Blog Rant against ESPN & ACC

[Benny B]

Or it wasn't libel since he tested positive and never disputed the positive result.  He only disputed how his tainted pee was handled.

Correct... Braun argued that the chain of custody was broken, and supposedly, that is the basis for his appeal being upheld.  However, because the chain of custody was broken, there would be no way for ESPN to demonstrate to the court that the alleged positive sample belonged to Braun.

I would be willing to bet that if you asked WADA regarding Braun's test, the most they could say would be along the lines of "Sample XXXXX tested positive for synthetic testosterone, but we cannot confirm to whom Sample XXXXX belongs."  In fact, you're not likely to find anyone who would be able to testify under oath that Ryan Braun tested positive for anything.  Suspecting someone did something is not the same as proving that's the case.

"It's true" is only a defense against libel if you can demonstrate that it is true.  If you can't, you better have a damn good lawyer (fortunately, for Mickey Mouse, he does).

[🏀]

Correct... Braun argued that the chain of custody was broken, and supposedly, that is the basis for his appeal being upheld.  However, because the chain of custody was broken, there would be no way for ESPN to demonstrate to the court that the alleged positive sample belonged to Braun.

I would be willing to bet that if you asked WADA regarding Braun's test, the most they could say would be along the lines of "Sample XXXXX tested positive for synthetic testosterone, but we cannot confirm to whom Sample XXXXX belongs."  In fact, you're not likely to find anyone who would be able to testify under oath that Ryan Braun tested positive for anything.  Suspecting someone did something is not the same as proving that's the case.

"It's true" is only a defense against libel if you can demonstrate that it is true.  If you can't, you better have a damn good lawyer (fortunately, for Mickey Mouse, he does).

Benny,

WADA came out in support of the collector, and stated they believed the methods used did not break the chain of custody. This was before the arbitrator ruling, and I may be wrong but I thought they released a pretty harsh statement after the ruling.

Braun got off on MLB's loop hole, not current standards recommended by the WADA.

Since other players have used Brauns loop hole, I would assume the MLB will update their testing policy to WADA standards.

[Benny B]

Benny,

WADA came out in support of the collector, and stated they believed the methods used did not break the chain of custody. This was before the arbitrator ruling, and I may be wrong but I thought they released a pretty harsh statement after the ruling.

Braun got off on MLB's loop hole, not current standards recommended by the WADA.

Since other players have used Brauns loop hole, I would assume the MLB will update their testing policy to WADA standards.

I don't recall the exact statement, but I do recall that WADA's position was that it appeared that nobody tampered with the sample.  That's a very convenient qualifier on their part.  In fact, I don't recall seeing a single scientist going on record stating that Ryan Braun tested positive for synthetic testosterone... it was always "alleged" this or "believed" that by those speaking on the record.

I'm not saying that someone did tamper with the sample, but do you think anyone at WADA would be willing to stare down the face of perjury and say that 100%, without a doubt, that it was Ryan Braun's sample that tested positive?  We all have our beliefs, but do you think any of us are willing to rest our livelihoods on making a statement one way or the other?  That's the fallacy of most drug testing procedures.... unless you do the testing on site or run the DNA on the sample, then there's no way to ensure a sample belongs to anyone.  To this day, I find it curious that WADA refused a DNA test on the sample at Braun's request, but that's just one component of a story that has more holes than Indiana's defensive line.

[The Process]

Since other players have used Brauns loop hole, I would assume the MLB will update their testing policy to WADA standards.

The loophole was closed in April.  Not sure if it's WADA standards now, but what Braun was able to argue isn't do-able anymore.

[TJ]

ESPN doesn't bother me any more because I only watch it when games are on.

It bothers me in that I used to be able to watch Sportscenter and get a decent summary of the day in sports.  Now if I were to watch I would get a half hour summary of the results of maybe 10 games - no matter how many were played that day and always focused on the same "major" teams - repeated all night long.

But you're right - I don't watch it so it doesn't really bother me.

[MerrittsMustache]

It bothers me in that I used to be able to watch Sportscenter and get a decent summary of the day in sports.  Now if I were to watch I would get a half hour summary of the results of maybe 10 games - no matter how many were played that day and always focused on the same "major" teams - repeated all night long.

But you're right - I don't watch it so it doesn't really bother me.

So much of Sportscenter is pointless debates about who's better or what should player/team/coach have done in this situation or what will happen next, etc. Fans want scores and highlights, they don't want a 10-minute breakdown of Bobby V's postgame comments.


BTW, shut up about Braun. He tested positive, word was leaked and many, many news sources reported it.

[Benny B]

I remember watching SportsCenter for an hour the day after Novak nailed the game winning 3 from the corner to beat ND in 2006... the only thing ESPN aired was the game score on the bottom line... as I recall, they spent 50 minutes jabbering about the AFC/NFC conference championships - which is understandable if not for the fact that 20 of those 50 minutes were ludicrously spent comparing Matt Hasselback to his brother.

[GGGG]

So much of Sportscenter is pointless debates about who's better or what should player/team/coach have done in this situation or what will happen next, etc. Fans want scores and highlights, they don't want a 10-minute breakdown of Bobby V's postgame comments.

I think they know more about what their viewer wants than you or I do.  They do that to stir debate and keep people around in between scores and highlights.