Ryan Braun Wins Appeal of Steroid Suspension
by Matthew on Feb 23, 2012 2:37 PM PST
in Around Major League Baseball
Email
PrintNews just (relatively) broke that the arbitration panel hearing Ryan Braun's appeal ruled in his favor, reportedly in a 2-1 decision. Ryan Braun is a Milwaukee Brewer, a team whom the Mariners do not play this season and do not directly compete with at all unless they two somehow reach the World Series, in which case this still would not have mattered. What I'm saying is that this has basically, potentially totally, nothing to do with the Mariners.
But it's rather big general baseball news. So here's a place to discuss it if you want.
125 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Gut reaction is it's crap
If he doped, he should be punished. And the best information that’s publicly available is he did indeed dope. So why’s he getting off?
What about information privately available?
by ThundaPC on Feb 23, 2012 2:49 PM PST up reply actions 4 recs
What? What public information is out there that he doped?
Only thing I’ve ever read is that his testosterone levels were supposedly over twice as high as any other player ever tested. Which to me lends more credence that the test was screwed up in some way than anything else.
by drblacknwhite on Feb 23, 2012 2:50 PM PST up reply actions
The arbitrator felt that he did not dope.
That is why.
by Mariner John on Feb 23, 2012 2:50 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Probably not true.
From the MJ Sentinel piece on the matter:
Someone familiar with the decision said the appeal went Braun’s way not so much on contesting the result of the test but the testing process itself, some kind of technicality. And it was arbitrator Shyam Das who decided to rule in favor on that technicality, making it a 2-1 decision by the three-man panel.
I assume that there are two types of “technicalities.” If it’s a procedural thing that MLB can fix, then i think the technicality has no bearing going forward as to Braun or other drug tests, and we’ll likely never know what it was. If it’s something more contractual-based, then i think it could have a major impact on future drug testing and I imagine it would have to be addressed in a manner that would result in more publicly available information.
by andrewgolfsalot on Feb 23, 2012 2:53 PM PST up reply actions
No, the arbitrator felt that he should not be suspended
Very different. I can’t help but draw comparison to my other favorite sport, cycle racing, where multi-Tour de France champion Alberto Contador was recently suspended for six months. The arbitration court ruled that his adverse test probably did not come from doping, but that he had not sufficiently proven that it was caused by accidental ingestion in food. Even though they went on record saying they did not believe he had doped, he was still suspended.
Sounds like the exact opposite sort of thing may have happened here.
by Aly Edge on Feb 23, 2012 2:56 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
The Spanish beef industry challenged Contador's explanation,
saying that they test all their beef and that their meat could not have contained high enough levels to give Contador his test results. The Spanish Cycling Body ruled in Contador’s favor, but was appealed and overruled by the international cycling body.
By the Court of Arbitration for Sport
The International Cycling Union seems not to have the power to suspend riders themselves, which is moronic.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport can only get involved if there is legal language between two litigants that recognizes their authority, and I’ve never heard of a baseball case going to the CAS, so I doubt the “options” MLB are considering (blockquote below) would involve that, but maybe the next time a CBA needs to be negotiated it may happen.
I couldn't remember CAS's name...so I threw international cycling body
Thanks for refreshing my memory. I don’t follow cycling too much, except the Tour (France), probably because it’s the only race that gets any coverage.
I thought I heard on the Dan Patrick show that Braun tested positive for HGH instead of Synthetic Testosterone (highest ever recorded). Judging from the articles being linked looks like it’s testosterone, unless it’s both.
Ha...ha?
If there is a good reason why he’s getting off, I’m all ears. I’m not saying there isn’t one. I’m not in a position to be able to say that. I am saying I’d like to know it if there is one.
The sample was not handled correctly.
There you go.
by Aaron Campeau on Feb 23, 2012 3:58 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Hooray! It would suck for baseball if an awesome player like Braun was suspended for a large portion of the season.
Mariners fan in SF :: @Eric_Dykstra
Not enough info for me to really make a decision yet.
But the fact that he’s getting off on a technicality just seems sketchy.
What is the technicality?
I’ve read that Braun’s lawyers made the case that the samples were improperly handled. If that’s true, it does shed some doubt on that initial test coming back properly.
From ESPN's article on the story:
Braun didn’t argue evidence of tampering, didn’t argue anything about science being wrong but argued protocol had not been followed. A second source confirmed to ESPN investigative reporter Mark Fainaru-Wada that Braun did not dispute the science but rather questioned chain of custody/collection procedure.
According to one of the sources, the collector, after getting Braun’s sample, was supposed to take the sample to FedEx/Kinkos for shipping but thought it was closed because it was late on a Saturday. As has occurred in some other instances, the collector took the sample home and kept it refrigerated. Policy states that the sample is supposed to get to FedEx as soon as possible.
Braun’s initial T/E ratio was more than 20:1. And sources previously confirmed synthetic testosterone in his system. Source says MLB is livid and is considering options and other comment.
by drblacknwhite on Feb 23, 2012 3:10 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I wonder what it's like to have a Baseball player's pee in your refrigerator all weekend.
by joof on Feb 23, 2012 3:14 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Not arguing tampering or against the test itself
doesn’t mean there wasn’t tampering or that the test wasn’t botched. Braun and his lawyers might have just figured that the technicality was easy to prove.
by Matthew on Feb 23, 2012 3:20 PM PST up reply actions 7 recs
No, it doesn't sound like it.
You’re confusing Matthew’s explanation with him declaring any sort of causality. He’s not saying definitively that Braun didn’t juice or that Braun’s test was tampered with. He’s merely saying that what Braun argued, and apparently won on, was the process itself.
by andrewgolfsalot on Feb 23, 2012 3:26 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
My mind isn't made up. I don't think we'll ever know.
If you want to try and tease me, go ahead.
I don't want to
I don’t think that way. I just don’t get why you felt the need to needle me for expressing my opinion.
But I’m not crying in my beer over it, so whatever.
I'm just going to go out on a limb that he needled you because
the opinion you expressed was not based on any fact actually reported, and the conclusion you drew cannot be supported by any information that you currently possess.
by andrewgolfsalot on Feb 23, 2012 3:31 PM PST up reply actions
See I don't get that
Braun tests positive.
He wins appeal.
I say WTF? He tested positive, why is he not being punished?
As I said before, if there’s an answer to that question, it would be nice to hear it.
Chain of custody of the sample was broken
Drug testing samples are supposed to be tracked from donation to testing/storage. Braun’s was kept in some dude’s fridge for any number of hours. During that time, that sample could have been altered. There is no way to know that the sample that Braun gave was the one the lab analyzed.
Because according to the CBA the player has the right to appeal.
He appealed. He one the appeal and that arbitration is binding. That is literally all we know.
That's not all you said though.
You implied that information proving him innocent should be made public knowledge
We know that Braun's test contained a heightened level of testosterone.
Where you fun afoul is where you say “he tested positive.” We don’t know that. We know that the levels of his testosterone in his urine were heightened.
If Braun can show that the required protocols weren’t followed for collecting and processing the evidence against him, then the evidence against him is meaningless and cannot be trusted.
Cases like this get dismissed all the time in the legal world. When they get dismissed, we don’t know for certain that a defendant is innocent, and we don’t know for certain that they’re guilty. All we know is that the State can’t prove them guilty.
It’s the same thing here. The arbitrators held that MLB cannot prove Braun was guilty.
by andrewgolfsalot on Feb 23, 2012 3:39 PM PST up reply actions
No one knows if it was really his urine...
with so much money at stake, you’d want a clean chain of custody. It’s kind of like the OJ defense on the blood collected at the murder scene.
With Braun not talking about anything else, he avoids the Bonds perjury trial for lying under oath.
It was in that random dude's fridge for 48 hours!
if I were MLB, I would fire AND sue that lab.
by pdb on Feb 23, 2012 3:43 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I would probably set up an expectation for testing that included no room for doubt.
You know, like not testing after FedEx is closed on a Saturday or Sunday, or finding another 24hr option in the delivery world.
Is it really like players would only do performance enhancing drugs on the weekend if you simply eliminated weekend testing?!?
“Woohoo! It’s Saturday. Time for my weekly steroid mini-cycle!!!!!”
MLB dropped the ball on Bud Selig’s watch and lost some credibility, then acted petulant and self-righteous about it. Shocking. I would have NEVER suspected that on Selig’s watch.
The best part? This whole “2 of 3 arbitrators” argument. One works for MLB, one for Players Union. EVERY vote comes down to the arbitrator. There really aren’t 3 arbitrators, why pretend there is? Make an independent panel and change the rules, or stop bitching when your guys messed up protocol. Simple enough.
I've put away the whiskey and the chainsaw and gone responsible. I'd like to say "Danny Kelly made me do it!" but that would be a lie. I chose to shave, put on a suit and tie and pretend I'm more important than I really am...
by Tyler Jorgensen on Feb 23, 2012 5:08 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
He's an ex-Marine Drill Sargeant.
Just needs a blind man and Nicholas Easter to steer him right.
I've put away the whiskey and the chainsaw and gone responsible. I'd like to say "Danny Kelly made me do it!" but that would be a lie. I chose to shave, put on a suit and tie and pretend I'm more important than I really am...
by Tyler Jorgensen on Feb 23, 2012 5:10 PM PST up reply actions
Because girls don't like baseball and aren't on the internet.
by Patrick Stites on Feb 23, 2012 5:42 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Crap. I didn't read the name. I read to Alexan...
and just assumed it was some Alexander the Great reference.
My mistake.
The Nicholas Easter reference still plays though.
I've put away the whiskey and the chainsaw and gone responsible. I'd like to say "Danny Kelly made me do it!" but that would be a lie. I chose to shave, put on a suit and tie and pretend I'm more important than I really am...
by Tyler Jorgensen on Feb 23, 2012 9:55 PM PST up reply actions
If you want to be simple about it
MLB agreed to a testing procedure.
That procedure was not followed when Braun was tested.
Therefore, MLB doesn’t get to punish Braun.
So we bascially cannot make any judgements then, can we?
We can’t say for sure he was clean, nor can we say for sure that he wasn’t.
by Cascadian Man on Feb 23, 2012 3:25 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I think that has something to do with:
But it’s rather big general baseball news. So here’s a place to discuss it if you want
by Cascadian Man on Feb 23, 2012 3:28 PM PST up reply actions
We say things about it, but we can't reasonably make any judgements on it.
There’s a slight difference.
by Cascadian Man on Feb 23, 2012 3:30 PM PST up reply actions
Dude. I think you're taking everything a wee bit personal.
In my opinion, having seen this play out many times, it would be best to let it go.
Please don't call me Dude
But you’re right. As usual, I seem to have an entire forum gunning for me. I’m honestly not sure how that happens.
Also. You're getting a lot of heat because steroids are a topic that a lot of people are really tired of.
Along with the subsequent almost witch-hunting that has accompanied it.
"As usual, I seem to have an entire forum gunning for me. I’m honestly not sure how that happens."
Have you considered the unchanged variable in this statement?
by Aaron Campeau on Feb 23, 2012 4:00 PM PST up reply actions 14 recs
You must live in a very odd monochromatic world
by Graham MacAree on Feb 23, 2012 3:29 PM PST up reply actions
The gray area is that you as an outsider do not know whether he did or not
by pdb on Feb 23, 2012 3:32 PM PST up reply actions 13 recs
Sometimes the grey matter doesn't even know
See: Rafael Palmeiro, Barry Bonds
The part that looks kinda gray-ish
Like proving whether he actually doped or not beyond a reasonable doubt, etc.
I don't believe I've indicated that I do
A positive test is a pretty damn good indicator that he did, but if there’s mitigating information, let’s hear it.
Up top you said
And the best information that’s publicly available is he did indeed dope
This is what people are taking issue with. Nobody who is not Ryan Braun can know this.
by pdb on Feb 23, 2012 3:36 PM PST up reply actions 5 recs
The appeal process overturned the decision.
That mitigates the “pretty damn good indicator.” If you stick with “he did it” then you have to find better indicators.
How about
Braun tests positive for artificial testosterone!
A. The test was mishandled, which means it’s (as far as I know) inadmissible?
B. There’s possibly other evidence which was unnecessary thanks to point A.
C. Tests aren’t 100% accurate.
D. The test results were sufficiently bizarre to confuse everyone.
I am Braun agnostic, the only rational conclusion one can come to given the above.
by Graham MacAree on Feb 23, 2012 3:41 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Or to put Matthew's original comment another way
I assert that God is made manifest on my desk as a potted basil plant.
Matthew disagrees. He may have some philosophical tools to employ about perception, the nature of god, whether he exists or not etc. that he can deploy to refute my assertion, but he chooses to look at my desk and say, ‘There is no basil plant on your desk, so the assertion is false’.
The fact that you can dismiss the claim using one tool does not mean the other tools weren’t available. All we know is that their deployment was unnecessary.
by Graham MacAree on Feb 23, 2012 3:47 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
It's kind of green and leafy.
And in my case dead and in the garbage
by Graham MacAree on Feb 23, 2012 3:58 PM PST up reply actions
This is basically why trying a case in the court of public opinion is quite dumb
And why we don’t (or at least, are not supposed to) do it.
Pretty much.
Which is why this never should have leaked and been kept a private process, as called for by the drug testing policy.
by drblacknwhite on Feb 23, 2012 3:27 PM PST up reply actions
Fair enough point
But while the court of public opinion means zero when determining the truth, I think the majority of people will jump to the conclusion that he did indeed take a PED.
I want to clarify my stance as well that
I think its more probable that he took something than he didn’t. I am not declaring that he did it or not.
I think it just provides a window for possible tampering
Or, that’s the bigger reason when compared to degradation of the sample
by Craptastic-J on Feb 23, 2012 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
Technicality? You mean someone didn't follow the rules. That's not a technicality. That's due process.
First, the test has to meet the testing protocols listed in Addendum A of the Drug Treatment and Prevention Program. Once a valid test comes back positive, there is a presumption the player is guilty. “The Commissioner’s Office is not required to otherwise establish intent, fault, negligence or knowing use of a Prohibited Substance…” The burden then shifts to the player to show the test result was not due to his “fault or negligence”. Negligence is not defined in the Program.
Because the test wasn’t valid, there is no need to move on to the second step which is to determine whether the player can meet his affirmative defense of not being at fault or negligent.
by Matsui on Feb 23, 2012 10:52 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Does anyone else like me doubt the test because "Why the hell would Ryan Braun need to take PEDs anyway?"
I’m not saying there is no way he did it. But he’s been a very good player since he came into the league in 2007. Why decide to take something illegal now? I guess it’s possible that he’s always been doing this and he just finally got caught, or he was trying to get over an injury, or the test really was tampered with. There’s also the possibility that he just decided that if he used PEDs he could get better, and he thought he could get away with it. I just find this whole situation to be very weird.
True, but there was no testing then.
There was no risk of getting caught. Braun has been tested numerous times since he entered the league.
Is it just me or is Ryan Braun a great comparison for best-case-scenario Jesus Montero?
Righty hitter with a high average, great power to all fields, walks just enough to be acceptable.
But Ryan Braun is better than Carlos Lee
I think it’s a good comp though, obviously Montero wouldn’t be as valuable, but I think the hitting could be similar.
Babe Ruth with a knuckleball!
by yuniform on Feb 23, 2012 9:22 PM PST via Android app up reply actions
I come here and find a lot of commenting energy that could have been devoted to the draft or beer.
Oh well, at least Graham showed up.
Very interesting ruling, and not for the reasons I expected.
I had been skeptical of this test result ever since the whole twice-as-high-as-the-next-highest-guy revelation. That set off all sorts of red flags for me. I find it difficult to believe that such a high profile player could go that far off the deep end and not have a fair amount speculation/suspicion surrounding him prior to any test result.
Sure, several people have plenty of incentive to protect him at all costs (current teammates, Brewers front office guys, family) but what about everyone else he comes in contact with? It seems like someone would have noticed significant physiological and/or emotional changes in him if he were going that completely nuts with some kind of synthetic testosterone.
There's an unconfirmed, but not out of left field, rumor
that Braun was taking legally prescribed and cleared medication that influenced the reading.
Valtrex.
Herpes medication. That’s what I heard months ago…
I've put away the whiskey and the chainsaw and gone responsible. I'd like to say "Danny Kelly made me do it!" but that would be a lie. I chose to shave, put on a suit and tie and pretend I'm more important than I really am...
by Tyler Jorgensen on Feb 23, 2012 9:57 PM PST up reply actions
If it was testosterone, the biggest symptom would be
micro nuts.
"Without freedom of speech I might be in the swamp" B. Dylan
" first step to restoring my good name and repuration"
false Braun, you won on a technicality.
Braun's reputation is unaffected, in my opinion.
According to the story, the protocol for handling the sample was not followed. Braun challenged the failure to follow protocol and he won. Good for him!
by Bart's Evil Twin on Feb 23, 2012 11:33 PM PST up reply actions
And yet there's still no proof he took them.
We shouldn’t even have known about this, whoever leaked the test is a cunt.
by Patrick Stites on Feb 23, 2012 11:36 PM PST up reply actions
Or a dick, as the case may be.
And MLB’s open disagreement with the result is extremely unprofessional and classless, suggesting a connection between the original leak and the desire to convict.
"Without freedom of speech I might be in the swamp" B. Dylan
Has it ever occured to you that there is a reason a mishandled test is grounds for that test being inadmissable?
Perhaps that the mishandling could, you know, fuck up the sample and lead to a false positive?
by Aaron Campeau on Feb 24, 2012 7:49 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I keep hearing "Braun's defense never challenged the science......" which is complete BS.
Chain of custody of a biological specimen is a rather critical component of forensic science. The two are inextricably bound. Challenging the protocol IS challenging the science. It isn’t a difficult concept.
The only truth:
Is that we don’t know and probably never will. Thankfully, the Founding Fathers (and I don’t mean Abner Doubleday, Kennesaw Mountain Landis and ESPECIALLY not Bud Selig) decided that a person is innocent until PROVEN guilty. Have reported on courts, I know the chain of evidence is important. Was the sample tampered with? Did the wait affect it? Was the guy’s fridge on the fritz? Did Braun decide he needed a boost for the playoffs? Was it some Rogaine (as I’ve heard suggested, probably not seriously)? False positives on drug tests happen all the time, and retesting showed the levels were OK shortly afterward. I guess there’s one other truth, that no system is foolproof. Now let’s get over this and get back to watching ballgames!
"There is no sports event like Opening Day of baseball, the sense of beating back the forces of darkness and the National Football League."
—George Vecsey
I hope Ryan Braun's test, and "chain of custody", have become the new "Prince Fielder fat joke"
In terms of zero tolerance from LL regulars, I mean.
This thread was interesting and fun and all, but… yeah.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
