poor, old, crass jokes.
-
Really looks like it's time to lock this thread. Nothing new coming out, but some really poor, old, crass jokes.
Where? I was not joking.
-
Where? I was not joking.
Long night. Was not responding to your post. In fact, responded in the wrong thread (and I didn't have a drink tonight, yikes). I guess my posting was as bad as MU's play tonight.
-
Long night. Was not responding to your post. In fact, responded in the wrong thread (and I didn't have a drink tonight, yikes). I guess my posting was as bad as MU's play tonight.
Happens to us all. Take the rest of the plays off tonight. You will feel better in the morning.
-
I was prescribed a combination of antivirals as well as a steroid for a viral infection, but I wouldn't think the steroid is needed for herpes treatment.
As I stated previously, I'd find it hard to believe that MLB had never seen a player test "positive" for some sort of STD medication.
If Braun isn't suspended, most baseball fans (outside of Milwaukee) would view it as a PR move by bumbling Bud Selig, who doesn't want the MVP of his league, who happens to be on his hometown team, to be viewed as a cheater.
-
As I stated previously, I'd find it hard to believe that MLB had never seen a player test "positive" for some sort of STD medication.
If Braun isn't suspended, most baseball fans (outside of Milwaukee) would view it as a PR move by bumbling Bud Selig, who doesn't want the MVP of his league, who happens to be on his hometown team, to be viewed as a cheater.
Actually, from some of the rumors on the web, other players have tested positive this way and that is why they won their appeal. Don't believe the spin that no one has beaten a test. If some clown wouldn't have leaked this, no one would have ever even known Braun tested positive.
-
http://sportsradiointerviews.com/2011/12/19/mlb-milwaukee-brewers-ryan-braun-ped-testing-victor-conte/ (http://sportsradiointerviews.com/2011/12/19/mlb-milwaukee-brewers-ryan-braun-ped-testing-victor-conte/)
interview with Victor Conte (of BALCO fame) relevantly -
Were you surprised that Ryan Braun tested positive?:
“No, I was not surprised. In fact, three weeks before that, I was in Vietnam and I was interviewed by somebody from the New York Daily News. It was when the growth hormone testing was being introduced. And I don’t think growth hormone is effective as a performance enhancer. At that time, I basically said that what they’re doing is using fast-acting testosterone — creams, gels, orals, patches — and they clear so quickly, sometimes in a matter of hours. … They could conceivably, after a game, use testosterone to help with tissue repair and healing and recovery and by the time they’d show up at the park the next day, their PE ratio would be normal. I always knew there was this giant loophole that you could drive a Mack truck through.”
How many players do you think are still using things that are banned by baseball?:
“A significant percentage. Way back in 2004, I said that I felt 50 percent were using steroids and 80 percent were using stimulants. The numbers are obviously less now, but I think it’s a significant portion. … I’m including the offseason, where they really don’t do testing. … When you’re considering offseason and during the season, it may have dropped, but still 30 or 40 percent?”
Do you think there will be another player implicated in this after Braun’s situation is over?:
“This is a wake-up call. … I’ve been pitching this before this Ryan Braun case broke … I said here’s the loophole: They’re using fast-acting testosterone; they’re not using anabolic steroids. … You need to use carbon isotope ratio testing and you will bust lots of people. I said a significant number of players would test positive. … Three weeks later, here’s a positive.”
What argument can Braun’s people make to win their appeal?:
“The first thing I hear that they’re saying is it’s an extremely high level, the highest that’s ever been recording. Are they talking about in baseball or are they talking about in general? … I’m not sure about that, but this is a double-whammy for him. Unless there’s some chain-of-custody issue, other technical problem during the collection and transport process, he’s basically dead in the water. … I believe he’s going to serve the 50-game suspension.”
To me, this reeks of the Canseco stuff. He might be a creep and total cock, but that doesn't mean he's wrong/lying.
-
http://sportsradiointerviews.com/2011/12/19/mlb-milwaukee-brewers-ryan-braun-ped-testing-victor-conte/ (http://sportsradiointerviews.com/2011/12/19/mlb-milwaukee-brewers-ryan-braun-ped-testing-victor-conte/)
interview with Victor Conte (of BALCO fame) relevantly -
To me, this reeks of the Canseco stuff. He might be a creep and total cock, but that doesn't mean he's wrong/lying.
To me it reminds me of the Donahey situation. Total crook who was relevant for the wrong reasons trying to stay in the spotlight. He has no inside knowledge of this situation. Still need to be convinced Braun wasn't on PED, though.
-
Actually, from some of the rumors on the web, other players have tested positive this way and that is why they won their appeal. Don't believe the spin that no one has beaten a test. If some clown wouldn't have leaked this, no one would have ever even known Braun tested positive.
I'd be willing to bet there is someone in the NBA, NFL, MLB, etc. who has or is going to beat a test this week. Victor Conte isn't the only mad scientist running around... with the money involved in pro sports, I wouldn't be surprised if there were a dozen or more "moonlighting" operations in the US alone being run out of a few rogue pharma-scientists' basements. If an under-appreciated pharma-type working for Lilly, Abbott, etc. was offered $5M to come up with an undetectable PED (by today's testing standards) in his/her spare time, you think every single one of them would politely decline?
In any event, I don't buy the "no one has beaten an appeal" garbage at all. If that were true, then there's either something wrong with the system (because everyone makes a mistake - honest or otherwise - eventually) or they're grossly under-testing the athletes (to minimize any possible mistakes).
-
Here's a plausible scenario of how I believe the Braun thing went down:
RB contracts herpes.
RB gets prescription from doctor to treat his herpes.
The prescription is on MLB's banned list.
RB asks MLB for a medical waiver to take the prescription.
MLB grants waiver.
RB takes the herpes drug.
RB takes drug test.
RB fails drug test.
Some clown at the drug testing facility leaks test results to the media.
Everybody jumps to conclusions about RB being a cheater.
If this is how it actually plays out, he will not be suspended and tons of people will owe RB apologies, but his name will forever be linked to the report of the failed drug test during the 2011 playoffs. This is one reason why the test results are supposed to be confidential until after the appeals are heard. This should have never come out.
(Of course, this is just my own theory that I put together from the information that's out there...I could be 100% wrong.)
-
Beer, then 'splain why the herpes rx has testosterone in it.
-
Look, I'm not a pharmacist or an STD doctor. I don't know what kind of treatment he may have been taking. We will all see what happens.
-
There are several studies that confirm acyclovir, commonly used to treat genital herpes, will not cause an increase in blood testosterone levels.
-
Is there any other drug out there to treat herpes? What about for other STD's?
-
I think that may be a stretch. But, testosterone meds can used for those having issues "hoisting the mast."
-
I think that may be a stretch. But, testosterone meds can used for those having issues "hoisting the mast."
Testosterone medicines are also given in conjunction with HIV meds that drastically lower natural body levels of testosterone.
-
Don't think it was herpes, Ron Mexico never failed a drug test.
-
Don't think it was herpes, Ron Mexico never failed a drug test.
Or did he have a waiver from the league and thus no "failed drug test" was announced?
-
BOOYEAH! Braun wins appeal!
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/140213003.html
-
apparently on a technicality...
-
Complete joke.
Allows a player to have 4 times the normal levels of testosterone.
They set a dangerous precedent today.
-
Just wait until the whole story comes out. Then you can declare whether it's a complete joke or not. I think all of you who declare this a complete joke without knowing what really happened are a complete joke.
-
I guess. The article says he got off on some kind of technicality. Certainly sounds a little BS to me.
-
MLB released a statement where they "strongly disagree" with the third party's decision to overturn it.
-
It is all Union BS!
-
They actually "vehemently disagree".
-
They set a dangerous precedent today.
No such thing as precedent in arbitration cases.
-
They actually "vehemently disagree".
Of course they do...they lost their case.
-
According to national writers on twitter, the defense centered around the chain of custody being broken for 2 days and left unprotected. With the rumor that there were two other Brewers who had very high levels, but were thrown out, it could be fairly reasonable to assume someone tampered with it.
-
Of course they do...they lost their case.
They disagree because it makes the steroid testing process a complete joke.
-
Given a) the money involved with pro sports contracts, b) the litigious nature of our society, and c) the willingness in sports to cave on any matter of principal so long as you're compensated --- if just one test can be overturned on a technicality - be that a technicality in due process or the in the testing process itself - every athlete's agent will attempt to use that result as precedent as to why their client's test was inaccurate/questionable/invalid/etc in the future, and honestly, I don't think MLB has the resources or desire to defend its policy against a bombardment of test appeals, even if the appeals have no merit whatsoever. I hate making slippery slope arguments, but there's significant value to the WADA and MLB in the deterrent that 0 for 12 on appeals has on those contemplating an appeal. Unless one player is greater than the MLB drug-testing policy, Braun is going to be the sacrificial lamb if he has any level of culpability whatsoever.
The only way Braun and MLB can come out unscathed is if there was deliberate misconduct or fraud by the WADA and some scientist in Montreal goes to jail.
------
From ESPN.com:
"It has always been Major League Baseball's position that no matter who tests positive, we will exhaust all avenues in pursuit of the appropriate discipline. We have been true to that position in every instance, because baseball fans deserve nothing less," Manfred said. "As a part of our drug testing program, the commissioner's office and the players' association agreed to a neutral third party review for instances that are under dispute. While we have always respected that process, Major League Baseball vehemently disagrees with the decision rendered today by arbitrator Shyam Das."
------
As I predicted (although not by the exact method), MLB is throwing Braun under the bus to cover its own ass. "Ass" being their sham drug testing policy.
I'm happy for Braun. But I'm pissed at MLB... and Congress needs to be recalling Bud Selig for testimony because MLB has represented that they have this cutting-edge drug testing policy. If anybody is under the illusion that MLB has this "tough on PED" policy, I have some beachfront property in the Yukon I'd like to sell you.
-
No such thing as precedent in arbitration cases.
How can you say it doesn't set a precedent? If you test positive, find a technicality and you are free.
-
How can you say it doesn't set a precedent? If you test positive, find a technicality and you are free.
Agreed.... the worldwide leader is already speculating that past tests could be re-opened. Pandora's box is full of worms.... this could get quite nasty for MLB.
-
Agreed.... the worldwide leader is already speculating that past tests could be re-opened. Pandora's box is full of worms.... this could get quite nasty for MLB.
Right, because an arbitration system with a 0% chance of success on appeal is a much better policy Science isn't perfect and mistakes can be made. Everyone already has the same chance to appeal, this changes nothing and sets no precedent other than proving the system works.
-
This isn't science.
-
Agreed.... the worldwide leader is already speculating that past tests could be re-opened. Pandora's box is full of worms.... this could get quite nasty for MLB.
Does Pandora have a STD?
-
They disagree because it makes the steroid testing process a complete joke.
The same process they agreed to, and are now doing all they can to undermine? When Sosa and mcGuire were making everyone rich they turned a blind eye. Now that they have an agreed upon process in place they can't criticize it enough. Embarrassing.
-
http://danny-knobler.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/8590096/34964084
-
Love that article!
-
I love the part where it says we don't know if braun is clean.
-
I love the part where it says we don't know if braun is clean.
We don't know if he is dirty, either. You and others have jumped on that. I think there are irregularities here that MLB needs to explain. They are the ones so critical. I guess if they botched the control and handling procedures, they WOULD want to focus the light somewhere else.
-
Except they didn't. You trust a courier with a package. They knew where the package was the entire time. If you trust a courier for two hours, why is he suddenly not trustworthy for 48. The testing facility received the samples completely sealed and showing no signs of tampering or degradation. There has to be more to the story, because based on what we know so far, it doesn't make sense.
-
Except they didn't. You trust a courier with a package. They knew where the package was the entire time. If you trust a courier for two hours, why is he suddenly not trustworthy for 48. The testing facility received the samples completely sealed and showing no signs of tampering or degradation. There has to be more to the story, because based on what we know so far, it doesn't make sense.
What I had heard and read is that the individual took the sample home because it was too late to deliver to FedEx. Not at the courrier's place, but at the individual's home.
If it was under lock and key at some courrier's office, I might look differently.
From the Journal Sentine article (here is the link: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/138857174.html (http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/138857174.html))
People familiar with the details said the sample was not dropped off that day at FedEx to be sent to the MLB testing lab in Montreal because the collector thought it was too late and the shipping company was closed.
Instead, the collector kept the sample, and perhaps others, refrigerated at home for two days before making the shipment. Though the seals on the samples were unbroken upon arriving at the lab, that lapse in protocol became the crux of the hearing in which Braun's side contested the validity of the test itself.
-
Except they didn't. You trust a courier with a package. They knew where the package was the entire time. If you trust a courier for two hours, why is he suddenly not trustworthy for 48. The testing facility received the samples completely sealed and showing no signs of tampering or degradation. There has to be more to the story, because based on what we know so far, it doesn't make sense.
This.
-
Except they didn't. You trust a courier with a package. They knew where the package was the entire time. If you trust a courier for two hours, why is he suddenly not trustworthy for 48. The testing facility received the samples completely sealed and showing no signs of tampering or degradation. There has to be more to the story, because based on what we know so far, it doesn't make sense.
You can, in fact, tamper with a urine or blood sample and still make it look like there was no tampering, but it takes much longer than 2 hours to do so.
Basically:
1) Remove a tamper proof seal. If you're going to re-use the same seal (which they would have had to do since it is either numbered or signed), it's going to take upwards an hour or more just to complete this step.
2) Analyze the specimen & calculate how much foreign substance to add. You can't simply dump the foreign substance into the sample, because under testing, it would be painfully obvious that the sample was compromised. Analyzing in a lab can take a hours, sometimes days depending on what they're doing. Even in a streamlined analysis, it still takes at least a few hours.
3) Reanalyze to ensure the proper mix of everything. Another few hours.
4) Re-seal the sample. Depending on whether the sample jar is HDPE or polypropylene and the adhesive material on the tamper-proof seal, this could take 10 minutes or it could take another hour.
Even if you had several people working together, at a minimum, you're looking at 10-12 hours to complete the job.
In other words, it's not a question of courier trustworthiness, it's a matter of ensuring a time frame that makes it impossible to undetectably tamper with a sample.
-
So you're saying you would most likely need a science degree to pull this off. What couriers do you know that could pull off this level of intricacy and scientific accuracy? That's a less believable conspiracy theory than saying Bud Selig got Braun off because he owns the Brewers.
-
So you're saying you would most likely need a science degree to pull this off. What couriers do you know that could pull off this level of intricacy and scientific accuracy? That's a less believable conspiracy theory than saying Bud Selig got Braun off because he owns the Brewers.
No... you're completely misreading what I said. You posed the query, "if he's trustworthy for 2 hours, why not 48?" I answered that question by saying that it's not about trust... it's about a protocol that leaves no opportunity for the sample to be undetectably compromised. At no point did I suggest that the sample was indeed compromised.
-
No... you're completely misreading what I said. You posed the query, "if he's trustworthy for 2 hours, why not 48?" I answered that question by saying that it's not about trust... it's about a protocol that leaves no opportunity for the sample to be undetectably compromised. At no point did I suggest that the sample was indeed compromised.
Fair enough.
-
So you're saying you would most likely need a science degree to pull this off. What couriers do you know that could pull off this level of intricacy and scientific accuracy? That's a less believable conspiracy theory than saying Bud Selig got Braun off because he owns the Brewers.
Where do you get couriers? I provided the information in the JS article. It was the collector, not the courier. It was not at the couriers office under lock and key, it was in the collector's refrigerator at home. Yeah, that's real trustworthy.
-
That's actually a fair point, Mac. I think someone said it at some point and I subconsciously latched on. The point remains, though. If the they trust the collector enough to take a sample, seal it and ship it, why is he suddenly not trustworthy for a longer period of time?
-
Don't know if this was linked, and if so I apoligize. A column from the Philly paper. I think it hits my thoughts fairly well. http://www.philly.com/philly/columnists/phil_sheridan/20120224_Phil_Sheridan__Braun_decision_unsatisfactory.html (http://www.philly.com/philly/columnists/phil_sheridan/20120224_Phil_Sheridan__Braun_decision_unsatisfactory.html)
-
That article does say it was a courier...
Oh, and the article aligns with my feelings for the most part as well.
-
Yeah, I caught that after. That is perplexing, though. Why use a courrier? Wouldn't the lab deliver it themselves?
I think facts are sketchy. It will be interesting to hear what comes out in the future.
All I know is this whole situation has been botched.