Issues I have with the Raphy situation
Douglas
A) he never 'intentionally' took steriods but isn't sure how they got in his
system...hmm...i did hear today though that traces of steroids can last in
your fat tissue for up to a year after put in your system.
B) major league baseball should reveal what the exact substance was. it
might necessarily have been steroids. it could've been another banned
substance. we just assume steriods.
C) confused why his appeal was heard before the suspension was made public.
i don't believe alex sanchez and the others that have been suspended have
received this type of treatment.
D) bud selig needs to replaced as major league baseball's commissioner. he's
an idiot!
E) i like the NFL testing program better. every player is tested, even in
the off season. someone comes to your house and actually watches you pee so
you can't make a switcheroo.
I think it's great that baseball has finally started to test (even if its
randomly for now) but they certainly have a long way to go before they have
a good program in tact.
smack
wrote:
> B) major league baseball should reveal what the exact substance was. it
> might necessarily have been steroids. it could've been another banned
> substance. we just assume steriods.
There's only one kind of substance that comes with a 10-day suspension.
--
Stephen Mack
"Nobody's smart enough to be wrong all the time." -Ken Wilber
Jeff Lichtman
> There's only one kind of substance that comes with a 10-day suspension.
MLB bans steroids, steroid precursors, masking agents and diuretics. I
believe all of them carry the same penalties. In Palmeiro's case, it
seems likely that he tested positive for something embarassing - if it
was diuretics, I wouldn't expect him to act the way he has (claiming
that he's forbidden from naming what he tested positive for when in fact
he is allowed to say anything he wants about it).
--
- Jeff Lichtman
Author, Baseball for Rookies
http://baseball-for-rookies.com/
David the Nationals Fan
language of the agreement up on line, but I can certainly see the case
that could be presented that he couldn't say anything at all.
Otherwise, it would essentially ensure that the players with the worst
violations would have this known, because all of the lesser violators
would immediately fess up. (And of course, if a player lies, how could
MLB "correct" this lie without breaking confidentiality.). The
easiest way to do this is to require confidentiallity period. And thus
if the player talks, there is no reason to determine or state whether
or not he is telling the truth.. instead he can be smashed merely for
talking.
David Marc Nieporent
"David the Nationals Fan" <davidth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Do you know he is allowed to say anything?
Yes.
> I haven't seen the actual
>language of the agreement up on line, but I can certainly see the case
>that could be presented that he couldn't say anything at all.
It forbids either MLB or the MLBPA from speaking, not the individual player.
>Otherwise, it would essentially ensure that the players with the worst
>violations would have this known, because all of the lesser violators
>would immediately fess up. (And of course, if a player lies, how could
>MLB "correct" this lie without breaking confidentiality.). The
>easiest way to do this is to require confidentiallity period. And thus
>if the player talks, there is no reason to determine or state whether
>or not he is telling the truth.. instead he can be smashed merely for
>talking.
---------------------------------------------
David M. Nieporent niep...@alumni.princeton.edu
T Mason
Mr. PHP
wrote:
>In article <lLTHe.33753$W%5.30608@trnddc05>, "Douglas" <do...@anon.com>
>wrote:
>
>> B) major league baseball should reveal what the exact substance was. it
>> might necessarily have been steroids. it could've been another banned
>> substance. we just assume steriods.
>
>There's only one kind of substance that comes with a 10-day suspension.
Indeed!
The same steroid cost one guy a Gold Medal!
Ask Ben!
PanHandler
"Douglas" <do...@anon.com> wrote in message
news:lLTHe.33753$W%5.30608@trnddc05...
> some issues i have with this....
> I think it's great that baseball has finally started to test (even if its
> randomly for now) but they certainly have a long way to go before they
> have a good program in tact.
What does tact have to do with it?
sli...@slidge.com
> system...hmm...i did hear today though that traces of steroids can last in
> your fat tissue for up to a year after put in your system.
>
At this point, the only scenario that I can see that would basically
exonorate Palmeiro is that if it is proven that he took a non-banned
substance that was contaminated with the banned substance during the
manufacturing process. In order to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt,
Palmeiro would have to provide the non-banned substance that has been
contaminated, and an indepenedent laboratory would have to investigate
it, which would involve investigating the manufacturing facility as well
in order to prove that the "contamination" was not done after the fact.
Since I firmly believe in "innocent before proven guilty", and since a
positive test does not erase all reasonable doubt in my mind, and since
the abitrator himself said that Raffy's case was "compelling", I am
giving Palmeiro the benefit of the doubt (unless, of course, he comes
right out and says that he's been injecting himself for years).
> B) major league baseball should reveal what the exact substance was. it
> might necessarily have been steroids. it could've been another banned
> substance. we just assume steriods.
>
It was leaked to the New York Times that the substance in question is
stanozolol, which also goes by the name Winstrol. This substance does
not appear in any dietary supplements (which rules out pretty much every
scenario short of the contamination scenario listed above).
According to Wikipedia, stanozolol is sold as an aqueous suspension, and
can be consumed via oral consumption.
My question is, who makes stanozolol, what other products do they make,
and is there the possibility that there was cross-contamination into an
unbanned product that Palmeiro ingested?
> C) confused why his appeal was heard before the suspension was made public.
> i don't believe alex sanchez and the others that have been suspended have
> received this type of treatment.
>
Jayson Stark on ESPN Radio this morning said it was because someone in
the panel requested arbitration, which automatically kicks in the appeal
process, whereas the other players did not have a member of the panel
request arbitration.
However, as he pointed out, this means that MLB has known about the
results of this test since last May.
David Hageman
> > A) he never 'intentionally' took steriods but isn't sure how they got in his
> > system...hmm...i did hear today though that traces of steroids can last in
> > your fat tissue for up to a year after put in your system.
> >
>
> At this point, the only scenario that I can see that would basically
> exonorate Palmeiro is that if it is proven that he took a non-banned
> substance that was contaminated with the banned substance during the
> manufacturing process. In order to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt,
> Palmeiro would have to provide the non-banned substance that has been
> contaminated, and an indepenedent laboratory would have to investigate
> it, which would involve investigating the manufacturing facility as well
> in order to prove that the "contamination" was not done after the fact.
>
> Since I firmly believe in "innocent before proven guilty", and since a
> positive test does not erase all reasonable doubt in my mind, and since
> the abitrator himself said that Raffy's case was "compelling", I am
> giving Palmeiro the benefit of the doubt (unless, of course, he comes
> right out and says that he's been injecting himself for years).
I thought that maybe something spiked his water or food to create this
mess at this time...3000 hits, etc.. However, it's been reported that
the test was done back in May and baseball kept their mouth shut while
he pursued the 3,000 hit mark.
I don't see Raffie as a steroid freak because he doesn't even have a
Brady Anderson type build. He's very small, like the typical baseball
players through the ages, compared to the muscle men like Sosa, Giambi
of old, McGwire.
If guys like Raffie used steroids to heal muscle, it wasn't to get
bigger...but to maintain that sweet and adorable swing of his. it was
to keep the aches and pains to a minimum.
Help explains Cal Ripken's Streak, too, IMO.
No, I have no proof, but not even one day out of the lineup all those
years. All those balls hit off his ankles and feet....just thinking
that's all.
David H.
David M. Nieporent
>>C) confused why his appeal was heard before the suspension was made public.
>>i don't believe alex sanchez and the others that have been suspended have
>>received this type of treatment.
> Jayson Stark on ESPN Radio this morning said it was because someone in
> the panel requested arbitration, which automatically kicks in the appeal
> process, whereas the other players did not have a member of the panel
> request arbitration.
> However, as he pointed out, this means that MLB has known about the
> results of this test since last May.
I'm impressed by their ability to keep it from leaking.
I know people raise the fact that MLB knew about this for a while as proof
of perfidy on MLB's part -- but what else could they do? It hadn't been
upheld yet; they couldn't punish him, and they were required to keep it
confidential. So they had to treat him as if it hadn't happened.
--
David Marc Nieporent niep...@alumni.princeton.edu
Jumping To Conclusions: http://www.oobleck.com/tollbooth
mish...@hotmail.com
man from the gallows!
Killer Rabbit
"David M. Nieporent" <niep...@alumni.princeton.edu> wrote in message
news:42F0E160...@alumni.princeton.edu...
> sli...@slidge.com wrote:
>
> I'm impressed by their ability to keep it from leaking.
>
> I know people raise the fact that MLB knew about this for a while as proof
> of perfidy on MLB's part -- but what else could they do? It hadn't been
> upheld yet; they couldn't punish him, and they were required to keep it
> confidential. So they had to treat him as if it hadn't happened.
For me, it's pretty simple: Raffy's 3000 mark was good for MLB. Just as
Sosa and Mcguire's homeruns and Ripkin breaking Lou Gehrig's streak. All
good for baseball...that's why they dragged their feet. Again, just my
humble opinion.
Lori =^.^=
Douglas
<sli...@slidge.com> wrote in message
news:1123077763.ed6d073aae3ca9a733b16e5f39287f53@teranews...
>> A) he never 'intentionally' took steriods but isn't sure how they got in
>> his
>> system...hmm...i did hear today though that traces of steroids can last
>> in
>> your fat tissue for up to a year after put in your system.
>>
>
> At this point, the only scenario that I can see that would basically
> exonorate Palmeiro is that if it is proven that he took a non-banned
> substance that was contaminated with the banned substance during the
> manufacturing process. In order to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt,
> Palmeiro would have to provide the non-banned substance that has been
> contaminated, and an indepenedent laboratory would have to investigate
> it, which would involve investigating the manufacturing facility as well
> in order to prove that the "contamination" was not done after the fact.
Agreed, and the chances of this are probablly 1/1000
Douglas
could they do? They arent allowed to release the information...
However they knew months in advance and before his 3000th hit. So what could
MLB do? How about pay for ads congradulating him...
"Three people in baseball with direct knowledge of the drug-testing program
told The New York Times that MLB was aware early last month that Palmeiro
had failed a steroid test. When Palmeiro got his 3,000th hit July 15, Major
League Baseball paid for full-page congratulatory newspaper advertisements."
www.dallasnews.com
sfb
a series of process steps including some sort of appeal all governed by
the union contract. The drug testing stuff is confidential so those in
the know could not say no 3,000 hit ads without somebody asking why big
time.
"Douglas" <do...@anon.com> wrote in message
news:b0eIe.12664$Bx5.6246@trnddc09...
sli...@slidge.com
> Sosa and Mcguire's homeruns and Ripkin breaking Lou Gehrig's streak. All
> good for baseball...that's why they dragged their feet. Again, just my
> humble opinion.
>
Well, Palmeiro had the right for the appeals, etc. The question I have
is how much time passed between the end of the appeals and the
announcement? If the appeal process was already over when Raffy got his
3,000th hit, than you definitely have them withholding information in
their own interests.
sli...@slidge.com
>> exonorate Palmeiro is that if it is proven that he took a non-banned
>> substance that was contaminated with the banned substance during the
>> manufacturing process. In order to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt,
>> Palmeiro would have to provide the non-banned substance that has been
>> contaminated, and an indepenedent laboratory would have to investigate
>> it, which would involve investigating the manufacturing facility as well
>> in order to prove that the "contamination" was not done after the fact.
>
> Agreed, and the chances of this are probablly 1/1000
>
True enough (actually, I just read that there is one company licensed in
the US to produce that steroid and that they haven't manufactured it in
two years, which kind of increases the odds).
Killer Rabbit
<sli...@slidge.com> wrote in message
news:1123123820.26bbedbb0ed9e3bae061094111b62557@teranews...
It would be interesting to find out. Is it normal protocol to have a month
a half to appeal? Oddly enough, I just read that Ryan Franklin (Seattle
pitcher just suspended) was aware of failing a test 2 months ago, but a test
3 weeks after was negative. So maybe this is normal. On a
he-must-think-fans-are-stupid note, this guy is saying that his urine must
have been mixed up with another players and that he would never do steroids.
Sorry, can't buy that. Anyone here in this ng who's ever had a drug test
knows that there are precautions taken (the last one I took I had to sign my
name on a sticky back label and physically tape it on the bottle over the
screw top). How about a more likely scenario is that the guy cleaned up
after the first test knowing he would get popped again.
Personally, I am disgusted by the whole lot of them...owners, players, their
agents shooting their mouth off, etc..
Lori =^.^=
--
"We've got a blind date with Destiny -- and it looks like she's ordered the
lobster."
--The Shoveler--
Ron Johnson
David Marc Nieporent wrote:
> In article <1123036180.8...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "David the Nationals Fan" <davidth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Do you know he is allowed to say anything?
>
> Yes.
>
> > I haven't seen the actual
> >language of the agreement up on line, but I can certainly see the case
> >that could be presented that he couldn't say anything at all.
>
> It forbids either MLB or the MLBPA from speaking, not the individual
> player.
Which hasn't prevented leaks.
Ron Johnson
sli...@slidge.com wrote:
> > A) he never 'intentionally' took steriods but isn't sure how they got in his
> > system...hmm...i did hear today though that traces of steroids can last in
> > your fat tissue for up to a year after put in your system.
> >
>
> At this point, the only scenario that I can see that would basically
> exonorate Palmeiro is that if it is proven that he took a non-banned
> substance that was contaminated with the banned substance during the
> manufacturing process.
(I'm aware that Palmeiro hasn't adopted either potential defense,
basically conceding the accuracy of the test results)
There are a couple of other potential scenarios. He could
argue that his natural levels are above the thresholds. (Don't
laugh, it's an issue with positive tests for nandrolone. Yeah,
I know that's not what he's reported to have tested positive for)
Found an interesting paper on how the pass/fail levels are chosen.
Simplifying a heck of a lot, they're initially set at a level
where 99% of all athletes will pass. Then they adjust for the
standard error of the testing process.
It's a method with two practical problems. There's a money back
guarantee of the occasional false positive even if the tests
are perfect (which is why the low penalty for the first offense
Best I can tell, you'd expect a false positive every few years)
And it allows athletes with naturally low testosterone levels
to freely juice.
Palmeiro can also argue that the test is simply wrong. It's an issue
that the NCAA adresses in their drug testing program.
Quoting now:
The question of where the samples will be analyzed is critical. No
matter where the analyses are done, data on false-positive and
false-negative rates for the specific tests to be used should be
provided.
And further on:
No matter what screening methods may be used, including thin-layer
chromatography and radioimmunoassay, there is a finite probability
of a false-positive result (i.e., the test is positive even hough
the student-athlete is actually "clean"). The NCAA urges that
before
any action is taken on the basis of a positive result from such
screening tests, the results should be confirmed by gas
chromatography/mass spectrometry, with the latter test providing
the definitive result.
Again, a tricky road to go down. You'd assume the PA was aware of
these issues and that they're addressed. I can't find anything on
the procedures being followed.