Six NFL Players Suspended for Diuretics

[WackyJacky]

Link: Six Players Suspended for Diuretics (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/03/sports/football/03nfl.html)

"Six N.F.L. players were suspended Tuesday for the final four games of the regular season for violating the league’s policy on performance-enhancing drugs. The players — Pat Williams and Kevin Williams of the Minnesota Vikings; Charles Grant, Deuce McAllister and Will Smith of the New Orleans Saints; and Bryan Pittman of the Houston Texans — tested positive for diuretics, which can serve as masking agents for steroids."

:smash:

[PyroGenic]

I don't think this is fair and Star Caps should be sued for not labeling their products correctly or thoroughly. How is a player supposed to know that a product is banned if the offensive substance in the product isn't on the label, or on the no-no list the league gives to the players? This was a bad decision on the NFL's part.

[redskin_rich]

Huge blow to Minnesota.

[skinsfan36]

the vikes are screwed and the saints well they will just have to score more points lol.

[guess88]

I don't think this is fair and Star Caps should be sued for not labeling their products correctly or thoroughly. How is a player supposed to know that a product is banned if the offensive substance in the product isn't on the label, or on the no-no list the league gives to the players? This was a bad decision on the NFL's part.

Agreed. What a crappy ruling. The NFL's been heavy with fines and suspensions this year, some worthy, some not, but it seems like it really has taken to the moniker of No Fun League. I'm not liking the direction the league's going with Goodell so far.

[WarEagle]

Agreed. What a crappy ruling. The NFL's been heavy with fines and suspensions this year, some worthy, some not, but it seems like it really has taken to the moniker of No Fun League. I'm not liking the direction the league's going with Goodell so far.

He's doing the right thing. The lesson is baseball's blind eye towards this stuff and the weak "let history be the judge" assessment from the baseball commish. No tolerance is a good policy.

[guess88]

He's doing the right thing. The lesson is baseball's blind eye towards this stuff and the weak "let history be the judge" assessment from the baseball commish. No tolerance is a good policy.

My dislike of Goodell comes more from the unnecessary roughness/late hit/roughing the passer fines. Seems like they're in abundance this year, and either every team's gotten a lot dirtier, or they're going a bit overboard in trying to protect the players that they're making it a pansy game. It's a violent sport, I think people should get hit. Cheap shots shouldn't be tolerated, but there have been some fines that unfairly take away from the game.

I agree with no tolerance on steroids, as I think it heavily cheapens and ruins sports, but this ruling just seemed a bit far fetched to me. Many, if not all players, have weight clauses in their contracts, and diuretics are the fastest way to cut down and make weight. If you consider the size and position of the 6 players listed, I wouldn't be surprised if they really were just trying to shed some pounds for a weigh in.

Pat Williams - nose tackle, 6'3', 317
Kevin Williams - defensive tackle, 6'5", 311
Charles Grant - defensive end, 6'3", 285
Deuce McAllister - running back, 6'1', 232
Will Smith - defensive end, 6'3", 282
Bryan Pittman - long snapper, 6'3", 265

Now tell me why a long snapper needs to take steroids?

[Fathead]

These guys get paid a kings ransom to play a game and know that what goes into their bodies is solely their responsibility, and that if they aren't sure it is legal, to not take it. They get 0 sympathy. They have trainers, medical staff, and the nfl they can check with before they take something.

[smoak]

These guys get paid a kings ransom to play a game and know that what goes into their bodies is solely their responsibility, and that if they aren't sure it is legal, to not take it. They get 0 sympathy. They have trainers, medical staff, and the nfl they can check with before they take something.


110% agree. Rules is rules folks. If you don't like the rules, don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya... Buh-bye!

[Moe]

These guys get paid a kings ransom to play a game and know that what goes into their bodies is solely their responsibility, and that if they aren't sure it is legal, to not take it. They get 0 sympathy. They have trainers, medical staff, and the nfl they can check with before they take something.

I thought that the primary contention was that some of those guys called the league about it and the league didn't even know that it contained banned stuff, so they figured it was ok. If that's the case then these guys are getting screwed.

[Fathead]

I thought that the primary contention was that some of those guys called the league about it and the league didn't even know that it contained banned stuff, so they figured it was ok. If that's the case then these guys are getting screwed.



Even if they called, I'm sure the NFL didn't say "We don't know, so go ahead and take it". They were most likely told "We don't know, so take at your own risk if you don't contact the manufacturer".

When in doubt, don't touch the stuff. I really don't understand why everyone seems to want to coddle athletes. They all know the rules, and they all know that they are 100% responsible for what goes into their bodies. I'm pretty sure that if they had gone to their team and said "Hey, find out if this stuff is okay for me to take", the team would have done the homework for them.

[dj_stouty]

At the end of the day, it is the player's responsibility to know what they are putting in their bodies. PERIOD.

[akhhorus]

Local Minnesota Judge plays to the voters:

Link (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3743006)

[BIGREDSKINSFAN1963]

The Williamses were among six players suspended for four games for testing positive for a diuretic that can be used as a masking agent for steroids. They have argued that the substance containing the diuretic didn't list all its ingredients, and that league scientists and lawyers had information about the substance but withheld it from players.


from what i have seen on tv the last day,these guys just may win this case.if the guys from minnesota win,th other players are bound to file suit too.

[Moe]

Even if they called, I'm sure the NFL didn't say "We don't know, so go ahead and take it". They were most likely told "We don't know, so take at your own risk if you don't contact the manufacturer".

When in doubt, don't touch the stuff. I really don't understand why everyone seems to want to coddle athletes. They all know the rules, and they all know that they are 100% responsible for what goes into their bodies. I'm pretty sure that if they had gone to their team and said "Hey, find out if this stuff is okay for me to take", the team would have done the homework for them.

I appreciate that and generally agree that it's ultimately their responsibility but I think it's bogus for the league to have in place a means of authority that is failing and then to levy such a financial butt kicking to these guys. It has nothing to do with coddling, it's called being judicious and instituting a means of logic into thing rather than a draconian system that removes the league from any fault. We're not talking HGH or coke or anything like that; there was a gray area concerning a diuretic and to hammer these guys for hundreds of thousands of dollars each is beyond heavy handed IMO.

[Fathead]

Its only heavy handed if the NFL flat out knew that the substance was illegal and failed to tell players who contacted them about it. If that is the case, then of course the NFL is being overbearing, not to mention bordering on fraud.


Otherwise, its holding up the performance enhancing drug policy, pure and simple. The players know that they should be contacting their trainers on what to take to make weight goals.

[Moe]

Its only heavy handed if the NFL flat out knew that the substance was illegal and failed to tell players who contacted them about it. If that is the case, then of course the NFL is being overbearing, not to mention bordering on fraud.


Otherwise, its holding up the performance enhancing drug policy, pure and simple. The players know that they should be contacting their trainers on what to take to make weight goals.

The NFL is the ultimate authority, trainers are supposed to defer to them. There have been cases where players have been suspended when trusting trainers who didn't follow up. There have also been reports from numerous players that they've reached out to the NFL and never gotten responses. Of ocurse, we'll never know what these guys were told and while I agree with you that it was unlikely that they were green lighted, the system is far from perfect and I don't see why it would be so hard for the league to accept at least a portion of fault here and revisit the penalty.

[Keino]

110% agree. Rules is rules folks. If you don't like the rules, don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya... Buh-bye!

At the end of the day, it is the player's responsibility to know what they are putting in their bodies. PERIOD.

Its only heavy handed if the NFL flat out knew that the substance was illegal and failed to tell players who contacted them about it. If that is the case, then of course the NFL is being overbearing, not to mention bordering on fraud.


Otherwise, its holding up the performance enhancing drug policy, pure and simple. The players know that they should be contacting their trainers on what to take to make weight goals.

That's the rub. If the players reached out to the league and the league withheld information from them on the issue as the players are alleging, then that changes things a bit.

The League's attorney's are saying "Starcaps" was addressed in a 2006 memo. Well if that was the case, and the players called, why wouldn't the league at least refer them to the memo?

[shally]

Huge blow to Minnesota.

agree.. but perhaps even bigger to new orleans

[Fathead]

That's the rub. If the players reached out to the league and the league withheld information from them on the issue as the players are alleging, then that changes things a bit.

The League's attorney's are saying "Starcaps" was addressed in a 2006 memo. Well if that was the case, and the players called, why wouldn't the league at least refer them to the memo?

If it is proven that the NFL knew about this and these guys called the league and the NFL did not provide them that info, then thats entirely different.


But that hasn't been shown.

[akhhorus]

That's the rub. If the players reached out to the league and the league withheld information from them on the issue as the players are alleging, then that changes things a bit.

The League's attorney's are saying "Starcaps" was addressed in a 2006 memo. Well if that was the case, and the players called, why wouldn't the league at least refer them to the memo?

I'm sorry, but I don't think it matters. If a player took a substance that no one knew had a banned element in it, he's doping-intentionally or not. He's responsible for what he puts into his body, whether the NFL knows what it contains or not.

[redskin_rich]

agree.. but perhaps even bigger to new orleans

How so? The Aints are in last place of their division and have a 3-5 conference record, they are already done.

Minny is currently in first place of their division.

[shally]

How so? The Aints are in last place of their division and have a 3-5 conference record, they are already done.

Minny is currently in first place of their division.

with drew brees you never know what the saints can pull off.. but without 2 defensive linemen and deuce mcallister they are non competitive. still, i do agree that the saints chances are poorer overall because of the strength of their division compared to the division minny is in...

i was more refering to the impact upon each of the teams by losing those players, rather than what there position in the standings was.

[Keino]

I'm sorry, but I don't think it matters. If a player took a substance that no one knew had a banned element in it, he's doping-intentionally or not. He's responsible for what he puts into his body, whether the NFL knows what it contains or not.

It absolutely does matter. If I call you because you are the authority on matters dealing with what are permissible and not permissible substances, and you withhold information from me about the specific substance I ask you about, then you are not on solid ground suspending me for using the substance. Especially when the "Illegal ingredient" is not listed on the label. I performed two levels of due diligence on the issue. Certainly, if the NFL issued a memo about it 2 years ago, they know that at the very least it contains a banned susbtance. That information by itself would likely have led to very different decisions.....

[akhhorus]

It absolutely does matter. If I call you because you are the authority on matters dealing with what are permissible and not permissible substances, and you withhold information from me about the specific substance I ask you about, then you are not on solid ground suspending me for using the substance. Especially when the "Illegal ingredient" is not listed on the label. I performed two levels of due diligence on the issue. Certainly, if the NFL issued a memo about it 2 years ago, they know that at the very least it contains a banned susbtance. That information by itself would likely have led to very different decisions.....

You can call the FDA or have your agent research it before taking a supplement you don't know what is in it. Don't tell me that they don't have the money to find that out. And if they havent submitted it to the FDA for testing/inventory, then don't take it until they do.

And the NFL did issue a memo on Starcaps that it was on the banned list to all the teams and the Union. They've submitted this information in the official hearing about the suspensions, so they aren't lying. Ignorance isn't a valid excuse.

[dj_stouty]

It absolutely does matter. If I call you because you are the authority on matters dealing with what are permissible and not permissible substances, and you withhold information from me about the specific substance I ask you about, then you are not on solid ground suspending me for using the substance. ....

You are painting the absolute perfect picture that would get these guys off the hook. Is it possible it went down the way you describe? Sure, its possible. But we wont' know for sure until the facts come out. I think you are always at the ready to nail Goodell, that you already have your mind made up on the matter. ;)

[Keino]

You are painting the absolute perfect picture that would get these guys off the hook. Is it possible it went down the way you describe? Sure, its possible. But we wont' know for sure until the facts come out. I think you are always at the ready to nail Goodell, that you already have your mind made up on the matter. ;)

Well I conditioned my comments in such a way that said "IF what these guys are alleging is true". I am not making an assumption either way. I think Goodell sucks, but my comments have nothing to do with him, specifically.




Akh, again, why not just refer the players asking to the 2006 memo if they issued it? "Sir, we've addressed this question, please refer to our 2006 Memo". Bam. It's done.

[akhhorus]

Akh, again, why not just refer the players asking to the 2006 memo if they issued it? "Sir, we've addressed this question, please refer to our 2006 Memo". Bam. It's done.

I can think of some valid reasons why they wouldn't have. But the fact remains: the NFL issued a memo saying that StarCaps contained a banned substance to every Club president, every General Manager and the Union's office on banned substances. There is no valid reason to claim ignorance. None. Even if they called the NFL and they didn't bring up the memo. The information on starcaps would have been known to every trainer and agent.

[Keino]

I can think of some valid reasons why they wouldn't have.

I'd like to hear them.

[akhhorus]

I'd like to hear them.

Just off the top of my head:
1-They might have asked someone in the NYC office who's not directly involved with the Steroid policies and didn't search properly.
2-They may have asked someone in the NYC office who was involved with the steroid policies who screwed up and didn't check properly.
3-They may not have asked anyone at all. Or the players asked someone to ask and they didn't do it.

It doesn't matter. The NFL issued a memo on it 2 years ago and everyone potentially attached to the player in an official capacity would have had access to the info. Which is more likely:
They didn't ask the trainer, their agents or the team about their potential use of starcaps.
or
The NFL is lying about the memo, which means they perjured themselves just to suspend 6 players(1 of whom isn't fighting the suspension).

[Keino]

Just off the top of my head:
1-They might have asked someone in the NYC office who's not directly involved with the Steroid policies and didn't search properly.
2-They may have asked someone in the NYC office who was involved with the steroid policies who screwed up and didn't check properly.
3-They may not have asked anyone at all. Or the players asked someone to ask and they didn't do it.

It doesn't matter. The NFL issued a memo on it 2 years ago and everyone potentially attached to the player in an official capacity would have had access to the info. Which is more likely:
They didn't ask the trainer, their agents or the team about their potential use of starcaps.
or
The NFL is lying about the memo, which means they perjured themselves just to suspend 6 players(1 of whom isn't fighting the suspension).


The Former is more likely. I can't see the NFL lying about putting out the memo 2 years ago unless they were covering up a screw-up for this (which gets us into tin foil hat territory), but even if they assert something like that they should (and likely will) be able to easily prove it.

It sounds like they read the labels, thought they were ok and that was about the extent of their due diligence on the subject.

[akhhorus]

The Former is more likely. I can't see the NFL lying about putting out the memo 2 years ago unless they were covering up a screw-up for this (which gets us into tin foil hat territory), but even if they assert something like that they should (and likely will) be able to easily prove it.

There's a difference between leaking to ESPN that they put out a memo on it and saying it in official paperwork-which the NFL did.

It sounds like they read the labels, thought they were ok and that was about the extent of their due diligence on the subject.

It might be my distrustful nature, but I think they knew Starcaps were banned and didn't ask anyone on purpose. Figure that a player wants to lose weight quickly, who are they going to go to? The team trainer at some point, and they would know that Starcaps were banned.