Also, if that was insulting then people need thicker skin.

Technically, one could argue (and many did), that Braun’s strategy only raises further suspicion that he did it, so to defend that, would in itself be indirectly taking a stance.

All I’m really saying is that it’s kind of naive to take anyone thoughts for face value. There is always something to read between the lines, and people will always perceive things differently. In defending Braun in any way, he opened himself up to it, which I am sure he is aware of…

I think that’s much more reasonable, and less insulting, then to come to the conclusion that people are so hell-bent on disagreeing with Craig that they are actually going to put him on the opposing side of every opinion they have. That and…usually when someone disagrees with someone it actually relates to something they disagree over. They don’t need to invent something to disagree over.

There was no degradation of the sample which supports it was stored properly.

The three seals were intact which it makes it very hard to believe they were tampered with outside of area 51 9/11 conspiracy buffs.

Urine will not spontaneously generate testosterone, if anything the level will go down in time. Braun’s PR team is throwing it out there along with the sleazy innuendo about the test taker to try to create doubt among people desperate to believe. There’s a reason they didn’t try it with the arbitrator.

The test taker was chosen by MLB AND the Players Association who have had no problem with his six years of service until now where suddenly Braun finds him shady and incompetent.

Again, according to Will Carroll, Braun’s defense team did argue that the storage process led to a change in the urine sample. It is a “process” argument in the sense that the process influenced the test result.

I watched Braun’s press conference, and he never said the sample was tampered with. He said something about learning things about the process that made them suspicious. His statement is completely consistent with the storage process leading to a change in the urine composition.

And I don’t even like Olney.

Player A (let’s call him Brett Meyers) beats the crap out of his wife. His defense is that she had it coming.

Player B (anonymous) says that Meyers used a ridiculous defense.

Brett Meyers then says that Player B is full of crap because if he beat his wife, he’d use the same excuse!

The one thing Braun does have in his favor is that he has never had a positive test before. The negative thing is that he was tested in the playoffs, during the biggest moment of his young career.

This guy is not stupid, though. He has a reason for ruling the way he did, and I feel pretty confident that reason will be announced soon enough. My guess is that his reasoning will be one that shows a complete ignorance to the chemistry of urine, and the testing process in general, though.

And I hope Das has to take questions from reporters and doesn’t get off with just giving a written report justifying his decision. I’ve never had trouble writing a report justifying anything I did since it’s not hard come up with BS to cover your behind.

“I’m guessing I’ve had 30 to 40 conversations with different folks around the sport, a small sample for sure.”

“I’m guessing I’ve had 30 to 40 conversations with different folks around the sport, a small sample for sure.”

Now go back and read the rest of it.

“Absent unusual circumstances, the specimens should be sent by FedEx to the Laboratory on the same day they are collected.”

Note: By all reports the ruling was based on the definition of “unusual circumstances.”

Note: “…should be…” not “must be” sent by FedEx to the Laboratory on the same day they are collected.

“If the specimen is not immediately prepared for shipment, the Collector shall ensure that it is appropriately safeguarded during temporary storage.
1. The Collector must keep the chain of custody intact.
2. The Collector must store the samples in a cool and secure location.”

Note: the agreement allows for delay and storage in a cool and secure location.

By all reports these are the details the decision to dismiss this case were based on. I eagerly await the Arbiter’s explanation how the samples sitting in a unsecured Fed Ex facility for 2 days would not be considered unusual circumstances, or how Laurenzi’s apparently allowed storage of the samples violated this agreement.

“Braun didn’t argue that the specimen was tampered with or that the delay contaminated his urine. He only argued process, not that the process changed his sample.”

How on earth do you know this? According to Will Carroll, Braun argued that the storage conditions are what led to the change in the testosterone/epitestosterone ratio. We won’t know for sure if this is true until we see Das’s report, but it makes more sense to me than the arbitrator being duped by some dumb procedural point that has no effect.

And it is not surprising that current players are not happy with the Braun decision given that ESPN has forced the “technicality” explanation upon them.

Well put.

If (1) other experts come out and say that the manner in which the sample was handled is consistent with industry norms and that such handling would not alter the chemistry of the sample (which is happening already; experts are speaking out), and (2) we find that there is no way to demonstrate that such handling could alter the sample (ie, the rumor proves false that Braun’s legal team was able to replicate a false positive, or at least that such a false positive test would be discovered on testing the B-sample), then we’re left with a test which would, by any other normative standard, have resulted in a finding of guilty and a suspension from the given sport.

Even more damning would be MLB rewriting the policy to state that what happened in this case is exactly what they would *want* to have happen in the case of a weekend test without a FedEx shop available.

So don’t pretend, just because MLB can’t render a penalty, that we can’t still use our reason and our judgment to form an opinion about this.

Braun could have argued process unless he gave his sample in the drug testing lab. There were always people handling samples which is why they are bar coded and signed off by the player.

I want to see the arguments put forth by Braun’s team and whether there really was a FedEx office that could have taken the sample. If the sample could not have been dropped off and shipped until Monday the arbitrator has some explaining to do as does the union rep on the panel since he should have to justify his decision beyond saying he works for the players.

Until we get all the info (and I hope reporters dig into the whole story) this case will always smell fishy.