Soxbadger Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Ah okay, I was reading the comment to literally. The implication of any "chain of custody" argument is that due to a failure in the chain of custody the sample is unreliable. So yes, they probably did not argue the test was wrong or that there was purposeful evidence tampering, because those arguments actually hurt their better argument, the sample is unreliable. Basically all Braun's attorneys wanted to do was knock out the 1 sample, not attack the entire science. The reason, Braun passed other tests, so if they argued there was something fundamentally wrong with the science, those passed tests proved nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 To clarify, the original comment made it seem like his lawyers were basically admitting Braun was guilty, but do to improper handling, he got off. The example of that is: I got a speeding ticket and I won because the police officer forgot to sign the ticket. There is no doubt as to my guilt, they just cant win. What I likely believe there argument was, is this example. I got a speeding ticket, but I won because the radar gun said I was going 5000 mph and my car could only go 150, so there was no reliable evidence as to what my speed was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 09:03 PM) Were these pee tests or blood tests? Pee tests being stored improperly could result in evaporation which could cause the entire sample to be much stronger. My guess is that MLB tries to keep it secret what happened, because otherwise every player will raise it as a defense. As far as I know, MLB still does not have the right to do blood tests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 09:23 PM) To clarify, the original comment made it seem like his lawyers were basically admitting Braun was guilty, but do to improper handling, he got off. The example of that is: I got a speeding ticket and I won because the police officer forgot to sign the ticket. There is no doubt as to my guilt, they just cant win. What I likely believe there argument was, is this example. I got a speeding ticket, but I won because the radar gun said I was going 5000 mph and my car could only go 150, so there was no reliable evidence as to what my speed was. Either way, if MLB can't follow their own procedures, thy can't suspend the guy. He may be clearly guilty, but it's mlb's job to run the program correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Thats what I thought, so the test is already very unreliable (in terms of drug tests its the worst reliability, 1 is hair and 2 is blood), there was a reading that was far outside of the normal range (even for failed tests,, at least thats what I believe I read when it came out) and there was poor handling of the sample. Surprised that it was 2-1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 08:28 PM) Thats what I thought, so the test is already very unreliable (in terms of drug tests its the worst reliability, 1 is hair and 2 is blood), there was a reading that was far outside of the normal range (even for failed tests,, at least thats what I believe I read when it came out) and there was poor handling of the sample. Surprised that it was 2-1 The three person board is made up of management (MLB), the union (MLBPA) and the arbitrator. Apparently it's common for MLB management and the MLBPA to split on votes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G&T Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 09:28 PM) Thats what I thought, so the test is already very unreliable (in terms of drug tests its the worst reliability, 1 is hair and 2 is blood), there was a reading that was far outside of the normal range (even for failed tests,, at least thats what I believe I read when it came out) and there was poor handling of the sample. Surprised that it was 2-1 Panels are always 2-1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) Yeah I just read that, completely ridiculous. If you had given me a thousand guesses, I would have never guessed it. Might as well just have 1 judge then, the more I read, the more clear it is this is all just a joke. GT, I assume you mean MLB panels? Because many real arbs go 3-0 all the time. Edited February 24, 2012 by Soxbadger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 08:27 PM) Either way, if MLB can't follow their own procedures, thy can't suspend the guy. He may be clearly guilty, but it's mlb's job to run the program correctly. PEDs >>> Bud Selig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 08:28 PM) Thats what I thought, so the test is already very unreliable (in terms of drug tests its the worst reliability, 1 is hair and 2 is blood), there was a reading that was far outside of the normal range (even for failed tests,, at least thats what I believe I read when it came out) and there was poor handling of the sample. Surprised that it was 2-1 Urine tests are valid in regards to what he tested positive for. Reliability is the reason you have the protocols which must be exactly fiollowed for a given test with mulitiple samples. He can say whatever he wants. He is guilty of taking banned substances. He knows it and the lawyers know it. This is why they attacked the procedure and not the actual tests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 The reporters who broke the story in December, thus placing Braun and MLB in uncomfortable and embarrassing situations, were the same people who did extraordinarily solid work on the Barry Bonds saga. Their story also gave Braun the opportunity to proclaim his innocence to the world before his appeal, not that it was always heard by those made cynical from baseball's drug problems. Despite the odds, I always believed Braun would win his appeal. He never seemed like a shortcuts kind of guy. He really does work at the innate skills that might cause other players to reach for the cruise-control button or the needle. He really does arrive early and leave late, despite his guaranteed millions. He's never displayed the moody or hostile behavior common to juicers. He really does value loyalty, having signed a below-market contract to be a Brewer for life. He is a face of a franchise and a respected man in the community. So you kept asking yourself during these last 10 weeks: Why would Braun risk what a $100 million contract could not buy? And that would be a spotless reputation. No matter what anyone believes, the ruling means Braun gets to keep his most valued commodity. And yes, he is still rich and powerful and famous, not that any of that helped relieve the anxiety and uncertainty as that Sword of Damocles dangled for two-and-a-half months. So now, Braun can finally do that well-known exhale for something much more than his batter's-box routine. As for the rest, there is nothing for Braun to do except keep swinging away.Send email to mhunt@journalsentinel.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Jesus Christ, sports journalism. Someone should tell Mr/Mrs. Hunt to breathe through their nose every now and again, as sucking off both Braun and the Brewers to that extent must be physically taxing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 10:17 PM) Urine tests are valid in regards to what he tested positive for. Reliability is the reason you have the protocols which must be exactly fiollowed for a given test with mulitiple samples. He can say whatever he wants. He is guilty of taking banned substances. He knows it and the lawyers know it. This is why they attacked the procedure and not the actual tests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Pretty much Brandon McCarthy @BMcCarthy32 "Hey hun, what's this next to the olives?" "That's a bottle of Ryan Braun's piss." "Oh." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 08:59 AM) Pretty much Brandon McCarthy @BMcCarthy32 "Hey hun, what's this next to the olives?" "That's a bottle of Ryan Braun's piss." "Oh." And yet...I don't know that I'd say Brandon has added much muscle since the years we had him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 08:59 AM) Pretty much Brandon McCarthy @BMcCarthy32 "Hey hun, what's this next to the olives?" "That's a bottle of Ryan Braun's piss." "Oh." That's too funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (ptatc @ Feb 23, 2012 -> 10:17 PM) Urine tests are valid in regards to what he tested positive for. Reliability is the reason you have the protocols which must be exactly fiollowed for a given test with mulitiple samples. He can say whatever he wants. He is guilty of taking banned substances. He knows it and the lawyers know it. This is why they attacked the procedure and not the actual tests. Sorry, but an independent arbitrator found him not guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 09:12 AM) Sorry, but an independent arbitrator found him not guilty. Incorrect. An independent arbitrator found that the quality control standards on the test were insufficient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 08:17 AM) Incorrect. An independent arbitrator found that the quality control standards on the test were insufficient. Therefore, he decided that Braun must be cleared of the allegation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 08:17 AM) Incorrect. An independent arbitrator found that the quality control standards on the test were insufficient. Why were they insufficient? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 09:24 AM) Why were they insufficient? Basically, if the rumor presented here is true, it means that MLB did not follow their own procedures. That doesn't mean by any stretch that there's any reason to think that the sample was contaminated, but it does mean that MLB can't suspend people if they can't follow the agreed-to procedures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 09:23 AM) Therefore, he decided that Braun must be cleared of the allegation. But that does not mean he was found not guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 24, 2012 -> 08:27 AM) Basically, if the rumor presented here is true, it means that MLB did not follow their own procedures. That doesn't mean by any stretch that there's any reason to think that the sample was contaminated, but it does mean that MLB can't suspend people if they can't follow the agreed-to procedures. What I was getting at is the quality control procedure exists for a reason - because without such a procedure it is possible a sample could produce unreliable results - how do you know something didn't honestly happen to the sample? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Watch Braun hit about 12 homers this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Let's not do this, people. We don't need to start an unstoppable argument over something we all know. Braun is guilty but he walks. Don't go into semantics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.