Jump to content

Braun tests postitive for PEDs


Sockin

Recommended Posts

Ah okay, I was reading the comment to literally.

 

The implication of any "chain of custody" argument is that due to a failure in the chain of custody the sample is unreliable. So yes, they probably did not argue the test was wrong or that there was purposeful evidence tampering, because those arguments actually hurt their better argument, the sample is unreliable.

 

Basically all Braun's attorneys wanted to do was knock out the 1 sample, not attack the entire science. The reason, Braun passed other tests, so if they argued there was something fundamentally wrong with the science, those passed tests proved nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 388
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

To clarify, the original comment made it seem like his lawyers were basically admitting Braun was guilty, but do to improper handling, he got off.

 

The example of that is: I got a speeding ticket and I won because the police officer forgot to sign the ticket. There is no doubt as to my guilt, they just cant win.

 

What I likely believe there argument was, is this example.

 

I got a speeding ticket, but I won because the radar gun said I was going 5000 mph and my car could only go 150, so there was no reliable evidence as to what my speed was.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 09:03 PM)
Were these pee tests or blood tests?

 

Pee tests being stored improperly could result in evaporation which could cause the entire sample to be much stronger.

 

My guess is that MLB tries to keep it secret what happened, because otherwise every player will raise it as a defense.

As far as I know, MLB still does not have the right to do blood tests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 09:23 PM)
To clarify, the original comment made it seem like his lawyers were basically admitting Braun was guilty, but do to improper handling, he got off.

 

The example of that is: I got a speeding ticket and I won because the police officer forgot to sign the ticket. There is no doubt as to my guilt, they just cant win.

 

What I likely believe there argument was, is this example.

 

I got a speeding ticket, but I won because the radar gun said I was going 5000 mph and my car could only go 150, so there was no reliable evidence as to what my speed was.

Either way, if MLB can't follow their own procedures, thy can't suspend the guy. He may be clearly guilty, but it's mlb's job to run the program correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats what I thought, so the test is already very unreliable (in terms of drug tests its the worst reliability, 1 is hair and 2 is blood), there was a reading that was far outside of the normal range (even for failed tests,, at least thats what I believe I read when it came out) and there was poor handling of the sample.

 

Surprised that it was 2-1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 08:28 PM)
Thats what I thought, so the test is already very unreliable (in terms of drug tests its the worst reliability, 1 is hair and 2 is blood), there was a reading that was far outside of the normal range (even for failed tests,, at least thats what I believe I read when it came out) and there was poor handling of the sample.

 

Surprised that it was 2-1

 

The three person board is made up of management (MLB), the union (MLBPA) and the arbitrator. Apparently it's common for MLB management and the MLBPA to split on votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 09:28 PM)
Thats what I thought, so the test is already very unreliable (in terms of drug tests its the worst reliability, 1 is hair and 2 is blood), there was a reading that was far outside of the normal range (even for failed tests,, at least thats what I believe I read when it came out) and there was poor handling of the sample.

 

Surprised that it was 2-1

 

Panels are always 2-1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I just read that, completely ridiculous.

 

If you had given me a thousand guesses, I would have never guessed it. Might as well just have 1 judge then, the more I read, the more clear it is this is all just a joke.

 

GT,

 

I assume you mean MLB panels? Because many real arbs go 3-0 all the time.

Edited by Soxbadger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 08:28 PM)
Thats what I thought, so the test is already very unreliable (in terms of drug tests its the worst reliability, 1 is hair and 2 is blood), there was a reading that was far outside of the normal range (even for failed tests,, at least thats what I believe I read when it came out) and there was poor handling of the sample.

 

Surprised that it was 2-1

Urine tests are valid in regards to what he tested positive for. Reliability is the reason you have the protocols which must be exactly fiollowed for a given test with mulitiple samples.

 

He can say whatever he wants. He is guilty of taking banned substances. He knows it and the lawyers know it. This is why they attacked the procedure and not the actual tests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reporters who broke the story in December, thus placing Braun and MLB in uncomfortable and embarrassing situations, were the same people who did extraordinarily solid work on the Barry Bonds saga.

 

Their story also gave Braun the opportunity to proclaim his innocence to the world before his appeal, not that it was always heard by those made cynical from baseball's drug problems.

 

Despite the odds, I always believed Braun would win his appeal. He never seemed like a shortcuts kind of guy. He really does work at the innate skills that might cause other players to reach for the cruise-control button or the needle. He really does arrive early and leave late, despite his guaranteed millions.

 

He's never displayed the moody or hostile behavior common to juicers.

 

He really does value loyalty, having signed a below-market contract to be a Brewer for life. He is a face of a franchise and a respected man in the community.

 

So you kept asking yourself during these last 10 weeks: Why would Braun risk what a $100 million contract could not buy?

 

And that would be a spotless reputation.

 

No matter what anyone believes, the ruling means Braun gets to keep his most valued commodity. And yes, he is still rich and powerful and famous, not that any of that helped relieve the anxiety and uncertainty as that Sword of Damocles dangled for two-and-a-half months.

 

So now, Braun can finally do that well-known exhale for something much more than his batter's-box routine.

 

As for the rest, there is nothing for Braun to do except keep swinging away.Send email to [email protected]

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 10:17 PM)
Urine tests are valid in regards to what he tested positive for. Reliability is the reason you have the protocols which must be exactly fiollowed for a given test with mulitiple samples.

 

He can say whatever he wants. He is guilty of taking banned substances. He knows it and the lawyers know it. This is why they attacked the procedure and not the actual tests.

 

:headbang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 08:59 AM)
Pretty much

 

Brandon McCarthy ‏ @BMcCarthy32

"Hey hun, what's this next to the olives?" "That's a bottle of Ryan Braun's piss." "Oh."

And yet...I don't know that I'd say Brandon has added much muscle since the years we had him...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 10:17 PM)
Urine tests are valid in regards to what he tested positive for. Reliability is the reason you have the protocols which must be exactly fiollowed for a given test with mulitiple samples.

 

He can say whatever he wants. He is guilty of taking banned substances. He knows it and the lawyers know it. This is why they attacked the procedure and not the actual tests.

 

Sorry, but an independent arbitrator found him not guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 09:24 AM)
Why were they insufficient?

Basically, if the rumor presented here is true, it means that MLB did not follow their own procedures. That doesn't mean by any stretch that there's any reason to think that the sample was contaminated, but it does mean that MLB can't suspend people if they can't follow the agreed-to procedures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 08:27 AM)
Basically, if the rumor presented here is true, it means that MLB did not follow their own procedures. That doesn't mean by any stretch that there's any reason to think that the sample was contaminated, but it does mean that MLB can't suspend people if they can't follow the agreed-to procedures.

What I was getting at is the quality control procedure exists for a reason - because without such a procedure it is possible a sample could produce unreliable results - how do you know something didn't honestly happen to the sample?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...