Braun tests postitive for PEDs

[southsider2k5]

Balta,

 

Thats why Im wondering. I would have assumed that the samples are numbered and therefore only the tester knew what sample belonged to who at first. The reason I assume this is because I also assume that the test is supposed to be blind (aka they dont know who the sample is until after the result). If that is the case, then the only people who knew the results had to be pretty high up. People in those positions generally dont risk their job over releasing confidential information.

 

I dont know, Im just speculating. The tone of Braun's speech seemed to suggest that he believes the tester did something to him, not that the tester just made an innocent mistake in delivering the sample late in the afternoon instead of early in the morning.

 

Hard to speculate, just seems like a mess from day 1.

 

It had to be someone working for MLB.

 

[Soxbadger]

The point is its entirely unnecessary to attack the collector.

 

All he had to say was:

 

"In order to ensure the reliability of the MLB drug program, MLB and the players association have instituted certain rules about how all samples should be handled. At trial it was shown that in this instance that protocol was not met and therefore the result was unreliable."

 

Hes not admitting hes a cheater, hes saying due to lab error the results are unreliable, therefore even though he "failed" it doesnt matter because the test was never accurate in the first place.

 

To take any other approach suggests that there must have been a scintilla of evidence to suggest that Braun felt he was targeted.

[Balta1701]

To take any other approach suggests that there must have been a scintilla of evidence to suggest that Braun felt he was targeted.

Or he felt that it would help repair his reputation if he could convince people he was purposely targeted by attacking people in the program who he thought wouldn't step up to defend themselves.

[Milkman delivers]

The point is its entirely unnecessary to attack the collector.

 

All he had to say was:

 

"In order to ensure the reliability of the MLB drug program, MLB and the players association have instituted certain rules about how all samples should be handled. At trial it was shown that in this instance that protocol was not met and therefore the result was unreliable."

 

Hes not admitting hes a cheater, hes saying due to lab error the results are unreliable, therefore even though he "failed" it doesnt matter because the test was never accurate in the first place.

 

To take any other approach suggests that there must have been a scintilla of evidence to suggest that Braun felt he was targeted.

 

I don't know what to say. It seems like pretty common sense to me that, in order to sway an ignorant public back in his favor, he has to make someone else out to be the bad guy.

[StrangeSox]

The point is its entirely unnecessary to attack the collector.

 

All he had to say was:

 

"In order to ensure the reliability of the MLB drug program, MLB and the players association have instituted certain rules about how all samples should be handled. At trial it was shown that in this instance that protocol was not met and therefore the result was unreliable."

 

Hes not admitting hes a cheater, hes saying due to lab error the results are unreliable, therefore even though he "failed" it doesnt matter because the test was never accurate in the first place.

 

To take any other approach suggests that there must have been a scintilla of evidence to suggest that Braun felt he was targeted.

 

But if he doesn't say anything, everyone assumes he really did test positive and got off on a technicality. Instead, he attacked the collector and insinuated that his results were tampered.

[Steve9347]

Braun was pretty self-righteous after the win and did a great "I'm not saying, I'm just saying" routine where he roundly impugned the collector's integrity and then finished with a statement that he wasn't accusing anyone of anything.

 

I took it as a smug asshole who just got off on a technicality and is trying to rebuild his image by tearing down the collector's.

ie - kick the little guy.

 

Ugh, Braun is trash.

 

Very rich, happy trash.

[G&T]

But if he doesn't say anything, everyone assumes he really did test positive and got off on a technicality. Instead, he attacked the collector and insinuated that his results were tampered.

 

The result of the attack was that Braun was exposed and it's not like Dino's reaction was unforeseeable. Which is why I am firmly entrenched in the Braun is an idiot camp who is trying to convince himself as much as anyone else that he didn't do anything wrong.

[Soxbadger]

I disagree. I think that most people are willing to believe that there is a chance a mistake occurred in a drug test, especially given the fact Braun has passed every other one.

 

That is what I would have stuck to, over all the tests, a mistake can happen 1 time.

[Balta1701]

I disagree. I think that most people are willing to believe that there is a chance a mistake occurred in a drug test, especially given the fact Braun has passed every other one.

 

That is what I would have stuck to, over all the tests, a mistake can happen 1 time.

A mistake in the sense of "I put a needle in my ass and I regret it"? or a mistake in the sense of "testosterone appeared in my urine magically"?

[Soxbadger]

A mistake by MLB in their testing because I never took steroids, so I have no idea how the test came up positive. Im willing to take as many other tests as necessary to prove my innocence.

Edited March 2, 2012 by Soxbadger

[Balta1701]

A mistake by MLB in their testing because I never took steroids, so I have no idea how the test came up positive. Im willing to take as many other tests as necessary to prove my innocence.

Frankly, no one would beleive that, nor should they. Thats' why 2 independent samples are taken.

[G&T]

Frankly, no one would beleive that, nor should they. Thats' why 2 independent samples are taken.

 

I don't understand. Do you think it was smart for him to come out and attack the collector? Was it not foreseeable that he we defend himself and make matters worse for Braun?

[Soxbadger]

According to the arbitrator neither of the samples were reliable, therefore you cant judge me on something that MLB is not allowed to use. If the samples were reliable, I would have been found guilty.

 

You can say whatever you want, but I never took steroids and only 1 test, of the 25+ that I have taken, found steroids in my system and that test has been found to have been done incorrectly.

 

What is more believable?

 

A) I never took steroids any other time in my career until the 2011 playoffs and was caught the 1 time I used them?

 

B) I never haven taken steroids and 1 test was faulty.

 

C) I always have taken steroids and the MLB test is so faulty I was only caught 1 time of the 25+ tests Ive taken.

 

To me most wont believe answer C, and even if they did believe it, answer C suggests that the MLB test is completely unreliable.

 

That leaves A/B, and I believe you would get at minimum a 50/50 split on it. That is the best you are ever going to do, unless you can absolutely prove the sample wasnt yours.

[StrangeSox]

A mistake by MLB in their testing because I never took steroids, so I have no idea how the test came up positive. Im willing to take as many other tests as necessary to prove my innocence.

 

I probably still wouldn't believe you, but I wouldn't think you were a huge douchebag.

[StrangeSox]

According to the arbitrator neither of the samples were reliable, therefore you cant judge me on something that MLB is not allowed to use. If the samples were reliable, I would have been found guilty.

 

You can say whatever you want, but I never took steroids and only 1 test, of the 25+ that I have taken, found steroids in my system and that test has been found to have been done incorrectly.

 

What is more believable?

 

A) I never took steroids any other time in my career until the 2011 playoffs and was caught the 1 time I used them?

 

B) I never haven taken steroids and 1 test was faulty.

 

C) I always have taken steroids and the MLB test is so faulty I was only caught 1 time of the 25+ tests Ive taken.

 

To me most wont believe answer C, and even if they did believe it, answer C suggests that the MLB test is completely unreliable.

 

That leaves A/B, and I believe you would get at minimum a 50/50 split on it. That is the best you are ever going to do, unless you can absolutely prove the sample wasnt yours.

 

Public perception is not a court room with standards of evidence.

 

But to all of that: Marion Jones.

[southsider2k5]

I probably still wouldn't believe you, but I wouldn't think you were a huge douchebag.

 

Cheater, versus a cheater, liar, and a d-bag willing to take down an innocent nobody.

[Steve9347]

I don't understand. Do you think it was smart for him to come out and attack the collector? Was it not foreseeable that he we defend himself and make matters worse for Braun?

Again.

 

[Soxbadger]

Right, which is why I said your best case scenario is maybe a 50/50 split.

 

Some people will believes hes guilty regardless, some people innocent regardless. The middle is going to split, unless its blatantly obvious.

[Steve9347]

Braun is an idiot. The guys who just go away are the ones we forget about... if Braun makes no statement no one is talking about this. Think Andy Pettitte.

 

It's the guys who fight it, who scream from the rafters, or who go on 20/20, those are the guys who get destroyed in the court of public opinion and never forgiven.

[Balta1701]

I don't understand. Do you think it was smart for him to come out and attack the collector? Was it not foreseeable that he we defend himself and make matters worse for Braun?

No, it was idiotic. He should have just read a brief statement from his lawyers saying he was happy the arbitrator had vindicated him and then walked away.

 

The more details you give, the more those details can be fact-checked.

[Kyyle23]

Braun is an idiot. The guys who just go away are the ones we forget about... if Braun makes no statement no one is talking about this. Think Andy Pettitte.

 

It's the guys who fight it, who scream from the rafters, or who go on 20/20, those are the guys who get destroyed in the court of public opinion and never forgiven.

 

ie. Roger Clemens

[Steve9347]

ie. Roger Clemens

ie A-Roid, ie Palmeiro, etc

[Soxbadger]

Which is why the best statement would have been about how the testing policy is great, 25 times Ive passed, 1 time there was an issue and because the policy is so good, the arbitrator clearly saw that there was an error and found the test unreliable.

 

Now what can MLB say, they vehemently disagree that they have good testing procedures?

[Steve9347]

Which is why the best statement would have been about how the testing policy is great, 25 times Ive passed, 1 time there was an issue and because the policy is so good, the arbitrator clearly saw that there was an error and found the test unreliable.

 

Now what can MLB say, they vehemently disagree that they have good testing procedures?

The best course of action would have been no statement.

[Soxbadger]

You have to make a statement.

 

Otherwise every single interview will ask him the same question and if he never answers, it makes him look guilty. Thus, you make a prepared statement and any other time you are asked you say, "I already addressed it in my statement."