|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,444 Likes: 815
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,444 Likes: 815 |
Wow, that's nuts (if true).
So the first bottle tested positive by a gnat's bollock, and the second bottle isn't used to confirm the positive test, but it is used to confirm the original sample tested. They're only looking to see if the two samples are close to each other, and in testing the second sample, they are blind to the results of the first bottle. They're confirming the original SAMPLE, not the original test results.
If all that is true and accurate, then Gordon is still in hot water. The test "worked" as intended. I do think it's kind of process, as in the case here, to let luck play any part in the test results.
Also, let's be clear and honest with ourselves. The moron was obviously smoking weed. He was told/busted/whatever at least once, if not multiple times, and he still smoked. Crying about being a teeny bit over the limit is laughable, regardless of how you feel about the policy itself. I'll repeat... he's an idiot.
His plan right now is to ask for leniency from the NFL and Goodell. Normally I'd bid him adieu for a season, but maybe the absurdity of the Rice suspension helps out Gordon.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
-PrplPplEater
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,158 Likes: 841
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,158 Likes: 841 |
Quote:
Also, the Olympic's threshold for marijuana is 10x greater than the NFL's which reinforces the idea that the NFL is outdated in their drug program.
I completely agree that their system is totally outdated, but until they change it, you're held to those standards. The players don't get to violate them and then complain that they're too low.
Get the standards changed, then smoke.... or, perhaps get every player in the league to smoke. A lot.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,313 Likes: 200
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,313 Likes: 200 |
Josh Gordon barely tested positive for marijuana and might have strong appeal because of test disparity, according to report http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2014/07/josh_gordon.htmlI know ^this^ is being discussed already, but it kinda reminds me of his recent DUI... Just barely over the limit. I wish he'd just quit smokin' it already. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,645 Likes: 1670
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,645 Likes: 1670 |
Quote:
All that A and B stuff sounds weird to me.
Maybe this will end all the posts dedicated to him missing a flight. Then again, maybe not. 
Funny thing is, I never heard anyone mention this as factual. Only a possibility.
j/c
This entire A and B bottles are an interesting aspect. Seems like the level was so close it's hard to call one way or the other.
Hmmm.....
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
My predictions 90% chance he is gone for the year.10% reduced suspension of 8 games. 0% he gets off.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544 |
Second-hand smoke to be defense The legal team for Cleveland Browns wide receiver Josh Gordon will argue in a hearing Friday that its client has disputed test results that were caused from second-hand marijuana smoke, according to sources. Gordon is appealing the NFL's imposition of a year-long suspension for a positive test for marijuana. Gordon's legal team will argue that the positive tests are so marginal that they show uncertainty as to whether the test results were even truly positive, and even if so, were the result of exposure to second-hand smoke, according to sources familiar with the case. Gordon's "A" sample tested at 16 nanograms per milliliter, a bare one nanogram per milliliter above the 15 nanogram per milliliter threshold, while Gordon's "B" sample -- which should theoretically be consistent with the "A" sample being that it comes from the exact same specimen -- tested at 13.63 ng/ml, lower than the threshold. With both samples coming from the same specimen test, the results should be consistent. Gordon's attorney's do not believe their client should be suspended for a year for differing disputed tests results, especially when one was barely higher than the threshold, per sources. Gordon's attorneys also plan to introduce witnesses that will testify that Gordon's scores indicate he was the victim of breathing in second-hand smoke, per sources. The league has maintained that it does not intend to suspend players for second-hand smoke. Scientific studies have shown that second-hand smoke exposure can result in the kind of test results similar to those of Gordon. Because of this, Gordon's test results would have been negative for marijuana if considered under other professional sports testing regimes -- including the strict Olympic standard and Major League Baseball -- the federal workplace testing standards and various state testing standards, including California and Nevada, which govern boxing and MMA. And lastly, Gordon's attorney's also will point out that with their client being subject to over 70 drug tests, there was only one time since his rookie year that a test came back positive for marijuana, and even then, the "A" and "B" samples did not match. Gordon's arrest in early July in North Carolina also was a DWI charge, which is unrelated to the proceedings surrounding his positive marijuana test. It cannot and will not be factored into any discipline that is doled out to Gordon over this violation. Gordon is facing the indefinite one-year ban for violating the league's substance-abuse policy for at least the third time. If he loses, he'll have to wait a year to apply for reinstatement. Last season, Gordon was suspended two games and docked four game checks for testing positive for what he said was codeine in his prescribed cough medicine. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/112814...-marijuana-test
being a browns fan is like taking your dog to vet every week to be put down...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
jc
Get caught smoking weed a couple times, which gives an NFL player no performance advantage and arguably hurts = banned for at least a year
Get caught taking HGH a few times, which gives an NFL player a huge recovery and performance advantage = oh wait, you effectively can't get caught, because it's not even tested for
Yes different policies, but they both entail drug testing and it's yet another thing the NFL has managed to get completely backwards.
edit: It's not fair to solely blame the NFL. It's the Players Union as well. There's plenty of blame to go around for the stupidity of the current policies.
Last edited by hasugopher; 07/29/14 03:32 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,645 Likes: 1670
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,645 Likes: 1670 |
Oh I have very little doubt he'll get a suspension. I do believe this may cause the NFL to rethink their drug testing policy. Maybe the best two out of three? 
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,968 Likes: 1610
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,968 Likes: 1610 |
BOOM! Quote:
The league has maintained that it does not intend to suspend players for second-hand smoke.
AND BOOM!
Quote:
Scientific studies have shown that second-hand smoke exposure can result in the kind of test results similar to those of Gordon.
#FreeJoshGordon 
Yeah, I'm gonna ride this train.... Nothing to lose now.
At DT, context and meaning are a scarecrow kicking at moving goalposts.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,293 Likes: 2257
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,293 Likes: 2257 |
The bottom line for me is that NFL policy looks like more of a joke with every headline. If an approach seems like common sense, it is very unlikely that it is part of their policy. If you divide one sample into two parts wouldn't you be required to average the two if one is positive? Merely testing for ANY trace of the substance as a means of confirming the first test is ludicrous. The biggest reason is because it opens the door to challenge and appeal... Somebody obviously didn't think this policy through when it was written.
With good representation (which he has) this is 4-6 games, tops.
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
I blame Scott Fujita.
no, seriously (he was our player representative). The NFLPA did an absolutely horrible job on the last CBA in terms of the policy structure and it has constantly reared it's ugly head in all of these issues. They better have cleaned up their act the next time this comes around because the NFL owners' lawyers destroyed them on all that stuff last time.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 305 Likes: 1
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 305 Likes: 1 |
j/c
I think the defense team is putting all this information out to try and bring public pressure to bare on the NFL to go softly on Gordon. Hard to come down hard on Gordon for what he did given this fact pattern while Rice is only getting a couple games for what he did. It'll make the league look bad and the defense team knows it so they are being very open about their case.
I still think Gordon is gone for a year...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,408 Likes: 461
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,408 Likes: 461 |
I think that he stands a great chance, given that the 2 samples, which are actually one sample, split in half, should test at identical levels. Since they did not, and since the one that was in violation was barely into the violation range, and as long as he has tested clean since, I think that his appeal stands a solid chance of being successful.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,801 Likes: 171
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,801 Likes: 171 |
jc...
I question the accuracy of "all" the NFL's drug tests if, as outlined in Gordon's case, the same urine sample placed in two different bottles resulted in drastically different results...one result enough to suspend Gordon for a year and the other test result clearly under the NFL's limit.
There needs to be a review of the NFL's testing process due to the variation of results produced by the present testing method.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,444 Likes: 815
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,444 Likes: 815 |
Maybe I misread the original article...
I was under the impression that the two samples DID match each other within the acceptable tolerance. There has to be a specified tolerance range (or method to calculate that range) which defines what it means for the two samples to be "similar".
I'm assuming that the testers have already determined that the two samples (16 and 13.whatever) were actually close enough to confirm the first test (the test of the B bottle is automatic when the A bottle tests positive).
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
-PrplPplEater
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,704 |
j/c...
Just so everyone is aware how little THC was actually in Gordon's system....
Most drug tests (the kinds common folk take lol) -- The limit for a failed test is actually 50 ng/ml, not 15 ng/ml like the limit Gordon has to stay under.
15 ng/ml is a very small amount of THC, that actually could be caused by second hand smoke (Not saying I believe it or that I don't, just that he has a good chance at winning this appeal)
You or I would not fail a test from second hand smoke, because we have 50 ng/ml to play with, Gordon only has 15 ng/ml.
That's why so many people are saying "You can't fail a test from second hand smoke"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059 Likes: 80
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 7,059 Likes: 80 |
Quote:
... should test at identical levels.
...within a (known) small inherent test error. This test does not seem to yield repeatable results within an acceptable range. I'm not trying to imply here whether he is "guilty" or not, but rather that the test method itself should be in question.
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers...Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 Likes: 280
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 Likes: 280 |
He should go to his appeal hearing, get on the elevator and punch the first woman he sees, then walk in and tell Goodell he'll serve his 2 games... nothing more to see here. 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,198 Likes: 267
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,198 Likes: 267 |
Quote:
He should go to his appeal hearing, get on the elevator and punch the first woman he sees, then walk in and tell Goodell he'll serve his 2 games... nothing more to see here.
our luck the NFL learned their lesson and will suspend him for 2 years
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,444 Likes: 815
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,444 Likes: 815 |
That's the point I was trying to make.
The results from the two samples are not going to be dead-nuts identical. There's always going to be some degree of error or variation, but that should be already defined. Since it's lasted this long, and Gordon has to appeal, then I'm assuming that the two results are, in fact, close enough to each other to uphold the initial positive test.
If he's trying to make the case that the B bottle sample tested below the level, and the A bottle sample was over, but by a small amount, then I think he's going to lose the appeal. It's a dumb test process, in my opinion, but it's the agreed upon process, and it worked as intended.
If he's trying to make the case that the 15 ng/ml threshold is too low, and that he exceeded that because of second-hand smoke, well then I think he has an arguable case, but he's still going to lose. 15 ng/ml is the agreed upon threshold from both the NFL and NFLPA. Why the NFL and NFLPA agreed to such a low maximum is beyond me, but those are the rules.
Nobody spilled a cup or mixed up samples or lost chain of custody of the samples, so there was no break in procedure (that we know of). I don't see how Gordon wins this.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
-PrplPplEater
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,198 Likes: 267
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,198 Likes: 267 |
Quote:
Quote:
... should test at identical levels.
...within a (known) small inherent test error. This test does not seem to yield repeatable results within an acceptable range. I'm not trying to imply here whether he is "guilty" or not, but rather that the test method itself should be in question.
I'm intrigued why they are not identical.
one would think they should be.
Also, I'd like to know if that 15/ whatever could be caused from second hand smoke or not. I'm pretty sure he smoked but if he can get help and still play in the NFL this year... I'm all for it.
He is an entertainer. We pay to watch them play a violent game and we cheer for more.
Entertainers in the music and movie industry die all the time form oding maybe we should start testing them or stop testing sports players for MJ
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,313 Likes: 200
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,313 Likes: 200 |
"It wasn't me - it was those damn pot smokers!"
...Well, at least it is a defense... or some sort.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,293 Likes: 2257
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,293 Likes: 2257 |
jc
Correct me if I'm wrong but this reads to me that as long of ANY of the substance is found in sample "b" then sample "a" holds up. So 1 nanogram in sample b would uphold a positive test even though that would clearly show that the test is flawed. I think there is a problem with the whole method from beginning to end. I also don't understand why they wouldn't use hair samples - supposedly they are much more reliable.
This uber low level of allowable substance also helps the league shoot itself in the foot... being off by 1.4 nanograms in a test that allows 70 isn't such a big deal - in this case it is a near 10% disparity.
It's tough to convict in the court of public opinion and that does play a role in any company or organization. I'm sure the NFL wouldn't "choose" to look like a bunch of blithering idiots and that may help with an appeal for a shorter suspension. I'm expecting a little "give and take" here. This policy needs a lot of work... How can they possibly expect to keep upholding suspensions on such a small amount when there are players on teams and living in parts of the country where the substance isn't even legal?
Also, am I reading that JG "opted in" to phase 3 to reduce the codeine suspension? This whole policy cracks me up...
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,332 Likes: 235
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,332 Likes: 235 |
Here's a question not saying this is the case or not but say a guy has smoked weed for a long time 3 years, then quits long enough to the pass the tests, will his levels fall to 0? Or since he smoked so long the levels in his body will never be 0 again?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
I also don't understand why they wouldn't use hair samples - supposedly they are much more reliable.
Hair tests are much harder to pass than urine tests.
The system is designed for players to avoid detection.
Quote:
Also, am I reading that JG "opted in" to phase 3 to reduce the codeine suspension?
https://www.nflplayers.com/about-us/history/Player-Policies/Drug-Policy/
Page 35, Appendix E, Section 2.
Quote:
2. A player who is in the Intervention Program and who tests positive a first time due to the abuse of a prescription or over-the-counter drug will be eligible for a reduction from the applicable discipline unless his entry into the Intervention Program was due to the abuse of a prescription or over-the-counter drug.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
I was gonna say 8 game checks and 4 games, but after reading this, I would be surprised if he gets anything at all. I would have to think any good lawyer could use the two different tests results as a lab mix up and I don't see how they could do anything to him. He's off the hook, for now.
Dawginit since Jan. 24, 2000 Member #180
You can't fix yesterday but you can learn for tomorrow
#GMSTRONG
I want to do it as a Cleveland Brown because that's who I am.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,313 Likes: 200
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 14,313 Likes: 200 |
Quote:
I was gonna say 8 game checks and 4 games, but after reading this, I would be surprised if he gets anything at all. I would have to think any good lawyer could use the two different tests results as a lab mix up and I don't see how they could do anything to him. He's off the hook, for now.
Oh, don't put that little bit of hope in me! It would be too sweet if he was off the hook.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
Quote:
BOOM!
Quote:
The league has maintained that it does not intend to suspend players for second-hand smoke.
AND BOOM!
Quote:
Scientific studies have shown that second-hand smoke exposure can result in the kind of test results similar to those of Gordon.
#FreeJoshGordon
Yeah, I'm gonna ride this train.... Nothing to lose now.
Very... very interesting. We may not have to deal with a prolonged absence of our #1 WR after all! We as Brown fans don't catch TOO many breaks, this would definitely be a huge break. HUGE. How can you cover Andrew Hawkins, Gordon and Cameron? Who cares who else we put on the field, how do you cover those three?
You can't!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544 |
Quote:
Quote:
I was gonna say 8 game checks and 4 games, but after reading this, I would be surprised if he gets anything at all. I would have to think any good lawyer could use the two different tests results as a lab mix up and I don't see how they could do anything to him. He's off the hook, for now.
Oh, don't put that little bit of hope in me! It would be too sweet if he was off the hook.
As explained by Mike Florio of PFT, urine samples are typically divided into an "A" bottle and a "B" bottle, and if the "A" bottle yields a positive test for a banned substance, the "B" bottle is tested. Per rules of the league's substance-abuse policy, the "B" bottle doesn't need to show a violation, only that the substance found in the other bottle is evident to the "limits of detection."
don't hold your breath.
being a browns fan is like taking your dog to vet every week to be put down...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 Likes: 136
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 Likes: 136 |
Not unless you were in a small enclosed space that was filled to the brim with smoke.
Wasn't he in the car with guys who had pot n smoking when he got caught speeding?
70 passed tests then this ehhh maybe hit the limit one...has to be 2nd hand smoke. If you can get high from it then you can get it in your system.
I don't see somebody passing 70 then he decides to say oh what the heck and smokes weed???
Got to be 2nd hand...get that kid away from the Weed heads!
jmho
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
3rd and 20: It's just me saying this, so don't get your hopes up Quote:
but rather that the test method itself should be in question.
This. Like I said, any good lawyer could pick this apart. How can you suspend any player, with results no better than pot luck  no pun intended
Dawginit since Jan. 24, 2000 Member #180
You can't fix yesterday but you can learn for tomorrow
#GMSTRONG
I want to do it as a Cleveland Brown because that's who I am.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,645 Likes: 1670
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,645 Likes: 1670 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I was gonna say 8 game checks and 4 games, but after reading this, I would be surprised if he gets anything at all. I would have to think any good lawyer could use the two different tests results as a lab mix up and I don't see how they could do anything to him. He's off the hook, for now.
Oh, don't put that little bit of hope in me! It would be too sweet if he was off the hook.
As explained by Mike Florio of PFT, urine samples are typically divided into an "A" bottle and a "B" bottle, and if the "A" bottle yields a positive test for a banned substance, the "B" bottle is tested. Per rules of the league's substance-abuse policy, the "B" bottle doesn't need to show a violation, only that the substance found in the other bottle is evident to the "limits of detection."
don't hold your breath.
And as soon as the suspension is announced, he should be neutered of course so he can never breed.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I was gonna say 8 game checks and 4 games, but after reading this, I would be surprised if he gets anything at all. I would have to think any good lawyer could use the two different tests results as a lab mix up and I don't see how they could do anything to him. He's off the hook, for now.
Oh, don't put that little bit of hope in me! It would be too sweet if he was off the hook.
As explained by Mike Florio of PFT, urine samples are typically divided into an "A" bottle and a "B" bottle, and if the "A" bottle yields a positive test for a banned substance, the "B" bottle is tested. Per rules of the league's substance-abuse policy, the "B" bottle doesn't need to show a violation, only that the substance found in the other bottle is evident to the "limits of detection."
don't hold your breath.
And as soon as the suspension is announced, he should be neutered of course so he can never breed.
was kinda hoping he had that done in rehab.
being a browns fan is like taking your dog to vet every week to be put down...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,263 |
Quote:
the "B" bottle doesn't need to show a violation, only that the substance found in the other bottle is evident to the "limits of detection."
I understand that. But were talking lawyers here. It seems they have a very good argument. Do they want to chance throwing away a very good player when the results could have just as easily gone the other way? It also says he passed 70 other tests, so I have to think they will error on the side of the player in this case. With lawyers now days, this seems like a slam dunk.
Dawginit since Jan. 24, 2000 Member #180
You can't fix yesterday but you can learn for tomorrow
#GMSTRONG
I want to do it as a Cleveland Brown because that's who I am.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,444 Likes: 815
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,444 Likes: 815 |
Quote:
jc
Correct me if I'm wrong but this reads to me that as long of ANY of the substance is found in sample "b" then sample "a" holds up. So 1 nanogram in sample b would uphold a positive test even though that would clearly show that the test is flawed. I think there is a problem with the whole method from beginning to end. I also don't understand why they wouldn't use hair samples - supposedly they are much more reliable.
The way I understand it (and this involves a degree of assumption), is that it's not what you just described.
The second test (or testing of the 'B' bottle), is simply a comparison of the results of the first test and the second test. With any type of test, there is variation in the testing process. Variation can be due to any number of things (equipment used, technician executing the test, the sample itself, etc). With an official, standardized test like this, they will already know how much variation is inherent in the system (how repeatable the test is), and so they can determine how close the samples have to be to each other in order to confidently say they're the same.
The Pass/Fail threshold is just an arbitrary number, and has no impact on what I'm talking about.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
-PrplPplEater
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
Quote:
Quote:
All that A and B stuff sounds weird to me.
Maybe this will end all the posts dedicated to him missing a flight. Then again, maybe not.
Funny thing is, I never heard anyone mention this as factual. Only a possibility.
Where did I say otherwise? In fact, I previously kept bringing up all the "ifs" in previous posts. The fact is that there are multitudes of posts where the missed flight is being offered as a possibility. Over and over and over until people start believing it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544 |
Quote:
Quote:
the "B" bottle doesn't need to show a violation, only that the substance found in the other bottle is evident to the "limits of detection."
I understand that. But were talking lawyers here. It seems they have a very good argument. Do they want to chance throwing away a very good player when the results could have just as easily gone the other way? It also says he passed 70 other tests, so I have to think they will error on the side of the player in this case. With lawyers now days, this seems like a slam dunk.
well we will find out this weekend I would think. the nfl has every right to punish him per the CBA. I think him going to rehab will affect what the nfl does more than anything a lawyer can do unless they can prove the first test was tampered with. JMO ofcourse.
being a browns fan is like taking your dog to vet every week to be put down...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
Quote:
Gordon's attorneys also plan to introduce witnesses that will testify that Gordon's scores indicate he was the victim of breathing in second-hand smoke, per sources. The league has maintained that it does not intend to suspend players for second-hand smoke.
So, last time it was cough medicine and this time it's second hand smoke? 
I see many of you are happy about this. I'm not. It is just another nail in the coffin in regards to the Browns and their fans.
I was hoping that the Browns and Gordon would understand it is time for him to change his lifestyle. Apparently not. I suppose the convicted felon he had w/him in NC was just a hitchhiker he picked up and the guy was so drunk that Gordon got drunk off the fumes?
Oh, I know some of you will get all hostile......but, I really could care less what you think of me. I think this is a bunch of BS and if it happened to a guy like me.......I would have no prayer of beating either the DUI or the failed drug test.
Once again.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 Likes: 906 |
Quote:
It also says he passed 70 other tests,
Did the report actually SAY that? I don't remember reading that. I remember posters saying it, but I don't remember that from the report. I will apologize in advance if it actually DID SAY that and I missed it w/my poor reading skills.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Josh Gordon hearing set for late
July
|
|
![[Linked Image from mypsn.eu.playstation.com]](http://mypsn.eu.playstation.com/psn/profile/Letherface.png)
