LightsOutTerp Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Merriman appeals drug ban; attorney blames supplement By Kevin Acee UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER October 24, 2006 Chargers linebacker Shawne Merriman will play at least the next two weeks as he awaits a hearing to appeal his pending four-game suspension for violating the league's substance abuse policy... Merriman will remain active pending the outcome of the hearing. That means he will play Sunday against the St. Louis Rams and Nov. 5 against Cleveland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Look out, he's gonna have so much roid rage they won't be able to stop him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Man, if he can hold out 1 more week than the two he expects to play in the coming weeks, he'd miss both games against DEN when he does eventually get suspended. That would work out well.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hat Trick Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Just so long as he's back for the KC game i don't care.......don't want to hear any excuses when we go to SD and hand it to him and his roid taking @$$ again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dingleberry Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 C'mon take the suspension now. We all know it's coming anyway. If my math is correct that puts him back Dec.10, (yes addition is my strong suit) 1 week after I travel to Buffalo to catch the Bills, Chargers game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncosn05 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 THIS IS CRAP!!! Note- Bulger owner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 If the guy has been 'roiding, he shouldn't be allowed to play. And as an organization I would think the Chargers might want him to just take his suspension and slide off the radar for the next 4 weeks. But it looks like it might get drawn out for the full 6, providing a nice healthy distraction for the team. Probably not the best move, considering the chances of a successful appeal are virtually none. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chargerz Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Probably not the best move, considering the chances of a successful appeal are virtually none. That brings up a question---> Anybody know the stats for successful appeals in this situation?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chargerz Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 That brings up a question---> Anybody know the stats for successful appeals in this situation?? This article came out today and kinda answers my question. The NFL apparently makes it very clear that the player is responsible for everything he puts in his body, including "supplements". Merriman's chances of beating this positive test are nil!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Supplements often blamed in positive steroid tests Analysis by Mark Zeigler UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER October 25, 2006 K.C. ALFRED / Union-Tribune Add to the list of certainties in life, along with death, taxes and the Clippers not winning the NBA championship: An athlete who tests positive for nandrolone will blame a tainted nutritional supplement. Chargers linebacker Shawne Merriman faces a four-game suspension after failing an NFL urine test for the chemical fingerprint of the anabolic steroid nandrolone, a source confirmed to The San Diego Union-Tribune yesterday. And while Merriman has not officially fingered supplements yet, the attorney for the 6-foot-4, 272-pound linebacker with a reported body fat of 5 percent has tossed the supplement card on the table. “I know people get tired of hearing it, but it is a fact,” said David Cornwell, who is handling Merriman's appeal to the NFL (a hearing is scheduled for Nov. 7). “Men like Shawne get hooked up and penalized for taking something that they didn't know was present in the supplement.” It is an increasingly common defense these days, if for no other reason than it is plausible and seems to gain sympathetic traction from a public not fully literate in the intricacies of doping. Less sold, though, is the anti-doping establishment that must sort through the various excuses and explanations for positive tests. “It's not an accident that there are so many nandrolone cases,” Dick Pound, the head of the World Anti-Doping Agency, once said. “These folks are taking it because it works. So the minute they get caught, they go around bleating about (how) they didn't label the package properly or it was an iron supplement. “It's just not credible to people with an IQ above room temperature.” Nandrolone is one of the oldest anabolic steroids, commonly known as Deca Durabolin – a synthetic form of the hormone testosterone that rapidly builds muscles and enhances recovery from workouts and injuries. Athletes began using it in the days before widespread drug testing because, among the anabolic steroids, it combined a high level of effectiveness with fewer side effects. There is one catch. The injectable form of nandrolone is stored in fat cells and can be found in urine samples months later. Because of that, usage declined and positive tests disappeared until 1999, when a slew of athletes from the entire spectrum of global sports – soccer, tennis, judo, mountain biking, even badminton – began failing tests for the stuff. The prevailing theory among drug testers was that athletes were using a form of androstenedione or andro, the steroid precursor popularized by baseball slugger Mark McGwire. Athletes offered an equally diverse set of explanations. A bobsledder said he ate spaghetti Bolognese made with meat from steroid-fattened cattle. Another blamed meat from an uncastrated boar. Another said his toothpaste tube was sabotaged. But the most common defense was tainted supplements, either by a manufacturer secretly lacing his new protein powder with steroids to get better reviews or because it neglected to clean the machine of andro products before making a batch of supplements. And indeed, a 2001 study commissioned by the International Olympic Committee found that of 634 nutritional supplements tested, 14.8 percent contained banned substances; among products from U.S. companies, it was 18.8 percent. A few athletes managed to wiggle out of competition bans in 1999. But that loophole closed in 2000, when WADA and the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency – new, independent bodies – were founded and established the principle of “strict liability” as the cornerstone of an international doping code. That meant an athlete was responsible for what was in his or her body, no matter how it got there. The NFL Policy on Anabolic Steroids has a similar clause, and a sign in locker rooms across the league reminds players they are responsible for anything and everything they ingest. A phone number is listed to answer any questions. Translation: Precedent suggests Merriman's chances of overturning a four-game ban are slim, regardless of how compelling his explanation. Take the case of swimmer Kicker Vencill. He tested positive for nandrolone in an out-of-competition test in January 2003. Suspecting it was the result of a tainted supplement, he had his multivitamin from Ultimate Nutrition tested and, sure enough, it showed evidence of containing nandrolone. Vencill sued Ultimate Nutrition and was awarded a $578,635 judgment by an Orange County jury. But his U.S. Anti-Doping Agency case didn't go as well. While USADA officials expressed sympathy with his plight, they also adhered to the rules of strict liability. He received a two-year competition ban and was ineligible for the 2004 Olympics. The numbers, however, indicate Vencill's case is a rarity. The U.S. Olympic Committee has estimated that 90 percent of its athletes regularly use nutritional supplements, and USADA has conducted about 40,000 drug tests since its inception in 2000. Of those, according to a source, only six showed levels of nandrolone high enough to be considered positive but low enough to possibly have come from a contaminated supplement (and not a full-blown steroid cycle). Of the six, one was Vencill. Another was an athlete who later admitted to taking nandrolone. The most famous nandrolone case came at the 2000 Summer Olympics in Sydney, where word leaked out that U.S. shot putter C.J. Hunter, the husband of star sprinter Marion Jones, had failed four drug tests for levels up to 1,000 times above the allowable limit of nandrolone. Hunter held a news conference in which he proclaimed his innocence, tearfully saying: “I can't explain it. I don't know what has happened. I can promise everybody I'm going to find out.” Sitting next to him was an expert flown in from the West Coast to explain that the positive tests were the work of a tainted iron supplement. The expert's name: Victor Conte, of BALCO. An iron supplement? “He would be a very rusty person,” WADA's Pound said, “if that's all it was.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sub150 Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 this is gay...stephen jackson was looking beautiful with a depleted chargers D but now merriman gets to play on the opposite side of him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 “It's not an accident that there are so many nandrolone cases,” Dick Pound, the head of the World Anti-Doping Agency, once said. “These folks are taking it because it works. So the minute they get caught, they go around bleating about (how) they didn't label the package properly or it was an iron supplement. “It's just not credible to people with an IQ above room temperature.” .... Sitting next to him was an expert flown in from the West Coast to explain that the positive tests were the work of a tainted iron supplement. The expert's name: Victor Conte, of BALCO. An iron supplement? “He would be a very rusty person,” WADA's Pound said, “if that's all it was.” We need this Pound guy posting here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted October 25, 2006 Share Posted October 25, 2006 (edited) If the guy has been 'roiding, he shouldn't be allowed to play. And as an organization I would think the Chargers might want him to just take his suspension and slide off the radar for the next 4 weeks. But it looks like it might get drawn out for the full 6, providing a nice healthy distraction for the team. Probably not the best move, considering the chances of a successful appeal are virtually none. Actually, the better stategy is to let him play now. That way, when they lose him, Igor and Phillips wil be returning to the line-up and less overall loss will be spread over a longer period. With the appeal, if he is found to be innocent of any wrong doing (not likely) stopping him from playing now would be wrong. You penalize the team and the player for something that he has a right to try to show his innocence. That is NOT American independent of FF or homerism. As I have pointed out in the other "Best in the NFL" thread, I find it hard to believe the kid did it on purpose. He "SEEMS" smarter than that and has too much to lose. He himself has said he is an obvious target and has to be more careful than most. It doesn't make sence at this point. I hope it ain't true, but if it is, I hope the NFL puts the on him because he has let an awful lot of people down! Edited October 25, 2006 by McBoog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Actually, the better stategy is to let him play now. That way, when they lose him, Igor and Phillips wil be returning to the line-up and less overall loss will be spread over a longer period. With the appeal, if he is found to be innocent of any wrong doing (not likely) stopping him from playing now would be wrong. You penalize the team and the player for something that he has a right to try to show his innocence. That is NOT American independent of FF or homerism. Yeah, I can see that it makes more sense to play him now considering the other injuries they have. But I have money on the Rams and I somehow feel wrong about him playing in this game after it is discovered 'roids are in his system. At that point, in my mind his on-field performace immediately becomes null and void. Despite "the American way" I don't appreciate the fact that the appeal process can't be immediate. Are they too busy to take care of this now, while his body still maintains the effects of the drug? Is it fair to the other teams in the league that the Chargers get a pass on 2 games, strike that, two MORE games from a known cheater? Come to think of it, that is the American way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 wrong forum 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.