Per ESPN: Braun Tests Positive, May Face 50 Game Suspension… (Part 3, Appeal underway)

[pebadger]

Yes, it's really semantics. The concept of an appeal in the sense that we associate with the American judicial system doesn't really apply here. From that perspective, this isn't really an appeal. He's really just taking the only opportunity he has to contest the summary administrative action that would have led to his suspension given the finding of the lab.

 

Cynic that I am about this stuff, I think the use of the word "appeal" in constructing the system was a conscious choice to make the entire procedure sound more fair and weighty than it really is, as if there is some elaborate system of protections and processes in place to make sure this all gets done correctly. As a matter of fact, however, there really isn't. The testing agency is presumed to be correct with only the barest of evidence. In international cases at the Court of Arbitration for Sport, the arbitration panel itself is stacked in favor of the testers by nature of the way it is assembled. In that venue much of this stuff is only for show, providing the appearance of the existence of a remedy for someone who beleives he has been wronged by what is otherwise a highly inflexible system.

 

The enitre system as constructed along that CAS model simply doesn't mesh well with American notions of justice. It also doesn't mesh well practically in the context of US professional sports where the power/economic relationships between leagues/clubs/players are much different than they are in sports like track, swimming and cycling. Indeed, in European soccer, where those power/economic relationships are much more analogous to relationships that exist in major US team sports, the soccer governing body (UEFA) and the anti-doping folks at WADA have had long-running battles over much of the same ground we've covered here in this thread. It was only the serious problems of the recent past, and the intrusion of a misguided and grandstanding Congress into the issue that caused the union to buckle under and agree to a deal that was not really in their own interest. I say that firmly believing that taking strong action against doping is very much in the union's interest. They just ceded way too much ground on an issue they were ill-equipped and very poorly positioned to fight over at that time.

 

Frankly, with so much money at stake in the CBA, I think they just made the determination that it was going to be worth heaving a few guys under the bus in the future to get a deal done rather than worrying about all the things they would have had to deal with in getting a better Drug Agreement in place, not least of which would have been the strong accusations that would have accompanied the stories framing MLBPA's efforts in that regard as "weakening the drug test proposal".

[Mays Hayes]

By the way, what is the source on this report that two other Brewers tested positive for elevated T? I listened to the clip and I did not hear that part.

It was the same source who said that Braun has a good defense. It was in the Dan Patrick audio. Said two other Brewers had highly elevated results

So... Is it possible that there are 2 other Brewers going through the same process as Braun right now, that we are unaware of?

 

 

[dadofandrew]

That's actually a really good question by MayesHayes.

[Crew2323]

What if it were Fielder, and that's why he hasn't signed yet?

[Patrick425]

By the way, what is the source on this report that two other Brewers tested positive for elevated T? I listened to the clip and I did not hear that part.

It was the same source who said that Braun has a good defense. It was in the Dan Patrick audio. Said two other Brewers had highly elevated results

So... Is it possible that there are 2 other Brewers going through the same process as Braun right now, that we are unaware of?

 

I actually brought this up in post #1040, but it was somewhat dismissed by a few others. I don't think it's completely unrealistic to think this is true (if Dan Patricks information is correct). Just because Braun's issue was "exposed" does not mean that the other Brewers would necessarily be.

 

 

[dhoffman19]

What if it were Fielder, and that's why he hasn't signed yet?

 

I guess that's one possibility, although we know so little it's hard to say if the names of these other two players have even leaked out. And if the names of the players has leaked to the clubs, I would think that rumor would have found its way to the Internet by now. And we really don't even know if this thing about the other two guys is true.

 

The reasons for Fielder not signing yet are pretty simple. He was competing with Pujols. The traditional big spenders (NYY, BOS, and ANA) are set at 1B, another potential big spender (LAD) is in a very unusual financial predicament, and the Cubs are rebuilding. Plus, Boras/Fielder are asking for a very long contract for huge money, for a guy who may be limited to DH duty in 4-5 years. Plus, no one wanted to make an offer for fear that Boras would just shop it around.

[brwrsfan]

My take on it was that two other Brewers were found to have levels so far out of whack that the tests were thrown out. And that perhaps Braun's defense is that the testing was flawed that day. If other tests from the same day, same team, same testing area were so high that they had to be thrown out. Isn't it entirely possible that his test was also wrong? I might not have been so high as the others, but it was like 2-3 times HIGHER than ANY other positive test ever. So while his may have been theoretically possible, that if those other 2 were so far skewed, that his almost had to be as well?

[dhoffman19]

My take on it was that two other Brewers were found to have levels so far out of whack that the tests were thrown out. And that perhaps Braun's defense is that the testing was flawed that day. If other tests from the same day, same team, same testing area were so high that they had to be thrown out. Isn't it entirely possible that his test was also wrong? I might not have been so high as the others, but it was like 2-3 times HIGHER than ANY other positive test ever. So while his may have been theoretically possible, that if those other 2 were so far skewed, that his almost had to be as well?

I guess, but that also leads to the question of why Braun's test wasn't tossed as well. Maybe with the other two guys, their second test didn't come back positive for synthetic T? Or maybe this is all BS.

[Fear The Chorizo]

My take on it was that two other Brewers were found to have levels so far out of whack that the tests were thrown out. And that perhaps Braun's defense is that the testing was flawed that day. If other tests from the same day, same team, same testing area were so high that they had to be thrown out. Isn't it entirely possible that his test was also wrong? I might not have been so high as the others, but it was like 2-3 times HIGHER than ANY other positive test ever. So while his may have been theoretically possible, that if those other 2 were so far skewed, that his almost had to be as well?

Here's a bit more expansion on this, admittedly with some assumptions:

 

Say the 2 other Brewers' results were completely out of whack and just thrown out - were those 2 samples even analyzed for synthetic T as Braun's sample apparently was? Say they weren't tested just because they were so high and easily thrown out compared to Braun's. That leaves the possibility open that the reason Braun's (and the other 2 Brewer players) sample came back high could have been a sampling error that could have been tampering, uncalibrated analytical equipment, who knows? I would think each sample would be looked at on its own and the decision to run the B sample would be made on its own merit. It's very possible that the other two Brewer player sample results were so ridiculous that the decision was made to just throw them out, and Braun's was just within the range of acceptable criterion to authorize the B sample to be analyzed. I would think chain of custody procedures would identify the samples in a way that prevents the lab from knowing where, or whom, they came from, so the crazy results coming from the same team may not immediately raise red flags to the sample results themselves.

 

 

[brwrsfan]

This is obviously all speculation, but the one thing I don't understand....let's just assume this is all true and our speculations are right. How exactly would Braun and his defense team know about the other positive tests? Isn't that all confidential? The players themselves might not have even been told about it if their samples were just thrown out. Making that even more confusing, is that I don't think the testing area knows the players/teams they are testing...and if those tests are simply thrown out, they might not even know whose they were. How could anyone know about them? And how could they know what players they were, where they were tested, etc?

 

Unless it's not just Braun appealing tests, but that seems far fetched, I think someone would have leaked that by now.

 

If all of this is true, and two tests were insanely high and thrown out and Braun's was also super high but maybe just within range, I think he would have a good argument to get his case thrown out to due faulty equipment, tampering, etc. But who knows. That tidbit could have been made up for all we know.

[pebadger]

You would need to know exactly which tests are being talked about, and nobody who is trafficking in these stories seems to be too specific about any of it. An alternative explanation is that the people in the media who might have this info aren't sharing it because it's not an easy subject to explain, it muddies the simpler black/white narrative, and explaining too much might expose their sources/leaks.

 

I still tend to think that a lot of what we are hearing generally about this being an odd case is true, but nobody on the MLB side of this cares about that too much because they have their 'positive' and that's all they really need. It's on Braun to try to make sense of it all. MLB aren't going to cry about the result one way or another. If Braun wins, they claim it shows the system is just. If Braun loses, they claim that the system is working and that they aren't afraid to take down the biggest names in the game. The only way MLB loses is in creating doubt about the system by questioning it themselves.

[Vgmastr]

Attanasio issues a statement saying Braun won't be at On Deck due to the sensitive situation:

 

http://brewers.mlblogs.co...al-owner-mark-attanasio/

[Invader3K]

Hopefully this isn't an indication that he will be suspended after all. I'm assuming they just wanted to avoid turning this event into even more of a circus.

[Patrick425]

Interesting. I'm guessing a lot of people will be skeptical about this decision and will want to state that this was purely Brauns decision and that maybe he knows something now about his fate. However, I really don't think that's the case at all and I can see why the Brewers might have suggested strongly to him that he sit this one out. The Brewer fans are great, but sometimes the general public at an event like this can be, lets say "less than tactful" in regards to some of the comments they might make. The last thing the Brewers want is to deal with that at an event that is supposed to celebrate the Brewers and there upcoming season.

 

The one piece of skepticism that I do have, that is directed at the Brewers, is the timing of this. I'm guessing that they were somewhat uncomfortable with Braun attending this thing from the start. Perhaps they were hoping for a "verdict" by now, but part of me wants to think they didn't want to put a damper on the ticket sales for this event either.

[dadofandrew]

It would be very uncomfy for all if a few morons started chanting something, or talk to Ryan about it after he signs stuff. It's a shame, but it only takes a few people to ruin it for everyone.

[brwrsfan]

For what it's worth....Tom H says in his blog that he has it on "very good authority" that the Brewers do not have a verdict yet and this is not any sort of indication that he is being suspended.

[JimH5]

Under the current circumstances, I can see why it is better for Braun to stay away. He's in a tough spot to be in a public situation like that.

 

And his attendance would dominate the event, instead of being all about the team and the upcoming season.

[Fear The Chorizo]

This is the right thing to do - Braun cannot and should not comment on his appeal due to confidentiality at this point. If he were to go to the event it's obvious what questions are going to be asked, and fans/networks looking for ratings will unjustifiably interpret non-answers from Braun on the subject as an admission of guilt.

 

The biggest difference I've seen from Braun compared to other known PED cheats is that he hasn't bent himself over backwards denying everything to the media and anyone else who will listen - he's using the appeal process to clear his name rather than trying to influence public opinion like Bonds, McGuire, Sosa, Palmeiro, ARod, and others have done before. Braun's actions to this point lead me to think he feels that he isn't in the wrong. That's not saying he'll win his appeal because the burden of proof his camp needs to shoulder is overwhelming with the current MLB drug policy.

[Invader3K]

Decision on Braun not expected "for a couple of weeks."

[fondybrewfan]

I guess that tells me that the case is not a simple case and it is going to take some time for the arbitration panel to sort things out. If it were cut and dry that Braun were guilty then I don't think the panel would need that much time; so if anything I would interpret this as good news.

[brewmann04]

Well hopefully the longer it take the better it might not be as cut and dry as people think and they might be proof that the test was faulty.

[jjfanec]

I guess that tells me that the case is not a simple case and it is going to take some time for the arbitration panel to sort things out.

This was what I took away from the Dan Patrick piece actually. The new points he brought up - 2 other Brewers with odd results, it wasnt a PED or masking agent, it wasn't medical - make it seem like Braun is going after the test themselves. Pebadger has made it seem like this was the best possible defense all along. Go after the test not what you actually put in your system since the later really does not seem to matter to MLB. I am bracing myself for a suspension but since I have actually believe Braun did not used steroids from the start I am holding out hope

[Nottso]

From everything I've read, the MLB guy always goes against the player and the Union guy always goes with the player, essentially leaving the entire decision up to the arbiter. Seems like a lot to put on one person. I would think the panel should consist of 3 third-party arbiters for a total of 5 people in hopes of increasing the odds of correct and impartial findings.

 

It may serve only to complicate things even further, but it just seems to me that this would be more fair. Thoughts?

[Warning Track Power]

From everything I've read, the MLB guy always goes against the player and the Union guy always goes with the player, essentially leaving the entire decision up to the arbiter. Seems like a lot to put on one person. I would think the panel should consist of 3 third-party arbiters for a total of 5 people in hopes of increasing the odds of correct and impartial findings.

 

It may serve only to complicate things even further, but it just seems to me that this would be more fair. Thoughts?

100% agree.

 

If the union guy and the MLB guy basically have their decision in hand before the hearing why are they even on the panel? Seems to me 3 arbiters would be more appropriate than 2 guys whose votes are pre-determined.

[Menotti80]

i thought about that too Nottso, but that means you have to convince 2 people instead of only 1.

 

So although instead of needing 100% of the arbiters (1/1) as opposed to 67% (2/3), I still think only needing 1 yes outweighes the percentage difference. but that's just my opinion...