Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43
  1. #21
    raptorman is offline Starter
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    200

    Re:Appeals court declines to rehear Williamses case

    These memos you talk of that went to the NFLPA representative who actually put "Balanced Health products" on the list of companies that the the players are not allowed to endorse.
    http://www.nflplayers.com/images/fck/BannedCompanies.pdf

    Because they make something with a prohibitive substance in them. Which any person in their right mind would connect the dots. But we ae talking NFL players here. Now if someone has a copy of the memo that says "Starcaps" is specifically banned I would love to see it.

    And for the heck of it, I went and read the Steroid policy to see what it says about the NFL's responsibility in reporting information. And it says nothing about it in any way. I also found nothing in the CBA that says anything either way about the NFL reporting or not reporting any information on drugs or supplements. So to say the NFL was following the CBA is correct. Since it's never addressed they don't have to follow it. Now if I am missing something in the CBA I hope someone can correct me on it. Here's a link to the CBA and the player policies on drugs and steroids. It's easy to get to the rest of the CBA from there.

    http://www.nflplayers.com/user/template.aspx?fmid=181&lmid=235&pid=0&type=l

  2. #22
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re:Appeals court declines to rehear Williamses case

    XTAP59 wrote:
    NodakPaul wrote:
    XTAP59 wrote:
    NodakPaul wrote:
    XTAP59 wrote:
    Vikes wrote:
    I understand what you are saying.

    But the fact remains the NFL gets off easy if it just say you are responsible for ANYTHING that is deemed illegal in you're body.

    I'm sorry but they are football players not chemists.

    The bottom line Starcaps did not disclose the information that was illegal on the product.

    How in the HECK are you suppose to screen something if it is not listed on the product??

    I think the Anti-doping rule in the NFL is WAY one sided.

    I agree the loophole is weak, but the real problem is the NFL should have looked at this unique case and treat as such unique.
    My take. Average Joe citizen is driving down th highway. He is going 50 miles per hour. The state Highway patrol pulls average Joe over and tells him he was speeding as the road he was driving on has a speed limit of 45.

    Average Joe plea's that there were no speed limit signs posted on this highway.

    The officer replies, well, since you are driving on the highway, you should know the speed limit.

    There is no right answer in this case.
    Not even close to the same. You are forgetting the part about the players being told specifically NOT to take products made by Balanced Health Products.

    Maybe if you added this part in your scenario:
    Prior to Average Joe getting in the car and heading down the highway, he was told by two different sources that all state highways have a speed limit of 45.

    Was average Joe told specifically about the highway he was on? No, he was told that it applied to all state highways. Did he know why the speed limit was 45? No, but it didn't change the fact that he knew that he should be driving 45 and chose to drive 50 instead.

    Vikings fans conviently forget that they were warned not to take the product.
    Not even a little close to the same?
    Really!
    What if the speed limit was 50 last week and just changed the day average Joe was driving. He thought it was safe, but he failed to call the state highway patrol before driving on that road to ask if perchance the speed limit was altered. Who's at fault? IMO, they both are, Joe and the state. Joe for not knowing, and the state for not properly informing him.

    And that is what this case is all about. Misinformation. The Williams believed what they were taking was acceptable, (under the speed limit.) The state, in its failure to adequately display the warnings about Star Caps, (failing to post the speed limit)still prosecute.
    The part in red is where we disagree.

    First, this case is NOT about misinformation. The original one was, but EVERY COURT HAS FOUND IN FAVOR OF THE NFL IN THIS REGARD. This case is about jurisdiction and whether or not federal labor laws trump state laws. Under the federal labor laws, the league will win because the league acted within the confines of the mutually agreed upon CBA. Under the state laws, the Williamses win - not because they didn't do anything wrong, but because Minnesota law prohibits employers from taking punitive action on an employee for a first failed drug test.

    Second, you fault the NFL for failure to adequately warn players. Two memos, one to the NFLPA, and one to the trainer on every single NFL team went out. These memos specifically told players that they were NOT allowed to use any products made by Balanced Health Products. In your scenario, this is why I added "Prior to Average Joe getting in the car and heading down the highway, he was told by two different sources that all state highways have a speed limit of 45." The Williamses were told via two different sources that they could not use that diuretic. And they chose to anyway.
    Then I guess there is no pleasing you then....
    (Dr. evil, Austin Powers movie)

    You are taking this way over the line IMO. My original post stated that IMO both were in the wrong. That is why they are in court and that is why the NFL has not yet won and that is why the Williams have not won yet. Because there is gray area.

    I thought the Willaims claimed that Star caps failed to list accurate ingredients, and that is why they got in trouble. The NFL sent messages to stay away from certain supplements with certain chemicals. Since Star Caps did not have those certain chemicals, the Williams felt they were safe.

    Perhaps they should have hired a chemist and average Joe should have taken a taxi instead.

    Again, I'm not for or against the NFL in what they perceive as the truth, I'm merely stating there are two sides and that it is always not cut and dry, right or wrong.

    Perhaps the NFL should give a little, show some good faith, meet them half way, as well as the Willaims should meet half way. Perhaps donate two game checks to charity and the NFL matches it.
    Everybody wins.
    Not trying to take this over any line. But there is a common misconception that the NFL somehow entrapped the Williamses into using a banned substance. Specifically, the part in blue is emphatically wrong.

    The NFL didn't just send messages to stay away from certain supplements with certain chemicals. Yes, there is a list of banned chemicals, and Bumetanide is on it. And you are correct that StarCaps (illegally) failed to list Bumetanide as an ingredient. However, that isn't where it ends. When the NFL found out that StarCaps contained Bumetanide, they sent out a league wide memo to all trainers and the NFLPA telling all players not to use products made by Balanced Health Products. They listed the manufacturer by name. The Williamses didn't need to hire a chemist to know that they shouldn't take StarCaps. It was very clear in both memos. THE MANUFACTURE WAS LISTED BY NAME.

    This was above and beyond what is required of the NFL according to the CBA, which was agreed upon by both the league and the NFLPA, and is binding under federal labor laws. There is no "banned supplement list." There is only an "approved supplement list", and anything NOT on that list players take at their own risk. The NFL went above and beyond that to specifically inform players and teams that Balanced Health Products were not to be used. Could they have been more informative? Yup. But in the end the NFL acted according to the CBA, and the players did not. The reason that they have not been suspended is because of a state law that cannot be applied uniformly to ever player in the NFL.

    I'm not trying to single you out. A majority of Minnesota fans as a group seem to be conveniently confused over that actual merits of this case. Your analogy with the Average Joe and the state trooper is a good example because you failed to include very relevant parts of the story.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  3. #23
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re:Appeals court declines to rehear Williamses case

    Just to be clear:

    I do think that the NFL failed the players by not being completely forthcoming about the StarCaps. And I think that all of this could have been avoided had the NFL acted intelligently and mitigated some of the 4 game suspension for each player. I also think that some good will come out of this - the new CBA will almost certainly include language that specifies the jurisdiction of the CBA.

    In the end, the Williamses will almost certainly win their case IMHO. And that disappoints me, because it teaches us as society that instead of owning up to mistakes we should look for legal loopholes to get out of whatever trouble we got ourselves into.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  4. #24
    raptorman is offline Starter
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    200

    Re:Appeals court declines to rehear Williamses case

    One more thing and then I will get off my high horse for awhile. Both the players and the NFL could have prevented this from happening. The players wanted to lose weight for money, the NFL feels it has no obligation to tell the players everything it finds out about a supplements. For an organization the attempts to hold it's players and personnel to high standards of ethics and morals they have failed miserably in this case. The players for trying to cheat the system and the NFL, specifically Dr. Lombardo, for not releasing "all" the information in relation to what was known about Starcaps.

    In the end I always thought a good compromise would have been a two game suspension. But what do I know, I'm just a fan.

  5. #25
    XTAP59's Avatar
    XTAP59 is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    777

    Re:Appeals court declines to rehear Williamses case

    Not trying to take this over any line. But there is a common misconception that the NFL somehow entrapped the Williamses into using a banned substance. Specifically, the part in blue is emphatically wrong.

    The NFL didn't just send messages to stay away from certain supplements with certain chemicals. Yes, there is a list of banned chemicals, and Bumetanide is on it. And you are correct that StarCaps (illegally) failed to list Bumetanide as an ingredient. However, that isn't where it ends. When the NFL found out that StarCaps contained Bumetanide, they sent out a league wide memo to all trainers and the NFLPA telling all players not to use products made by Balanced Health Products. They listed the manufacturer by name. The Williamses didn't need to hire a chemist to know that they shouldn't take StarCaps. It was very clear in both memos. THE MANUFACTURE WAS LISTED BY NAME.

    This was above and beyond what is required of the NFL according to the CBA, which was agreed upon by both the league and the NFLPA, and is binding under federal labor laws. There is no "banned supplement list." There is only an "approved supplement list", and anything NOT on that list players take at their own risk. The NFL went above and beyond that to specifically inform players and teams that Balanced Health Products were not to be used. Could they have been more informative? Yup. But in the end the NFL acted according to the CBA, and the players did not. The reason that they have not been suspended is because of a state law that cannot be applied uniformly to ever player in the NFL.

    I'm not trying to single you out. A majority of Minnesota fans as a group seem to be conveniently confused over that actual merits of this case. Your analogy with the Average Joe and the state trooper is a good example because you failed to include very relevant parts of the story.
    Not trying to take this over any line.
    To late.

    All I wanted was sharks with lasers on their heads and I get you instead. I'm not singling you out as you quoted saying to me mind you. I'm just stating that.

    However, I do not in any way have the misconception that the NFL somehow entrapped the Williams into using a banned substance. I never said that, and I don't believe that. I have no idea how you can arrive at that conclusion when I state my opinion, my opinion mind you, no court documents, no quotes from attorneys, judges, or NFL officials, just my opinion that there is a gray area in this matter using the state trooper analogy.

    You missed my original point completely. Let me say yet again, in my original post, I merely pointed out IMO that this situation has no right or wrong answer. However, you tell me that my opinion is incorrect because I failed to include any relevant parts to my story.

    Apparently I had no idea I was to bring all my court briefs with me to the PPO Viking forum to legally discuss the subtle nuances of the NFL CBA and the pending lawsuit filed currently. (I called Perry Mason but he is dead.)

    Back in January on my blog, I said this about the Star Caps debacle.
    "* Pat And Kevin Williams and Star Caps. What a mess. Still looming is a possible and more than likely four game suspension at the start of the 2009 season. I’m sure lawsuits will be filed fast and furious, and I believe the players will be compensated for the loss of money, reputation, and invasion of privacy they were put through. But, I see them sitting out games 1-4 next season."

    Here is the link to the blog with that quote.
    Wild Card Weekend

    So, you see, I believed they had made a mistake but was hoping that they and the NFL could come to a more beneficial solution for all instead of the union and NFL pointing fingers at each other.

    LURKING ON THE GRASSY KNOLL
    http://lotgk.wordpress.com

  6. #26
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re:Appeals court declines to rehear Williamses case

    XTAP59 wrote:
    Not trying to take this over any line. But there is a common misconception that the NFL somehow entrapped the Williamses into using a banned substance. Specifically, the part in blue is emphatically wrong.

    The NFL didn't just send messages to stay away from certain supplements with certain chemicals. Yes, there is a list of banned chemicals, and Bumetanide is on it. And you are correct that StarCaps (illegally) failed to list Bumetanide as an ingredient. However, that isn't where it ends. When the NFL found out that StarCaps contained Bumetanide, they sent out a league wide memo to all trainers and the NFLPA telling all players not to use products made by Balanced Health Products. They listed the manufacturer by name. The Williamses didn't need to hire a chemist to know that they shouldn't take StarCaps. It was very clear in both memos. THE MANUFACTURE WAS LISTED BY NAME.

    This was above and beyond what is required of the NFL according to the CBA, which was agreed upon by both the league and the NFLPA, and is binding under federal labor laws. There is no "banned supplement list." There is only an "approved supplement list", and anything NOT on that list players take at their own risk. The NFL went above and beyond that to specifically inform players and teams that Balanced Health Products were not to be used. Could they have been more informative? Yup. But in the end the NFL acted according to the CBA, and the players did not. The reason that they have not been suspended is because of a state law that cannot be applied uniformly to ever player in the NFL.

    I'm not trying to single you out. A majority of Minnesota fans as a group seem to be conveniently confused over that actual merits of this case. Your analogy with the Average Joe and the state trooper is a good example because you failed to include very relevant parts of the story.
    Not trying to take this over any line.
    To late.

    All I wanted was sharks with lasers on their heads and I get you instead. I'm not singling you out as you quoted saying to me mind you. I'm just stating that.

    However, I do not in any way have the misconception that the NFL somehow entrapped the Williams into using a banned substance. I never said that, and I don't believe that. I have no idea how you can arrive at that conclusion when I state my opinion, my opinion mind you, no court documents, no quotes from attorneys, judges, or NFL officials, just my opinion that there is a gray area in this matter using the state trooper analogy.

    You missed my original point completely. Let me say yet again, in my original post, I merely pointed out IMO that this situation has no right or wrong answer. However, you tell me that my opinion is incorrect because I failed to include any relevant parts to my story.

    Apparently I had no idea I was to bring all my court briefs with me to the PPO Viking forum to legally discuss the subtle nuances of the NFL CBA and the pending lawsuit filed currently. (I called Perry Mason but he is dead.)

    Back in January on my blog, I said this about the Star Caps debacle.
    "* Pat And Kevin Williams and Star Caps. What a mess. Still looming is a possible and more than likely four game suspension at the start of the 2009 season. I’m sure lawsuits will be filed fast and furious, and I believe the players will be compensated for the loss of money, reputation, and invasion of privacy they were put through. But, I see them sitting out games 1-4 next season."

    Here is the link to the blog with that quote.
    Wild Card Weekend

    So, you see, I believed they had made a mistake but was hoping that they and the NFL could come to a more beneficial solution for all instead of the union and NFL pointing fingers at each other.
    I never said that your opinion was incorrect. If that is how you interpreted it, then I am sorry I couldn't be more clear. I did say that the facts that you stated were incorrect. And they were, specifically the parts in blue and red that I had highlighted.

    I understand your opinion. And I disagree with parts of it, particularly the entrapment analogy. We are allowed to disagree here, that isn't crossing any "line"...
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  7. #27
    XTAP59's Avatar
    XTAP59 is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    777

    Re:Appeals court declines to rehear Williamses case

    NodakPaul wrote:
    XTAP59 wrote:
    Not trying to take this over any line. But there is a common misconception that the NFL somehow entrapped the Williamses into using a banned substance. Specifically, the part in blue is emphatically wrong.

    The NFL didn't just send messages to stay away from certain supplements with certain chemicals. Yes, there is a list of banned chemicals, and Bumetanide is on it. And you are correct that StarCaps (illegally) failed to list Bumetanide as an ingredient. However, that isn't where it ends. When the NFL found out that StarCaps contained Bumetanide, they sent out a league wide memo to all trainers and the NFLPA telling all players not to use products made by Balanced Health Products. They listed the manufacturer by name. The Williamses didn't need to hire a chemist to know that they shouldn't take StarCaps. It was very clear in both memos. THE MANUFACTURE WAS LISTED BY NAME.

    This was above and beyond what is required of the NFL according to the CBA, which was agreed upon by both the league and the NFLPA, and is binding under federal labor laws. There is no "banned supplement list." There is only an "approved supplement list", and anything NOT on that list players take at their own risk. The NFL went above and beyond that to specifically inform players and teams that Balanced Health Products were not to be used. Could they have been more informative? Yup. But in the end the NFL acted according to the CBA, and the players did not. The reason that they have not been suspended is because of a state law that cannot be applied uniformly to ever player in the NFL.

    I'm not trying to single you out. A majority of Minnesota fans as a group seem to be conveniently confused over that actual merits of this case. Your analogy with the Average Joe and the state trooper is a good example because you failed to include very relevant parts of the story.
    Not trying to take this over any line.
    To late.

    All I wanted was sharks with lasers on their heads and I get you instead. I'm not singling you out as you quoted saying to me mind you. I'm just stating that.

    However, I do not in any way have the misconception that the NFL somehow entrapped the Williams into using a banned substance. I never said that, and I don't believe that. I have no idea how you can arrive at that conclusion when I state my opinion, my opinion mind you, no court documents, no quotes from attorneys, judges, or NFL officials, just my opinion that there is a gray area in this matter using the state trooper analogy.

    You missed my original point completely. Let me say yet again, in my original post, I merely pointed out IMO that this situation has no right or wrong answer. However, you tell me that my opinion is incorrect because I failed to include any relevant parts to my story.

    Apparently I had no idea I was to bring all my court briefs with me to the PPO Viking forum to legally discuss the subtle nuances of the NFL CBA and the pending lawsuit filed currently. (I called Perry Mason but he is dead.)

    Back in January on my blog, I said this about the Star Caps debacle.
    "* Pat And Kevin Williams and Star Caps. What a mess. Still looming is a possible and more than likely four game suspension at the start of the 2009 season. I’m sure lawsuits will be filed fast and furious, and I believe the players will be compensated for the loss of money, reputation, and invasion of privacy they were put through. But, I see them sitting out games 1-4 next season."

    Here is the link to the blog with that quote.
    Wild Card Weekend

    So, you see, I believed they had made a mistake but was hoping that they and the NFL could come to a more beneficial solution for all instead of the union and NFL pointing fingers at each other.
    I never said that your opinion was incorrect. If that is how you interpreted it, then I am sorry I couldn't be more clear. I did say that the facts that you stated were incorrect. And they were, specifically the parts in blue and red that I had highlighted.

    I understand your opinion. And I disagree with parts of it, particularly the entrapment analogy. We are allowed to disagree here, that isn't crossing any "line"...
    Jesus Christ. You thought when I quoted Doctor Evil about sharks with lasers that I was actually taking you seriously! I am sorry you did not understand. Perhaps I should offer you some prime real estate at a very low price. (That's a pun!)

    But to be frank, I didn't state any facts as you claim. It was my opinion. It was an analogy. That is what you aren't comprehending. You treat my analogy to be factually exact. Here's a clue for you. It's not. (Also, the Walrus was Paul)

    LURKING ON THE GRASSY KNOLL
    http://lotgk.wordpress.com

  8. #28
    VKG4LFE's Avatar
    VKG4LFE is offline Jersey Retired Tetris Champion, Monkey GO Happy 4 Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Hartford, WI
    Posts
    15,993

    Re:Appeals court declines to rehear Williamses case

    Geat news! Now, let's get down to finishing off the season strong and winning that trophy!

    I get the most pissed off looks from people with my VKG 4 LFE Wisconsin license plate, and I LOVE IT!!

  9. #29
    raptorman is offline Starter
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    200

    Re:Appeals court declines to rehear Williamses case

    I just finished reading the Judges order from May 2009 sending this back to State court and I couldn't help but wonder about this passage from his ruling.

    The final relevant evidence surrounds the first “cluster” of positive bumetanide tests in 2006. These positive tests and the tested players’ statements that they took StarCaps prior to the positive tests gave rise to Lombardo’s request that a laboratory analyze StarCaps for the presence of bumetanide, as discussed above. As noted, Lombardo did not refer for discipline any player who tested positive for bumetanide in 2006.
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/15976006/NFL-Players-vs-NFL-D-Minn-Ruling-on-Cross-Motions-for-Summary-Judgment


    Just found it interesting.

  10. #30
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,601
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re:Appeals court declines to rehear Williamses case

    raptorman wrote:
    I just finished reading the Judges order from May 2009 sending this back to State court and I couldn't help but wonder about this passage from his ruling.

    The final relevant evidence surrounds the first “cluster” of positive bumetanide tests in 2006. These positive tests and the tested players’ statements that they took StarCaps prior to the positive tests gave rise to Lombardo’s request that a laboratory analyze StarCaps for the presence of bumetanide, as discussed above. As noted, Lombardo did not refer for discipline any player who tested positive for bumetanide in 2006.
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/15976006/NFL-Players-vs-NFL-D-Minn-Ruling-on-Cross-Motions-for-Summary-Judgment


    Just found it interesting.
    Yup, there were players who tested positive for the bumetanide in 2006, and claimed that the only thing that they took was StarCaps, which did not list it on the label. So the NFL looked into their claims, found them to be true, and therefore the players were not subject to any discipline. Shortly thereafter, a memo went out to all of the teams as well as the NFLPA instructing them not to use any products made by BHP.

    A lot of people think that the Williamses were the first to fall victim to the mis-labeling of StarCaps, but in truth they weren't. They were among the first to fall victim to it after they were warned about it though.

    The league handled the first group of positive tests in a fair manner for the players, and then warned all of the other players. The second group of positive tests were subject to suspension.

    (BTW, be careful - some people don't like it when you bring pesky things like facts and correct information into the thread... you should have wrapped it in a misleading analogy. )
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Williamses are going separate ways in case
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-11-2011, 09:51 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-08-2009, 11:30 AM
  3. Scott Linehan declines O-Coordinator Job with 9ers
    By Prophet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 01-25-2009, 04:41 PM
  4. Replies: 37
    Last Post: 05-22-2008, 12:23 AM
  5. Court dismisses case against rude doctor
    By BadlandsVikings in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-08-2006, 03:17 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •