Gordon's appeal of his 16-game suspension, which is scheduled to be heard on Friday, will reportedly hinge on inconsistencies in measurement of his urine sample, which was split into two containers. Florio:
Urine samples routinely are split into two bottles, the "A" bottle and the "B" bottle. If the "A" bottle generates a positive result, the "B" bottle is tested. Amazingly, the "B" bottle doesn't have to independently show a violation. Instead, the substance abuse policy states that the "'B' bottle Test need only show that the substance, revealed in the 'A' bottle Test, is evident to the 'limits of detection' to confirm the results of the 'A' bottle Test."
[...]
For Gordon, the "A" bottle showed a concentration of 16 ng/ml, only one nanogram per milliliter above the limits of 15. The "B" bottle showed a concentration of 13.6 ng/ml — less than the threshold.
To emphasize, Gordon's "A" and "B" bottles came from the same urine sample. The "B" was only tested to confirm that the "A" wasn't tainted or wildly out of bounds—it doesn't matter that the "B" wouldn't have been a violation had it arbitrarily been labeled the "A" bottle, or that there was a sizable discrepancy between the two tested bottles. It's tough shit for Josh Gordon, despite the fact that his urine averaged out to be below allowable limits.
But, this is how the NFL's Policy and Program for Substances of Abuse (the renegotiation of which has more or less been going on for three years) dictates testing should go. It's the same document that mandated Gordon, a repeat offender, be tested every few days.
Per a source with knowledge of the situation, Gordon landed in Stage III of the program last year as part of a negotiated two-game suspension for the use of cough syrup that contained codeine. Once in Stage III, a player never leaves. And he must pass up to 10 drug tests per month.
According to the source, Gordon has passed at least 70 drug tests.
The NFL's marijuana policy is a retrograde embarrassment. It's not technically on appeal here, in what sounds like a pretty strong case for Josh Gordon, but maybe it should be.
Update: Per ESPN's Adam Schefter, Gordon's appeal will also maintain that his drug test was so marginally positive that it could have been the result of second-hand smoke.
Link - (
New Window )
The level was 15 and 16 is over and 13.6 is under ...
Both are within experimental error ...
Rules are put in to account for that ... here the second one <EVEN THOUGH BELOW THE VALUE> confirms the previous result ...
The rule states that the first result of 16 is the official figure ... and the second result of 13.6 is used to confirm
that value as correct ... it did ... so the 16 stands ...
You don't take the second result ... you don't average the 2 ... you take the first result ... that is the rule in effect ...
To give an idea on testing variability ... a recent study of Arsenic in soil gave acceptance criteria of between 63 ppm and 135 ppm for a sample with a certified value of 125 ppm ...
13.6 and 16 are in excellent agreement ... the fact that 15 is a pass fail for the player is immaterial ...
I think Gordon is a young man who has a wild side, and really needs to be more responsible with alcohol. But i couldn't care less about any player smoking weed.
Personal conduct is subjective and the things that violate it also give rise to criminal penalties. It is understandably a different punishment structure, so that comparing punishment under one to punishment under the other is not really appropriate. Gordon certainly isn't getting 16 games for a first bad urine screen.
He is a hell of a player and someone that I hope will get his shit together but it is a privilege not a right to play in the NFL.
DUI - ( New Window )
Well that doesn't make any sense. You can get a DUI for not being under the influence of anything?
Quote:
is pretty significant and definitely not from "2nd hand smoke". For reference, you can get a DUI in Colorado if the concentration is above 5 ng/ml DUI - ( New Window )
Well that doesn't make any sense. You can get a DUI for not being under the influence of anything?
Huh? While most articles I've seen on the subject state more research needs to be done, there was some research that showed impairment when the concentration of THC in the blood was above 5 ng/ml. How is that "not being under the influence of anything"?
Bad business is changing things as you go along, not respecting the CBA and treating stars different than everybody else. How many other bad precedents can you set?
No?
Those that represent the players, pushed those to come to an agreement.
The Commish just can't reduce/add penalty based on an agreed upon sanction.
The wife beating/ etc. is more of a judgmental process. No?
Maybe I'm missing something here?
Perhaps the CBA in the NBA has it right? Much like the NFL, they know the players they represent, a great many, love to smoke weed, so, somehow, they get past it.
How the hell is it no one in the NBA get suspended for weed?
HOW !!!!!!!
I think Gordon is a young man who has a wild side, and really needs to be more responsible with alcohol. But i couldn't care less about any player smoking weed.
FTW
Quote:
bullshit that the league still has penalties for marijuana use while knocking out your fiancé only yields a 2 game suspension. If it affects your performance negatively, then the consequences will follow (like your next contract, playing time, getting cut etc), but it should not be a league suspension.
I think Gordon is a young man who has a wild side, and really needs to be more responsible with alcohol. But i couldn't care less about any player smoking weed.
FTW
Complete bullshit.
The two are not comparable for a variety of reasons.
The first being what that duned laid out above- One has specific rules in place, the other is a judgement call- very subjective vs. very objective rules and penalties.
The second, and the one that folks love to ignore is that even were they comparable based on the rules in place, one is a first time offense and the other is multiple offenses.
When you consider the latter fact, it is quite obvious the NFL absolutely DOES "CARE MORE" ABOUT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE as the first time you are caught smoking weed all you get is additional drug testing- the first time you're caught knocking your wife out you get a two game suspension.
If it's true that Gordon has multiple witnesses that can say that right before the test at issue he was only around smoke 2nd hand, and if he has a legitimate technical witness saying that his level of thc could've been caused by 2nd hand smoke, he'll have a shot to beat this, or at least get the NFL to play ball. I believe that the NFL's policy specifically states that they don't intend to punish anyone for 2nd hand smoke.