Soxbadger

Good drunk is so much more pleasurable than bad drunk.

A lot of emotions in this thread.

I have a feeling the Saints punishment may be bad. You have to hit the organization as well as the players, so Im thinking they lose some draft picks.

It seems like Mark is confused that Zambrano hasnt been suspended or attacked a gatorade dispenser.

Yeah the Snookie posts were ridiculous, and Khloe is also a throw back. My tastes are finicky and particular though.

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

Which is why the best statement would have been about how the testing policy is great, 25 times Ive passed, 1 time there was an issue and because the policy is so good, the arbitrator clearly saw that there was an error and found the test unreliable. Now what can MLB say, they vehemently disagree that they have good testing procedures?

Right, which is why I said your best case scenario is maybe a 50/50 split. Some people will believes hes guilty regardless, some people innocent regardless. The middle is going to split, unless its blatantly obvious.

According to the arbitrator neither of the samples were reliable, therefore you cant judge me on something that MLB is not allowed to use. If the samples were reliable, I would have been found guilty. You can say whatever you want, but I never took steroids and only 1 test, of the 25+ that I have taken, found steroids in my system and that test has been found to have been done incorrectly. What is more believable? A) I never took steroids any other time in my career until the 2011 playoffs and was caught the 1 time I used them? B) I never haven taken steroids and 1 test was faulty. C) I always have taken steroids and the MLB test is so faulty I was only caught 1 time of the 25+ tests Ive taken. To me most wont believe answer C, and even if they did believe it, answer C suggests that the MLB test is completely unreliable. That leaves A/B, and I believe you would get at minimum a 50/50 split on it. That is the best you are ever going to do, unless you can absolutely prove the sample wasnt yours.

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

I disagree. I think that most people are willing to believe that there is a chance a mistake occurred in a drug test, especially given the fact Braun has passed every other one. That is what I would have stuck to, over all the tests, a mistake can happen 1 time.

The point is its entirely unnecessary to attack the collector. All he had to say was: "In order to ensure the reliability of the MLB drug program, MLB and the players association have instituted certain rules about how all samples should be handled. At trial it was shown that in this instance that protocol was not met and therefore the result was unreliable." Hes not admitting hes a cheater, hes saying due to lab error the results are unreliable, therefore even though he "failed" it doesnt matter because the test was never accurate in the first place. To take any other approach suggests that there must have been a scintilla of evidence to suggest that Braun felt he was targeted.

Balta, Thats why Im wondering. I would have assumed that the samples are numbered and therefore only the tester knew what sample belonged to who at first. The reason I assume this is because I also assume that the test is supposed to be blind (aka they dont know who the sample is until after the result). If that is the case, then the only people who knew the results had to be pretty high up. People in those positions generally dont risk their job over releasing confidential information. I dont know, Im just speculating. The tone of Braun's speech seemed to suggest that he believes the tester did something to him, not that the tester just made an innocent mistake in delivering the sample late in the afternoon instead of early in the morning. Hard to speculate, just seems like a mess from day 1.

The reason I asked is because Im wondering if Braun feels that the tester was the leak.

Has it ever come out why Braun's name was released when it was supposed to be secret?

My friend tried for one at a strip club in Tampa, didnt work.

Why does anyone care, I mean really, why do people care what other people have done or said. I dont know who this guy is, never read one of his articles. I dont know who Frum is either. The guy died young, left a family, that is sad. What does the rest matter?

I also concur with Steve's statement.

Still subjective. I personally think that its more important whether or not Rose learned and improved from last years series. Hamilton is a good addition, but the Bulls are going to live and die with Rose. Last year was Rose's first time to the EC Finals, he needs to take that experience and improve. If Rose is handled by the Heat, Hamilton wont be able to save them.

I think that statement is slightly subjective. (With reference to Hamilton being the biggest key)

Appealing an arbitration depends on the contractual agreement of the parties. I have done no research, but my guess is that this was binding arbitration and thus very limited ability to appeal. This is the way the MLB wants it though, the last thing they want is the arbitrator to rule in favor of MLB (as he has done every other time) then the player appeal to a court in his teams state, just to have the state stay the enforcement of the suspension pending the appeal (see Kevin Williams, NFL).

Rex, Just so you know the best Indiana can do is the 5 seed. When Wisconsin won yesterday they clinched at worst the 4 seed (due to tie breaker with Indiana) and at best the 3 seed (due to various tie breakers, but it requires Michigan to lose both of their remaining games.) If you were talking NCAA tournament, not Big10, then disregard the above. Not really excited for the tournament because a 4/5 @ Indiana doesnt really appeal at all to me. I know that the Big10 is going to bring the tournament back to Chicago in the future, I just dislike it being mainly in Indiana. Id have no problem with a rotation, that included most Big 10 states, but dont like the fact Indiana is getting such an advantage. (I also dislike it in football, but because Indiana is less relevant its not as much of an immediate concern.)

lol Even Tubby is swearing at the refs. I think there have been 10 fouls (by both teams) in less than 5 minutes.

The Wisconsin- Minnesota game is one you watch where you have a feeling something really terrible is going to happen. Refs were brutal against Wisconsin, Ryan goes insane gets T'd, then they call everything in Wisconsin's favor. 23-16 in the first half, just bad.

I think racism stated before white people were in power. Those damn Egyptians were always keeping down the "others" (see Ten Commandments) and Im pretty sure that in places like Babylon, Persia, etc had forms of racism. Off topic, woooooooooooooooooooo