PDA

View Full Version : Ryan Braun Wins Drug Appeal


DirtySox
02-23-2012, 04:11 PM
No suspension.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/140213003.html

Also.


DKnobler ‏ @DKnobler Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
MLB says it "vehemently disagrees" with Braun decision.


Ken Rosenthal ‏ @Ken_Rosenthal Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Warning on Braun: Before forming opinions, we need to know more. #Brewers #MLB


karl ravech ‏ @karlravechespn Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Appears Brauns team won because a courier didn't take positive test to fed ex building thought it was closed Saturday night..protocol?


Steve Berthiaume ‏ @SBerthiaumeESPN Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Braun argued test protocol had not been followed. Collector took sample home & kept it refrigerated rather than get it to FedEx asap.
Retweeted by Buster Olney


Steve Berthiaume ‏ @SBerthiaumeESPN Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Braun test sample collector thought FedEx/Kinkos was closed because it was late on a Saturday. MLB is livid and considering options.


Jeff Passan ‏ @JeffPassan Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Sources: Braun sample sat over the weekend in FedEx shop. Wasn't delivered until Monday. Chain-of-custody argument from lawyers won case.


Jeff Passan ‏ @JeffPassan Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Sources: The particular chain-of-custody loophole Braun used is likely to be closed in an amendment to MLB's drug-testing program.

kittle42
02-23-2012, 04:13 PM
Chalk a loss up for the court of public opinion!

Marqhead
02-23-2012, 04:14 PM
Great news for him and baseball.

soxnut1018
02-23-2012, 04:14 PM
Wow. Was not expecting that one.

Southsider101
02-23-2012, 04:16 PM
Yeah! :bandance:

Over By There
02-23-2012, 04:16 PM
Wow. Interesting that it says that he got it overturned on a "technicality," and that he didn't challenge the result of the test per se. It would be interesting to know the details.

SephClone89
02-23-2012, 04:18 PM
Wow. Interesting that it says that he got it overturned on a "technicality," and that he didn't challenge the result of the test per se. It would be interesting to know the details.

Yeah, I'm trying to figure out what the hell that means.

Jerko
02-23-2012, 04:18 PM
Not surprised.

DirtySox
02-23-2012, 04:20 PM
DKnobler ‏ @DKnobler Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
MLB says it "vehemently disagrees" with Braun decision.

DirtySox
02-23-2012, 04:21 PM
And the NL Central race gets more interesting.

soxnut1018
02-23-2012, 04:22 PM
Bill Shaikin @BillShaikin
"MLBPA statement says vote for Braun was 2-1 -- obviously, arbitrator and MLBPA for Braun's appeal, MLB for suspension."

thomas35forever
02-23-2012, 04:23 PM
Wow. That's amazing.

Hendu
02-23-2012, 04:28 PM
Very surprised. I thought he was toast, unless they found discrepancies between his two samples. Hopefully we'll get more details, especially since MLB strongly disagrees with the decision.

HaroMaster87
02-23-2012, 04:37 PM
now they can alllll take 'roids as much as they want and dont have to worry...uh oh...

DumpJerry
02-23-2012, 04:38 PM
And the NL Central race gets more interesting.

Nope. The Cubs still suck.

now they can alllll take 'roids as much as they want and dont have to worry...uh oh...
Um...nope.

HaroMaster87
02-23-2012, 04:43 PM
Um...nope.

Why Not? They have a built in excuse as well as a precedent has now been set...whats stopping them now??

soltrain21
02-23-2012, 04:50 PM
Nope. The Cubs still suck.



What does that have to do with the rest of the NL Central?

SephClone89
02-23-2012, 04:53 PM
What does that have to do with the rest of the NL Central?

Really. I get that we're "totally biased" and all, but do we have to throw in a Cubs bash into every attempt at discussing National League baseball?

hi im skot
02-23-2012, 04:53 PM
What does that have to do with the rest of the NL Central?

It doesn't...it's just, uh, you know...CUBS SUCK, BRAH!

DirtySox
02-23-2012, 05:14 PM
karl ravech ‏ @karlravechespn Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Appears Brauns team won because a courier didn't take positive test to fed ex building thought it was closed Saturday night..protocol?

Steve Berthiaume ‏ @SBerthiaumeESPN Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Braun test sample collector thought FedEx/Kinkos was closed because it was late on a Saturday. MLB is livid and considering options.

Jeff Passan ‏ @JeffPassan Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Sources: Braun sample sat over the weekend in FedEx shop. Wasn't delivered until Monday. Chain-of-custody argument from lawyers won case.

WLL1855
02-23-2012, 05:20 PM
karl ravech ‏ @karlravechespn Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Appears Brauns team won because a courier didn't take positive test to fed ex building thought it was closed Saturday night..protocol?

If this was thrown out on a technicality then I'm pretty disgusted.

I guess he had a good lawyer. If you can't argue the results of the test put the system up on trial. Law school 101.

WhiteSox5187
02-23-2012, 05:21 PM
karl ravech ‏ @karlravechespn Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Appears Brauns team won because a courier didn't take positive test to fed ex building thought it was closed Saturday night..protocol?

Steve Berthiaume ‏ @SBerthiaumeESPN Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Braun test sample collector thought FedEx/Kinkos was closed because it was late on a Saturday. MLB is livid and considering options.

Wow, that's a shame. It sounds like Braun got away with one.

DirtySox
02-23-2012, 05:29 PM
Jeff Passan ‏ @JeffPassan Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Sources: The particular chain-of-custody loophole Braun used is likely to be closed in an amendment to MLB's drug-testing program.

Marqhead
02-23-2012, 05:41 PM
Chalk a loss up for the court of public opinion!

No so fast...

TDog
02-23-2012, 05:45 PM
Wow, that's a shame. It sounds like Braun got away with one.

It does, doesn't it?

I've seen people charged with criminal offenses get off because of chain-of-custody issues. Conscientious juries have let people they believe are guilty go because the state hasn't proved the case because the case is tainted by the way evidence was handled.

In this case, because Braun is popular and his announced positive test was a surprise, people will applaud the outcome. Many will say he is vindicated, although they may still scorn players they believe were juiced despite never having tested positive. The commissioner's office may be ridiculed, although it can only work within the rules established by law and labor agreements. Commissioner Landis never had to worry about due process.

The public still should consider Braun as guilty, just as the public considers Sammy Sosa. But it won't.

thomas35forever
02-23-2012, 06:48 PM
The public still should consider Braun as guilty, just as the public considers Sammy Sosa. But it won't.
To me, that's the biggest question here. Just because the ruling was overturned doesn't mean he didn't juice. I want to think he did, but it's a little difficult to definitively say so.

OTOH, I think another question is that even though Braun may still be considered a juicer from here on out, in which class does this place him in? Will he be scorned like McGwire, Bonds, Clemens and Palmeiro? Or will this just be brushed aside like Pettitte and Roberts, who came clean about their use after the Mitchell Report came out? It's a lot to think about going forward.

Bucky F. Dent
02-23-2012, 06:50 PM
Really. I get that we're "totally biased" and all, but do we have to throw in a Cubs bash into every attempt at discussing National League baseball?


I certainly hope so.:D:

Bucky F. Dent
02-23-2012, 06:52 PM
Jeff Passan ‏ @JeffPassan Reply Retweet Favorite · Open
Sources: The particular chain-of-custody loophole Braun used is likely to be closed in an amendment to MLB's drug-testing program.


Actually, that loophole is likely to be closed by firing the bozo's that botched the chain of custody.

Frontman
02-23-2012, 07:11 PM
Wow. Shock of shocks. Braun walks clean while Bud throws his hands up in confusion.


And, shock of shock; a sending of the samples on a Friday, so they don't arrive until a Monday. Built-in excuse not to have a result to a rule break.

Good one, MLB. After years of saying you "cleaned up the game," you prove that as an organization you can say all you want, but will do what you want.

ComiskeyBrewer
02-23-2012, 07:42 PM
I've seen people charged with criminal offenses get off because of chain-of-custody issues.



That's because Chain of Custody is a MAJOR issue. Any sample being used to support a case doesn't have airtight chain of custody records, it's thrown out(as it SHOULD). temperature changes alone can cause all kinds of false detections or non-detects of compounds, depending on analytical methods and what you're testing for. Also, chains of custody are scrutinized more closely on samples that appear to be outliers in data sets(which is the case here). Legally, a broken chain of custody invalidates the sample results because the result can't be proven or disproved - it's like the sample never existed. The solution is to resample(which is now impossible, but the sample take right after the elevated levels was at normal levels, which tends to lend credence to the idea that this chain of custody might have screwed up the sample).

2 days of a broken chain of custody is a huge time frame for this sort of thing, too. I'd be interested to know what the acceptable holding time is for a sample like this that isn't frozen/chilled. Biological samples tend to alter themselves more quickly if they aren't properly stored(like, oh, i donno, in some moron's fridge).

ComiskeyBrewer
02-23-2012, 07:47 PM
Also, anybody see Buster Olney was getting destroyed on twitter today? He is backtracking like crazy.

He got absolutely owned right here(first line is buster, then alternating).

@AndyMonfre @HelloKittysBf Key word: 'Offer.' And as I wrote, knowing that Writers wouldn't take it back. It was a suggested PR track.

@Buster_ESPN How would this have been good PR? "NL MVP Braun Offers to Give Back MVP, A Move That Likely Suggests Guilt"

@AndyMonfre To me,he would have appeared magnanimous,with the best interests of baseball at heart. But I never wrote he should give it back.

@Buster_ESPN If you were accused of plagarism, would you give back your AP award before your trial (knowing you were innocent) for PR sake?

@AndyMonfre Difficult to answer without specifics,but getting ahead of worst possible outcome is standard operating procedure in politics.

DirtySox
02-23-2012, 09:13 PM
The Ryan Braun Loophole (http://www.southsidesox.com/2012/2/23/2820447/the-ryan-braun-loophole)

Pretty ridiculous he got off on said technicality.

Soxman219
02-23-2012, 09:29 PM
Braun so got away with it, but it won't change. The seeds of doubt have been planted, Braun will always be questioned as a juicer. Precedent has been set.

Hendu
02-23-2012, 09:46 PM
The public still should consider Braun as guilty, just as the public considers Sammy Sosa. But it won't.

Agreed for the most part, but there will be enough people that consider Braun guilty to make him have to constantly talk about it. I don't think it'll exactly be smooth sailing for Braun.

ComiskeyBrewer
02-23-2012, 09:51 PM
Will Carrol(@injuryexpert), is saying on twitter that braun won via "Scientific argument"(basically not saying what could happen, but what did happen), and not just on the chain of custody. They were able to create a repeatable result that showed exactly HOW the sample was corrupted. The panel was shown this, and agreed. Hopefully more will come out on this soon, but apparently not everything is known yet.

EDIT: Apparently he has an article about it coming in the next Sports Illustrated.

TaylorStSox
02-23-2012, 10:41 PM
He's still a cheater to me. Sometimes I loathe professional sports.

skobabe8
02-23-2012, 10:49 PM
He's still a cheater to me. Sometimes I loathe professional sports.

After all of this, you're STILL going to assume he cheated?

Wow.

DirtySox
02-23-2012, 10:54 PM
After all of this, you're STILL going to assume he cheated?

Wow.

Why should we think otherwise? He got off on a technicality. The collector followed generally accepted protocol noted in the JDA. Even the head of the USADA noted the circumstances and process were routine. He got away with it because of good lawyers who know how to make a living arguing ambiguity. There's a reason the procedure was attacked versus merely the results.

TaylorStSox
02-23-2012, 11:07 PM
After all of this, you're STILL going to assume he cheated?

Wow.

Absolutely without question. He didn't argue that he wasn't juicing. He found a loophole to exploit. Granted, I'm biased. I think most pro athletes juice. I can't even watch the NFL much anymore because nothing could be more obvious. Ask yourself this...What does MLB have to gain by an MVP testing positive? Absolutely nothing. I would be more inclined to believe they would try to cover it up. Yet, they're "vehemently" against a ruling that incriminates one of the stars of the game. Obvious cheater is obvious.

ComiskeyBrewer
02-23-2012, 11:29 PM
Absolutely without question. He didn't argue that he wasn't juicing. He found a loophole to exploit. Granted, I'm biased. I think most pro athletes juice. I can't even watch the NFL much anymore because nothing could be more obvious. Ask yourself this...What does MLB have to gain by an MVP testing positive? Absolutely nothing. I would be more inclined to believe they would try to cover it up. Yet, they're "vehemently" against a ruling that incriminates one of the stars of the game. Obvious cheater is obvious.

First off, it wasn't steroids. That was falsely reported by ESPN, and something they never corrected. It was for a "banned substance", which doesn't mean PEDs, it means something else. So to say he was juicing is incorrect.

Second, maybe we should wait till we get most of the facts out here before we automatically assume he is guilty(especially concidering his conviction was just overturned). There are already people saying that it wasn't JUST the chain of custody, but if you want to concoct a conspiracy theory, more power to you.

rockinrobin23
02-23-2012, 11:30 PM
if the test was positive then he should sit..is this not the same guy who killed arod for not coming clean, its a shame..man up and take your 50 games like a man.

TaylorStSox
02-23-2012, 11:39 PM
First off, it wasn't steroids. That was falsely reported by ESPN, and something they never corrected. It was for a "banned substance", which doesn't mean PEDs, it means something else. So to say he was juicing is incorrect.

Second, maybe we should wait till we get most of the facts out here before we automatically assume he is guilty(especially concidering his conviction was just overturned). There are already people saying that it wasn't JUST the chain of custody, but if you want to concoct a conspiracy theory, more power to you.

To me, juicing isn't specifically steroids. Juicing is using PED's, which he tested positive for, which makes him a cheater...end of story.

rockinrobin23
02-23-2012, 11:41 PM
to me, juicing isn't specifically steroids. Juicing is using ped's, which he tested positive for, which makes him a cheater...end of story.
agreed

ComiskeyBrewer
02-23-2012, 11:53 PM
To me, juicing isn't specifically steroids. Juicing is using PED's, which he tested positive for, which makes him a cheater...end of story.

There is exactly as much direct, documentary evidence that Ryan Braun used a PED as there is that Paul Konerko used a PED, or Aaron Rodgers used a PED, or Mother Teresa used a PED: none. Zero.

What there was, was a test result. A test result is information filtered through a process. Testing for substances in the body is a particularly tricky process. The reason you take great care with such a test isn't that we're trying to let guilty players off the hook. The reason you take great care is because, if you don't do the test right, it becomes very easy to reach a wrong result. Temperature changes alone can cause all kinds of false detections or non-detects of compounds, depending on analytical methods and what you're testing for.

Here are the two important things I think we know:

(1) Braun's test results were extremely unusual.

(2) The procedures around the test were extremely sloppy.

I say "extremely sloppy" because of the one thing we absolutely do know: The neutral arbitrator ruled in Braun's favor. Apparently that doesn't happen much. Do you really think the arbitrator is going to deviate that far from a standard judgment over a small error? Or when there's not a very strong basis for believing that the error caused the suspicious result? Do you actually believe that?

What about guys like Will Carrol(whose field is basically just PEDs), saying that they were able to create a repeatable result that showed exactly HOW the sample was corrupted, not IF.

DSpivack
02-23-2012, 11:55 PM
There is exactly as much direct, documentary evidence that Ryan Braun used a PED as there is that Paul Konerko used a PED, or Aaron Rodgers used a PED, or Mother Teresa used a PED: none. Zero.

What there was, was a test result. A test result is information filtered through a process. Testing for substances in the body is a particularly tricky process. The reason you take great care with such a test isn't that we're trying to let guilty players off the hook. The reason you take great care is because, if you don't do the test right, it becomes very easy to reach a wrong result. Temperature changes alone can cause all kinds of false detections or non-detects of compounds, depending on analytical methods and what you're testing for.

Here are the two important things I think we know:

(1) Braun's test results were extremely unusual.

(2) The procedures around the test were extremely sloppy.

I say "extremely sloppy" because of the one thing we absolutely do know: The neutral arbitrator ruled in Braun's favor. Apparently that doesn't happen much. Do you really think the arbitrator is going to deviate that far from a standard judgment over a small error? Or when there's not a very strong basis for believing that the error caused the suspicious result? Do you actually believe that?

What about guys like Will Carrol(whose field is basically just PEDs), saying that they were able to create a repeatable result that showed exactly HOW the sample was corrupted, not IF.

Were the procedures even that sloppy, though? The head of the USADA said it wasn't.

ComiskeyBrewer
02-23-2012, 11:57 PM
Were the procedures even that sloppy, though? The head of the USADA said it wasn't.

We'll have to wait to find out to know for sure(like i said earlier, Will Carrol is coming out with an article that will shed a LOT of light on this, apparently). I would think it would have to be, in order to have an arbitrator deviate that far from a standard judgment.

TaylorStSox
02-24-2012, 12:05 AM
Were the procedures even that sloppy, though? The head of the USADA said it wasn't.

Exactly. They were standard. Again, why would MLB be so upset about this ruling? It's not in their best interest to have an MVP test positive.

TaylorStSox
02-24-2012, 12:07 AM
We'll have to wait to find out to know for sure(like i said earlier, Will Carrol is coming out with an article that will shed a LOT of light on this, apparently). I would think it would have to be, in order to have an arbitrator deviate that far from a standard judgment.

The procedure's were standard. Braun's lawyers were good enough to discover a loophole. They set a precedent. Braun's camp never challenged the results, they challenged the process.

ComiskeyBrewer
02-24-2012, 12:22 AM
Exactly. They were standard. Again, why would MLB be so upset about this ruling? It's not in their best interest to have an MVP test positive.

Seriously? :scratch:You really think MLB would rather have all this egg on their face, than have an MVP test positive? If they wanted to cover it up, they would have just dropped the case(like they have done several times in the past) after braun appealed it.

The procedure's were standard. Braun's lawyers were good enough to discover a loophole. They set a precedent. Braun's camp never challenged the results, they challenged the process.

Where's your proof? We have no clue what has happened, neither does the USADA. They know just as much as we do. All we know is the limited info that has been leaked. As i said before, there are reports saying there were multiple errors in the collecting process. It's best to wait till all the facts are out before rendering the man guilty.

Lip Man 1
02-24-2012, 01:09 AM
One thing that I thought was interesting was Braun's claim that he's been tested 25 times in his career, including twice this past season and each time he came up clean.

I don't know what to make of that, there should be a way to confirm that statement or not.

If that's the case than how could he use this season after two previous tests? (Don't know how long the stuff remains in your system...) You'd think it would have shown up before with a previous test no?

Lip

Wsoxmike59
02-24-2012, 06:29 AM
@Lip, agreed. I found this sentence very confusing regarding Braun and his test. From this morning's Trib.


ESPN broke the news on Braun's failed test in December. The report stated that Braun tested positive for elevated levels of testosterone in a urine sample taken during the playoffs. Braun quickly called for another test, but the results were also negative. :scratch:


http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/breaking/chi-brewers-braun-has-50game-suspension-overturned-20120223,0,5002084.story

skobabe8
02-24-2012, 07:58 AM
Why should we think otherwise? He got off on a technicality. The collector followed generally accepted protocol noted in the JDA. Even the head of the USADA noted the circumstances and process were routine. He got away with it because of good lawyers who know how to make a living arguing ambiguity. There's a reason the procedure was attacked versus merely the results.

Absolutely without question. He didn't argue that he wasn't juicing. He found a loophole to exploit. Granted, I'm biased. I think most pro athletes juice. I can't even watch the NFL much anymore because nothing could be more obvious. Ask yourself this...What does MLB have to gain by an MVP testing positive? Absolutely nothing. I would be more inclined to believe they would try to cover it up. Yet, they're "vehemently" against a ruling that incriminates one of the stars of the game. Obvious cheater is obvious.

I'm just saying at this point I don't know. Granted, I haven't looked into this story much at all, just getting my information from the comments I've read in this thread. But it seems like there is too much unknown at this point to be speaking in absolutes like you guys are doing.

Frontman
02-24-2012, 10:00 AM
The past two pages of exchanges is exactly what Bud and the MLB want:

We're not sure, so we need to just let it go. THAT's the situation that they have created. As someone said, no solid "PROOF" that he cheated (save of course, a failed substance test) but since we now can't trust the process; we can't be certain of anything, once again.

Fast forward 6 years and we're exactly where we were prior to the Mitchell investigator. Muddy water and fans arguing, while the players still use and put up awesome numbers.

kittle42
02-24-2012, 10:14 AM
Rational person: "You see, chain of custody is a very important, crucial thing in assuring correct test results, it....."

General public: "Blahah, blahhh, duhhhh....I DON'T CARE HE'S A CHEATER!"

skobabe8
02-24-2012, 10:25 AM
Rational person: "You see, chain of custody is a very important, crucial thing in assuring correct test results, it....."

General public: "Blahah, blahhh, duhhhh....I DON'T CARE HE'S A CHEATER!"

:clap:

Frontman
02-24-2012, 10:35 AM
Rational person: "You see, chain of custody is a very important, crucial thing in assuring correct test results, it....."

General public: "Blahah, blahhh, duhhhh....I DON'T CARE HE'S A CHEATER!"

So, which is much more rational to accept; the fact that Braun's test came back positive, or that someone planted a tainted sample (including Braun's DNA in it) so that he would come back positive?

Because that's what your rational person is saying. Chain of evidence must remain secure, because if not, it could be tampered with.

If we accept that argument, who would benefit from tampering with it?

A rational person can accept the fact that the MLB once again screwed up after all these years of touting they tightened up their process; and now we can't accept anything as the truth....again.

asindc
02-24-2012, 10:37 AM
Rational person: "You see, chain of custody is a very important, crucial thing in assuring correct test results, it....."

General public: "Blahah, blahhh, duhhhh....I DON'T CARE HE'S A CHEATER!"

Or put another way:

Step 1-Accusation

Step 2-Presume Guilt

Step 3-Due Process to Prove Presumption

Step 4-Results of Due Process Announced

Step 5a (if found guilty)-Proclaim Faith in System

Step 5b (if found not guilty)-Express Indignation About Results, if not Process Itself

The Racehorse
02-24-2012, 10:42 AM
I think most pro athletes juice.

Same here.

That's been my thinking for a very long time... :shrug:

kittle42
02-24-2012, 11:08 AM
Or put another way:

Step 1-Accusation

Step 2-Presume Guilt

Step 3-Due Process to Prove Presumption

Step 4-Results of Due Process Announced

Step 5a (if found guilty)-Proclaim Faith in System

Step 5b (if found not guilty)-Express Indignation About Results, if not Process Itself

America! **** yeah! Freedom isn't free!

rockinrobin23
02-24-2012, 11:18 AM
those samples are tripled sealed..seems to me someone would have to go through alot of trouble to taint that sample...he got off on a loophole and thats that...mlb network saying alot of players are upset about this as well, players seem to think he should sit...

voodoochile
02-24-2012, 11:28 AM
There is exactly as much direct, documentary evidence that Ryan Braun used a PED as there is that Paul Konerko used a PED, or Aaron Rodgers used a PED, or Mother Teresa used a PED: none. Zero.

What there was, was a test result. A test result is information filtered through a process. Testing for substances in the body is a particularly tricky process. The reason you take great care with such a test isn't that we're trying to let guilty players off the hook. The reason you take great care is because, if you don't do the test right, it becomes very easy to reach a wrong result. Temperature changes alone can cause all kinds of false detections or non-detects of compounds, depending on analytical methods and what you're testing for.

Here are the two important things I think we know:

(1) Braun's test results were extremely unusual.

(2) The procedures around the test were extremely sloppy.

I say "extremely sloppy" because of the one thing we absolutely do know: The neutral arbitrator ruled in Braun's favor. Apparently that doesn't happen much. Do you really think the arbitrator is going to deviate that far from a standard judgment over a small error? Or when there's not a very strong basis for believing that the error caused the suspicious result? Do you actually believe that?

What about guys like Will Carrol(whose field is basically just PEDs), saying that they were able to create a repeatable result that showed exactly HOW the sample was corrupted, not IF.

He tested positive for synthetic testosterone and his testosterone-to-epitestosterone ratio was three times higher than any result in the history of baseball's program and was consistent with other people who have been banned for doping in other sports.

That's a heck of a lot of smoke if nothing's burning. He got off on a technicality. The sample was delayed getting to the lab because it was collected on a Saturday and didn't get shipped until the following day because the FedEx office was closed. Testing of the sample showed no degradation and the seals were not tampered with.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/baseball/mlb/02/24/braun.wins.appeal/index.html?xid=cnnbin

Wsoxmike59
02-24-2012, 11:35 AM
To answer my own question about the 2nd Ryan Braun test. I found a much better explanation at ESPN:

Since being informed of the results, Braun has been disputing his case. A source close to Braun said that when he was told about the positive test, he immediately requested to be tested again. That second test, using a different sample that was tested by Braun's camp, the source said, was not positive.









http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/7338271/ryan-braun-milwaukee-brewers-tests-positive-performance-enhancing-drug

Over By There
02-24-2012, 12:15 PM
Braun's press conference is live on the Score right now. Making a pretty strong case for himself.

Fenway
02-24-2012, 12:21 PM
Dick Pound who helped cleaned up the Olympics says Braun is a liar and cheat.

http://www.thestar.com/sports/article/1136318--milwaukee-brewers-ryan-braun-isn-t-innocent-and-dodged-a-bullet-dick-pound

DirtySox
02-24-2012, 12:32 PM
Passan's piece is very much in line with my opinion on this.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-passan_ryan_braun_appeal_drug_program_selig_022312

hi im skot
02-24-2012, 12:36 PM
Dick Pound who helped cleaned up the Olympics says Braun is a liar and cheat.

http://www.thestar.com/sports/article/1136318--milwaukee-brewers-ryan-braun-isn-t-innocent-and-dodged-a-bullet-dick-pound

Heh...Dick Pound.

Fenway
02-24-2012, 12:40 PM
Passan's piece is very much in line with my opinion on this.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-passan_ryan_braun_appeal_drug_program_selig_022312

Dick Pound turned down a chance to head the IOC to set up the Olympic testing program which MLB uses.

Pound is no lightweight.

http://aoc.mcgill.ca/greatest-mcgillians/richard-pound

Braun is in Pound's sights now and mark my words they will nail him.

rockinrobin23
02-24-2012, 12:49 PM
makes no sense why would someone tamper with his sample, what would you have to gain from that???

hi im skot
02-24-2012, 12:49 PM
Dick Pound who helped cleaned up the Olympics says Braun is a liar and cheat.

http://www.thestar.com/sports/article/1136318--milwaukee-brewers-ryan-braun-isn-t-innocent-and-dodged-a-bullet-dick-pound

Just read this article. Fenway, nowhere in the article does he say "liar" or "cheat." Come on, man.

hi im skot
02-24-2012, 12:49 PM
makes no sense why would someone tamper with his sample, what would you have to gain from that???

Well, a 50 game suspension overturned, obviously.

rockinrobin23
02-24-2012, 12:53 PM
so the guy who took the sample wanted him suspended for 50 games...why would this help the person who took the sample? the fact that mlb is pretty upset that he is not suspend says alot in my book.

PeteWard
02-24-2012, 12:55 PM
Great news for him and baseball.

Unless of course he is really a juicer.

Fenway
02-24-2012, 02:28 PM
Just read this article. Fenway, nowhere in the article does he say "liar" or "cheat." Come on, man.

“He’s running around saying that he’s cleared is a misstatement. Anybody who’s at all neutral in this is going to say, ‘Well, he dodged a bullet with that.’ ”

“This is a 20:1 ratio (of testosterone to epitestosterone) — give me a … break,” Pound said, adding that storing the sample in a fridge over a weekend would not change its contents.

“There was no sign of any tampering, so I don’t understand how a properly formed independent panel could come to the conclusion that that invalidated the test,” Pound said. “It’s not sitting there in the fridge generating false testosterone.”


I think Mr. Pound was quite succinct.

Braun NEVER testified that he did not take anything....his entire appeal was based on it not being shipped. Apparently if FedEx or DHL in Milwaukee was open on Saturday night and it was stored in a fridge at Mitchell Field he would have been toast.

DirtySox
02-24-2012, 02:34 PM
“He’s running around saying that he’s cleared is a misstatement. Anybody who’s at all neutral in this is going to say, ‘Well, he dodged a bullet with that.’ ”

“This is a 20:1 ratio (of testosterone to epitestosterone) — give me a … break,” Pound said, adding that storing the sample in a fridge over a weekend would not change its contents.

“There was no sign of any tampering, so I don’t understand how a properly formed independent panel could come to the conclusion that that invalidated the test,” Pound said. “It’s not sitting there in the fridge generating false testosterone.”


I think Mr. Pound was quite succinct.

Braun NEVER testified that he did not take anything....his entire appeal was based on it not being shipped. Apparently if FedEx or DHL in Milwaukee was open on Saturday night and it was stored in a fridge at Mitchell Field he would have been toast.

Yep. And he tested positive on both samples which people seem to be overlooking here.

Marqhead
02-24-2012, 02:56 PM
Unless of course he is really a juicer.

I've been using this a lot lately.

http://uninformedcommentary.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/jump-to-conclusions-mat.jpg

TaylorStSox
02-24-2012, 03:56 PM
Rational person: "You see, chain of custody is a very important, crucial thing in assuring correct test results, it....."

General public: "Blahah, blahhh, duhhhh....I DON'T CARE HE'S A CHEATER!"

This isn't a court of law. The evidence against Braun is pretty damning in the court of public perception.

kittle42
02-24-2012, 04:36 PM
This isn't a court of law. The evidence against Braun is pretty damning in the court of public perception.

A lot of things the public perceives are very frightening and removed from reality - not saying this one rises to that level.

Fenway
02-24-2012, 04:49 PM
This isn't a court of law. The evidence against Braun is pretty damning in the court of public perception.

We all think Clemens is guilty and he never flunked a test.

downstairs
02-24-2012, 04:59 PM
Why Not? They have a built in excuse as well as a precedent has now been set...whats stopping them now??

They most likely mis-handled the samples. I'm sure there are strict rules in the CBA on how this stuff goes down.

Its like how a thief- who did it- can still get off on mis-handled evidence. That doesn't lead to the whole world now being able to steal what they want.

downstairs
02-24-2012, 05:03 PM
Dick Pound turned down a chance to head the IOC to set up the Olympic testing program which MLB uses.

Pound is no lightweight.

http://aoc.mcgill.ca/greatest-mcgillians/richard-pound

Braun is in Pound's sights now and mark my words they will nail him.

Nail him how (assuming he does not take 'roids in the future)?

I'm sure the 3-person panel has the final say, and its all said and done.

If Braun lied in any way, he didn't do so in a court of law or under oath.

WLL1855
02-24-2012, 05:22 PM
Nail him how (assuming he does not take 'roids in the future)?

I'm sure the 3-person panel has the final say, and its all said and done.

If Braun lied in any way, he didn't do so in a court of law or under oath.

I'd say the 'nailing' will come through the press. Braun is going to be grist for the mill for months to come. We will see exactly how negative the fan reaction is when the voting for the All-Star game begins. You would expect a reigning MVP to be leader in the voting. Anyone want to take a guess on that outcome?

I'll agree with you that as far as punishment from the league goes, Braun is probably in the clear. This time anyway.

Fenway
02-24-2012, 05:42 PM
I'd say the 'nailing' will come through the press. Braun is going to be grist for the mill for months to come. We will see exactly how negative the fan reaction is when the voting for the All-Star game begins. You would expect a reigning MVP to be leader in the voting. Anyone want to take a guess on that outcome?

I'll agree with you that as far as punishment from the league goes, Braun is probably in the clear. This time anyway.

This Montreal lab is the best in the world and Braun's entire defense was the way the sample was shipped.

If and I mean IF he decides to do something in the future he will get caught. Integrity in sports is Richard Pound's passion and that lab in Pointe-Claire, Quebec is important to him.

TommyJohn
02-24-2012, 05:44 PM
Rational person: "You see, chain of custody is a very important, crucial thing in assuring correct test results, it....."

General public: "Blahah, blahhh, duhhhh....I DON'T CARE HE'S A CHEATER!"

Count me among the low-life, stupid, unbelievably filthy non-lawyer, reg'lar peoples types.

voodoochile
02-24-2012, 06:07 PM
Count me among the low-life, stupid, unbelievably filthy non-lawyer, reg'lar peoples types.

Agreed and I don't really care what anyone thinks of it...

DumpJerry
02-24-2012, 09:20 PM
Have not gone through the entire thread, but isn't it "funny" how the first player to ever win an arbitration plays for Bud's old team?

CHISOXFAN13
02-25-2012, 12:05 AM
I'd say the 'nailing' will come through the press. Braun is going to be grist for the mill for months to come. We will see exactly how negative the fan reaction is when the voting for the All-Star game begins. You would expect a reigning MVP to be leader in the voting. Anyone want to take a guess on that outcome?

I'll agree with you that as far as punishment from the league goes, Braun is probably in the clear. This time anyway.

The Brewers will sell out the season and Braun will be an all-star starter. That's my guess.

Fenway
02-25-2012, 01:21 AM
Have not gone through the entire thread, but isn't it "funny" how the first player to ever win an arbitration plays for Bud's old team?

Gammons on NESN's Bruins post-game said from Ft. Myers that even the PA is not happy how this played out ( Selig is livid )

Look - we are not talking about a lab that does testing for local courts.

Now here is the question that SHOULD be answered. Who leaked the results to ESPN in the first place????

My guess is the same source that outed players on the 2003 list.

Lip Man 1
02-25-2012, 11:06 AM
Apparently that is what Peavy is concerned about according to a story on the Tribune web site.

Lip

slavko
02-25-2012, 03:20 PM
Who floated that story about how the testosterone was the result of a prescription for "Down There" ointment? His facial expressions during the statement he made had the evasive look to them. Guilty in the Court of Slavko.

ernie14
02-25-2012, 05:12 PM
now they can alllll take 'roids as much as they want and dont have to worry...uh oh...



It's always been that way.

ernie14
02-25-2012, 05:24 PM
1998 was a fraud.

Nothing constructive came of the Mitchell report

Nothing is working, nothing.

Bud Selig doesn't give a damn. 1998 saved baseball blah blah blah

All the cheats will be in Cooperstown, what a shame.

Cub fans will be bragging when Sosa gets in the Hall.

Hey, might as well put everyone in. Sosa, Bonds. Let's put Pete Rose in too.

:whiteflag I give up. Nothing works.

Oblong
02-25-2012, 08:53 PM
Nice article.

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/page/OTL-Ryan-Braun/ryan-braun-defense-raises-more-questions-doping-experts

I understand the need to follow protocol but it's important to note that these samples are sealed with crime scene type tape that makes tampering nearly impossible without someone knowing about it. These aren't some fly by night handlers. Refrigeration of the sample wouldn't increase testosterone levels as that's the proper routine when shipment is not immediately available.

We're talking two scenarios. A conspiracy, for some reason, to nail Braun, involving one of the top, if not the top, drug testing labs in the world, and MLB at the highest levels. We're talking JFK conspiracy theory stuff.

Or Braun's laying.

The only way I'm convinced otherwise is if you can show me how you can raise the testosterone levels of a urine sample on a sealed sample.

According to the OTL story, his lawyers never questioned the postitive test. only the protocol and procedures.

And further why would MLB want a positive result? He's the reigning MVP of the NL. He's a good story. Baseball doesn't need this. If they really did think things simply got screwed up and bungled in the testing process then they would have swept it under the rug and said the test was flawed and moved on. They have more to lose in all of this than Braun does. He's just one player.

ComiskeyBrewer
02-25-2012, 09:31 PM
Nice article.

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/page/OTL-Ryan-Braun/ryan-braun-defense-raises-more-questions-doping-experts

I understand the need to follow protocol but it's important to note that these samples are sealed with crime scene type tape that makes tampering nearly impossible without someone knowing about it.

From a person much smarter than I, who runs a lab:

The problem I have is that the "seals on the samples remained intact". The lab receives the samples and runs the test after a few days. A sample that's marked with a number code. It appears to have an elevated T:E and is tested again. At least 14 days passed from when the lab received the sample and Ryan was notified of the result. Any questions by the Braun group about chain of custody and tampering with the sample that would require the lab to check the records would have been at least a few weeks after the positive result. What is laughable to me is that other than a record of the state of the sample when it was received there is no way to verify that the seals remained intact. I have had to go back to my technicians often and ask "do you remember sample 4225242 from several weeks ago". We both smile because we've run maybe 100's of samples since then with completely non-descript numbers and both of us know that it is near impossible to remember any details of any specific sample. What he does is go back to his notes and verify that nothing was marked down to indicate that it was out of the ordinary. If I push, "do you recall checking the seal specifically on that sample?". "well I'm supposed to, but I can't say for sure I remembered to check for that sample". Granted, I don't run a diagnostic lab that requires precise documenting of samples as they come in, but my point is that no technician will remember the exact condition of a sample. The only record is what's written down and there is always human error that they really didn't make a careful study of the seal. It's probably extremely rare that a sample would come in where the seal is clearly broken. It's only human nature to not be vigilant about observing the seal when it is almost never broken, especially if the lab is processing ten's to hundreds of samples a day. To assert that the seal was definitely not broken is an extremely weak argument, in my opinion, as there is no way to check the accuracy of that statement. The lab has to break the seal to test the sample. How can you possibly say with absolute certainty that it was sealed before the lab broke the seal. You can't.


The only way I'm convinced otherwise is if you can show me how you can raise the testosterone levels of a urine sample on a sealed sample.

According to the OTL story, his lawyers never questioned the postitive test. only the protocol and procedures.

And further why would MLB want a positive result? He's the reigning MVP of the NL. He's a good story. Baseball doesn't need this. If they really did think things simply got screwed up and bungled in the testing process then they would have swept it under the rug and said the test was flawed and moved on. They have more to lose in all of this than Braun does. He's just one player.You can't spontaneously sprout synthetic T in urine sample, but the test that "determines" that synthetic T is present does not actually find synthetic T in urine. What it does is identify the metabolites produced when T is used up by your body processes. It identifies them only by very precisely determining when the remnants of those metabolites pass in front of a sensor after the urine sample has been literally turned into a gas. The gas rises up a tube and the different remnant rise at microscopically different rates. A sensor records data about these remnants as they pass by. This data is turned into a printout (though it can also be evaluated just as numbers). Then you look on your printout for a peak at a given "time" on the graph, you measure that peak and make a determination as to what that means.

Here's the catch. What if two different things are passing by the sensor at a give time? If you are predisposed to think that everything passing by that sensor at that specific time is indicative of synthetic T, you're going to get a big peak that looks like a lot of synthetic T that is actually only a mcuh smaller amounts of two different things. (And that small amount, for reasons alluded to in posts long ago, would not mean that there was a small amount of synthetic T, either. A determination of synthetic T being present can only be made by comparing ratios of different carbon ions, both of which are present in nature, and then making a statistical hypothesis that a certain ratio is "out of whack" with what would normally be expected in a given sample. It's diagnostic art and statistics as much as anything.

This is a vast oversimplification, but the point is that you don't "find' synthetic T waving back at you from under a microscope. These tests are extraordinarily complex in nature.

ComiskeyBrewer
02-25-2012, 09:36 PM
Also, The test only measures the weight of a molecule with a small error. Anything with similar weight will appear as synthetic T. (All 140 lb women are not the same). If a larger molecule degrades it can have a degradation product the same size as synthetic T and make it seem like their is more than normal (if you cut off Roseanne Barr's arms and legs you don't get Paris Hilton).

Oblong
02-25-2012, 09:49 PM
From a person much smarter than I, who runs a lab:

The problem I have is that the "seals on the samples remained intact". The lab receives the samples and runs the test after a few days. A sample that's marked with a number code. It appears to have an elevated T:E and is tested again. At least 14 days passed from when the lab received the sample and Ryan was notified of the result. Any questions by the Braun group about chain of custody and tampering with the sample that would require the lab to check the records would have been at least a few weeks after the positive result. What is laughable to me is that other than a record of the state of the sample when it was received there is no way to verify that the seals remained intact. I have had to go back to my technicians often and ask "do you remember sample 4225242 from several weeks ago". We both smile because we've run maybe 100's of samples since then with completely non-descript numbers and both of us know that it is near impossible to remember any details of any specific sample. What he does is go back to his notes and verify that nothing was marked down to indicate that it was out of the ordinary. If I push, "do you recall checking the seal specifically on that sample?". "well I'm supposed to, but I can't say for sure I remembered to check for that sample". Granted, I don't run a diagnostic lab that requires precise documenting of samples as they come in, but my point is that no technician will remember the exact condition of a sample. The only record is what's written down and there is always human error that they really didn't make a careful study of the seal. It's probably extremely rare that a sample would come in where the seal is clearly broken. It's only human nature to not be vigilant about observing the seal when it is almost never broken, especially if the lab is processing ten's to hundreds of samples a day. To assert that the seal was definitely not broken is an extremely weak argument, in my opinion, as there is no way to check the accuracy of that statement. The lab has to break the seal to test the sample. How can you possibly say with absolute certainty that it was sealed before the lab broke the seal. You can't.


You can't spontaneously sprout synthetic T in urine sample, but the test that "determines" that synthetic T is present does not actually find synthetic T in urine. What it does is identify the metabolites produced when T is used up by your body processes. It identifies them only by very precisely determining when the remnants of those metabolites pass in front of a sensor after the urine sample has been literally turned into a gas. The gas rises up a tube and the different remnant rise at microscopically different rates. A sensor records data about these remnants as they pass by. This data is turned into a printout (though it can also be evaluated just as numbers). Then you look on your printout for a peak at a given "time" on the graph, you measure that peak and make a determination as to what that means.

Here's the catch. What if two different things are passing by the sensor at a give time? If you are predisposed to think that everything passing by that sensor at that specific time is indicative of synthetic T, you're going to get a big peak that looks like a lot of synthetic T that is actually only a mcuh smaller amounts of two different things. (And that small amount, for reasons alluded to in posts long ago, would not mean that there was a small amount of synthetic T, either. A determination of synthetic T being present can only be made by comparing ratios of different carbon ions, both of which are present in nature, and then making a statistical hypothesis that a certain ratio is "out of whack" with what would normally be expected in a given sample. It's diagnostic art and statistics as much as anything.

This is a vast oversimplification, but the point is that you don't "find' synthetic T waving back at you from under a microscope. These tests are extraordinarily complex in nature.

Doesn't the listed concerns about the seals apply to pretty much any test and any sample that requires a seal? In other words this isn't an issue specific to Braun.

And the rest of your comments are interesting but I don't see the relevance to this particular case any more than any other test that's done.

Assume the courier/test taker had followed procedure.... would that have had any impact on the test result an arbitration procedure?

ComiskeyBrewer
02-25-2012, 10:09 PM
Doesn't the listed concerns about the seals apply to pretty much any test and any sample that requires a seal? In other words this isn't an issue specific to Braun.


I thought it was worth mentioning since people take the fact that there is no record of the seal being broken as gospel. Just a little inside knowledge i thought was worth passing on.

And the rest of your comments are interesting but I don't see the relevance to this particular case any more than any other test that's done. You don't see the relevance to how molecule degradation relates to this case? Let's say that the collector stores the sample in his basement, but light still manages to hit the sample(he leaves the cooler open, and light from the window hits it, or his cat knocks it over, whatever scenario you prefer). The UV light that the molecules absorb cause molecule degradation, this can get the larger molecules to break down to the correct size of synthetic T(which is how the test looks for it). Thus, you have elevated levels of "synthetic" Testosterone. Such an incident would also help explain the record levels. Now, do i think this happened? No, but it's very plausible considering the broken chain of custody.

Oblong
02-25-2012, 10:29 PM
I thought it was worth mentioning since people take the fact that there is no record of the seal being broken as gospel. Just a little inside knowledge i thought was worth passing on.

You don't see the relevance to how molecule degradation relates to this case? Let's say that the collector stores the sample in his basement, but light still manages to hit the sample(he leaves the cooler open, and light from the window hits it, or his cat knocks it over, whatever scenario you prefer). The UV light that the molecules absorb cause molecule degradation, this can get the larger molecules to break down to the correct size of synthetic T(which is how the test looks for it). Thus, you have elevated levels of "synthetic" Testosterone. Such an incident would also help explain the record levels. Now, do i think this happened? No, but it's very plausible considering the broken chain of custody.

Couldn't that have happened at FedEx and during shipment? I'm assuming we're not talking about a glass jar but something placed in some type of container which makes the contents look unknown to anybody who sees the container.

I'm the first to admit to not being a scientist and my brief career attempt at pharmacy ended halfway during Organic Chemistry.... I would think if things were that sensitive then we'd have more stringent controls and protective measures to ensure an accurate result

ComiskeyBrewer
02-25-2012, 10:41 PM
Couldn't that have happened at FedEx and during shipment? I'm assuming we're not talking about a glass jar but something placed in some type of container which makes the contents look unknown to anybody who sees the container.


Fedex takes it and seals it in a controlled environment(so it couldn't possibly be exposed to UV light for a possible 44 hrs, like it is possible at the collector's house) until shipping, as well as creates documentation of it(thus creating a chain of custody) I'm not certain as to the specifics during shipping, but seeing as they transport testings like this often, i assume they have a way to ship it to prevent UV/extreme temp changes.

I'm the first to admit to not being a scientist and my brief career attempt at pharmacy ended halfway during Organic Chemistry.... I would think if things were that sensitive then we'd have more stringent controls and protective measures to ensure an accurate resultThere are, that's why he was supposed to take the sample to fedex immediately after collecting it(instead of passing several fedex locations on the way home), to ensure nothing like this would happen.

Oblong
02-25-2012, 10:53 PM
Fedex takes it and seals it in a controlled environment(so it couldn't possibly be exposed to UV light for a possible 44 hrs, like it is possible at the collector's house) until shipping, as well as creates documentation of it(thus creating a chain of custody) I'm not certain as to the specifics during shipping, but seeing as they transport testings like this often, i assume they have a way to ship it to prevent UV/extreme temp changes.

There are, that's why he was supposed to take the sample to fedex immediately after collecting it(instead of passing several fedex locations on the way home), to ensure nothing like this would happen.

Don't remember where I read it but I saw something to the effect that the courier is to store it in a fridge if FedEx isn't immediately available and he assumed with the weekend that it would sit on a shelf somewhere, not reaching the lab for a few days anyway. Again, just something I read. It wasn't the courier being negligent or lazy but following what he thought were the proper procedures.

ComiskeyBrewer
02-25-2012, 10:56 PM
Don't remember where I read it but I saw something to the effect that the courier is to store it in a fridge if FedEx isn't immediately available and he assumed with the weekend that it would sit on a shelf somewhere, not reaching the lab for a few days anyway. Again, just something I read. It wasn't the courier being negligent or lazy but following what he thought were the proper procedures.

True, i misspoke(or typed). I should have said, he passed two fedex locations before trying a third, who wouldn't ship till monday. I actually don't think the collector was being lazy, just want to clear that up.

Fenway
02-26-2012, 12:03 PM
The collector is not some $7 attendant

Dino Laurenzi Jr. is a trainer based in Kenosha, Wisconsin. He is 52 who has a B.A. in athletic training from the University of Wisconsin, a master’s in medicine/athletic training from North Carolina and an MBA from Loyola-Chicago.

Gammons told WEEI that MLB has information that Braun gave 'incorrect' information to the arbitration panel.

There are only TWO FedEx drop centers in Milwaukee that are staffed by FedEx employees... ( FedEx Kinkos location are NOT approved by the CBA )


Both closed at 5 PM on Saturday - so Laurenzi Jr. followed the procedure correctly.

FedEx staffed
FedEx World Service Center
5375 S Third St
Milwaukee, WI 53207

FedEx staffed
FedEx World Service Center
2001 Airport Rd
Waukesha, WI 53188


Braun's defense team told the panel that there were many FedEx drop off locations in Milwaukee open until 9 PM BUT they were either OfficeMax or Kinko's locations. ( which the collector was told he could not use ). Arbitrator Shyam Das may re-evaluate everything.

TheVulture
02-26-2012, 03:32 PM
Great news for him and baseball.

How in the world is that great news for baseball? Due to incompetence or negligence, a case is thrown out on a technicality so a likely steroid user gets off. That just makes MLB look bad again.

Marqhead
02-26-2012, 03:41 PM
How in the world is that great news for baseball? Due to incompetence or negligence, a case is thrown out on a technicality so a likely steroid user gets off. That just makes MLB look bad again.

It was a knee jerk post after I saw the news, didn't know the full details of the case at the time.

Oblong
02-26-2012, 04:01 PM
The collector is not some $7 attendant

Dino Laurenzi Jr. is a trainer based in Kenosha, Wisconsin. He is 52 who has a B.A. in athletic training from the University of Wisconsin, a master’s in medicine/athletic training from North Carolina and an MBA from Loyola-Chicago.

Gammons told WEEI that MLB has information that Braun gave 'incorrect' information to the arbitration panel.

There are only TWO FedEx drop centers in Milwaukee that are staffed by FedEx employees... ( FedEx Kinkos location are NOT approved by the CBA )


Both closed at 5 PM on Saturday - so Laurenzi Jr. followed the procedure correctly.

FedEx staffed
FedEx World Service Center
5375 S Third St
Milwaukee, WI 53207

FedEx staffed
FedEx World Service Center
2001 Airport Rd
Waukesha, WI 53188


Braun's defense team told the panel that there were many FedEx drop off locations in Milwaukee open until 9 PM BUT they were either OfficeMax or Kinko's locations. ( which the collector was told he could not use ). Arbitrator Shyam Das may re-evaluate everything.

INteresting info but I wonder why the aribtrators wouldn't check that out themselves? Wouldn't they talk with the drug tester to get his side?

TheVulture
02-26-2012, 04:06 PM
It was a knee jerk post after I saw the news, didn't know the full details of the case at the time.

Oh, that makes sense.

Anyway, they really need to go to one year first offense, lifetime ban second offense. I'm tired of this crap. Even if he was suspended 50 games that apparently wouldn't deter him; he could still hit 30 homeruns and say imagine what I would have done with 162 games when he went to the bargaining table. If he only misses the beginning of the season it could even benefit his team to still be fresh at the end of the season while the player would still be able to reap the glory in the post season as if nothing ever happened. If a player had to miss a full season and be considered in breach of their contract, I'd think they'd be much less likely to take the risk. Fifty games would still be worth the risk if you're playing for a massive long term contract.

Oblong
02-28-2012, 01:37 PM
http://www.todaystmj4.com/blogs/lanceallan/140747293.html

The collector released a statement. Someone's lying.

robertks61
02-28-2012, 02:19 PM
Fyi, when I am tested at work. I am required to initial the seal that is placed on the sample container along with the seal that is on the shipping container after the container holding the bottle has been closed and sealed. I would hope if one of the seals is broken or damaged that the sample is discarded. I will find out next time I am tested though.

Hendu
02-28-2012, 03:11 PM
http://www.todaystmj4.com/blogs/lanceallan/140747293.html

The collector released a statement. Someone's lying.

If Braun's press conference was supposed to rebuild his image, he did a horrible job by going after this guy specifically and basically accusing him of tampering with the sample, rather than attacking the collection process/protocol. Now that the collector is lawyered up (with a big, expensive firm) hope he goes after Braun for defamation. Just to get all the facts out in a public court of law rather than MLB's secretive arbitration hearing.

AZChiSoxFan
02-28-2012, 03:27 PM
If Braun's press conference was supposed to rebuild his image, he did a horrible job by going after this guy specifically and basically accusing him of tampering with the sample, rather than attacking the collection process/protocol. Now that the collector is lawyered up (with a big, expensive firm) hope he goes after Braun for defamation. Just to get all the facts out in a public court of law rather than MLB's secretive arbitration hearing.

I totally agree. Regardless of whether he juiced or not, I've lost of ton of respect for the guy simply over the way he has gone after the collector.

Frontman
02-28-2012, 03:31 PM
If Braun's press conference was supposed to rebuild his image, he did a horrible job by going after this guy specifically and basically accusing him of tampering with the sample, rather than attacking the collection process/protocol. Now that the collector is lawyered up (with a big, expensive firm) hope he goes after Braun for defamation. Just to get all the facts out in a public court of law rather than MLB's secretive arbitration hearing.

But, but, but; it isn't against the rules of MLB to accuse someone of tampering.....waaaaaaaah!!!!!http://beautiful-pics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Ryan_Braun_2.jpg

rockinrobin23
02-28-2012, 03:40 PM
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7625905/milwaukee-brewers-ryan-braun-case-sample-collector-says-followed-protocols it comes down to who do you think is telling the truth....i think he did cheat and got off on a loophole. why would anyone tamper with the sample?

TDog
02-29-2012, 05:53 PM
I totally agree. Regardless of whether he juiced or not, I've lost of ton of respect for the guy simply over the way he has gone after the collector.

His concern should have been twofold. He needed to overturn the suspension and rehabilitate his image. Focusing on the former may well have helped him win his case (which impacts his paycheck), but pretty much ignoring his image in the process has probably impacted his future earnings.

Braun may be the victim of a mistake, and I'm not going to argue whether he was or wasn't. I'm guessing that most fans will only remember that he got off on a technicality. It will be interesting to see how his career plays out.

Frontman
03-01-2012, 08:15 PM
http://www.theonion.com/articles/kids-of-milwaukee-forced-to-look-up-to-ryan-braun,27499/

SI1020
03-01-2012, 08:30 PM
http://www.theonion.com/articles/kids-of-milwaukee-forced-to-look-up-to-ryan-braun,27499/ Gotta love the onion.

SoxandtheCityTee
03-02-2012, 05:17 PM
No surprise that the collector is unhappy. According to reports, the sample container was multiply sealed, then put inside another sealed package, which was in turn put inside a sealed box for shipment. And all these seals were intact when it left his custody.

How or why MLB did not introduce evidence at the arbitration that all these stickers/seals were unbroken when the box arrived is just a mystery. That's just basic. If in fact someone else in the chain messed up, it's really unfair to let the collector take the rap.

Frontman
03-02-2012, 06:39 PM
How or why MLB did not introduce evidence at the arbitration that all these stickers/seals were unbroken when the box arrived is just a mystery. That's just basic. If in fact someone else in the chain messed up, it's really unfair to let the collector take the rap.

Bud Selig, ties to Milwaukee Brewers.

Ryan Braun, reigning MVP of the League, plays for the Milwaukee Brewers.

And this surprises you how that they left the collector to take the blame for this?