This is a good thing, this ruling that came down Saturday in the StarCaps case. You may not see it that way if you're a fan of the Minnesota Vikings, who now face the first four games of their season without their Pro Bowl defensive tackles. Or if your team is the New Orleans Saints, who've likely lost their starting defensive ends for those first four games.But if you're the kind of person who thinks pro athletes (and, by extension, the children who admire them) should be discouraged from taking drugs to cheat at their games, you have to look at today's development as a positive.
There are all kinds of ticklish legal issues associated with this case, and Mike Florio does a far more detailed job of breaking them down here than my liberal arts education permits. For me, this boils down to the simple idea of pro athletes trying to skirt the drug policies their unions have negotiated with their leagues, and the danger that would result if the courts began to enable them to do it.
Minnesota's Pat Williams and Kevin Williams, along with the Saints' Charles Grant and Will Smith and former Saint Deuce McAllister, were found to have violated NFL drug policy last season by testing positive for Bumetanide, a diuretic commonly used as a steroid masking agent. Per that drug policy, each player was suspended four games. But they challenged the suspensions in court, arguing that the NFL should have informed them that the StarCaps pills they were taking contained the banned substance, and their argument was persuasive enough to earn them a temporary stay of the punishment until the case was resolved.
Now, if you buy what these guys are saying, you're buying the following:
1. That it's the league's job, not that of the players, to monitor the content of every supplement an NFL player might possibly ingest, and to keep the players informed of any content that might be harmful or illegal.
2. That all five of these guys were taking a celebrity diet pill in an effort to lose weight, with no greater or more nefarious motive than that.
3. That they weren't taking anything else illegal.
We'll take those one at a time:
1. Baloney. Thanks to the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994, the FDA can't monitor and regulate these supplements effectively. We should expect the NFL to pull it off?
The supplement industry is the textbook definition of "amok." Under the DHSEA, you could basically make one of these pills or powders in your basement, claim it to be anything you want and sell it in a vitamin store. You don't have to prove it's harmless, or that it contains nothing illegal, or even that it can do whatever it is you claim it can do. Your product is fine until the FDA can prove that it's harmful, at which time it can be declared illegal. If this sounds insane, take it up with Orrin Hatch. It's the law of the land, and it's spawned a shady and dangerous industry built on our society's perpetual desire to gain a physical edge.
Knowing this, it astounds me that these guys continue to take anything at all. I mean, how many times do you have to hear a story about somebody testing positive for a banned substance that just happened to be in a bottle they bought legally at GNC before you stop assuming everything you can get at GNC is okay?
Obviously, we're not dealing with the cream of the intellectual crop here. But even if you throw traditional logic and reason out the window, it's preposterous to shift the blame to the league. If you don't know what's in your supplement and you take it anyway, and you fail a drug test as a result, that's got to be on you. Next time you get stopped for speeding, try arguing that there aren't enough speed limit signs up. See how far that gets you.
2. Sure they were. And Manny Ramirez was taking female fertility drugs because he wants to be a mommy. Even if you give these guys their ignorance excuse -- even if you buy into the idea that the league should have warned them better -- you can't argue that their motives were pure. Whatever else happened, these guys are guilty of buying a bottle of something because they thought it would help them play football better than other people do -- better than they could without it. At it's core, that reason is no different from the ones Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens or Marion Jones used when they decided to inject steroids. You can make any kind of comparitive value judgment you want, but at the very bottom we know for a fact that these players, like so many others, decided to take a pill in an effort to make them better at their sport. That doesn't disqualify them from sympathy, but it doesn't mean they deserve it either.
3. Well, we can't know that, can we? What we do know is that they all tested positive for a drug that sophisticated steroid users employ as a masking agent. We know that, if successful, Bumetanide would prevent these guys from testing positive for steroids even if they had taken them. We know that pro athletes take steroids. We know that pro athletes have worked with chemists in an effort to develop new drugs that can elude drug-testing policies, and it's no great leap to assume they still are.
The players who got caught in the StarCaps case have every right to feel as if they've been denied a presumption of innocence, but what they should realize is that it's for good reason. The players who came before them, the cheaters whose actions necessitated these pro sports leagues' drug policies in the first place, are the ones responsible. It's the Rafael Palmeiros and Shawne Merrimans of the world who created a situation in which the StarCaps players can't be presumed innocent -- in which, no matter how neat a legal case they may be able to craft, we feel safe in our assumption that they're guilty as charged and probably of much worse.
For all of these reasons, zero-tolerance is the way to go here. These guys can break your hearts with their stories of I-didn't-know-it-was-illegal. But facts don't have hearts, and the fact here is that they tested positive for something the league's drug policy doesn't allow them to have in their bodies. If you start splitting hairs on that, you might as well not have a drug policy at all.
Today, the courts ruled that the NFL had the right to suspend the StarCaps players four games apiece. For the sake of anyone who thinks drugs in sports are bad, that's a good thing.



















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
5-24-2009 @ 10:33AM
horatiowrd said...
Your missing a key part of the argument. They arent saying the NFL should monitor all supplements, they are saying when the NFL knows a supplement has something in it that would get them in trouble, the NFL has a duty to notify them. The problem is StarCaps does not list this substance, the NFL as part of its own internal...(honestly I dont know why)...anywho the NFL discovered that StarCaps had it but did not tell players.
In that I think the players are right but I understand the NFL. The NFL doesnt want to create the precedent and have players depend 100% on there tests because theres no way they can keep up so if they what OTCs are off-limits its almost like an implicit statement "everything else is fine" or atleast, everything else thats well known that you can be sure we tested.
For the players, its really sucks to get punished because the company lied and to find out your employer KNEW they were lying and just decided not to tell you. If your Deuce, who seems like a 100% nice by the book guy, he has to be taken a back cause had the NFL had told him what they knew, he would never have taken it.
Its a tricky tricky situation. Its important for the NFL to do these tests to stay ahead of drug cheats (to know of knew things on the scene) but they, nor any athletic body, wants to get into the business of "approving" ANYTHING other than hard work.
But I think you misconstrue that the players are saying the NFL should monitor all drugs. They are saying that IF the NFL knows something they have to tell there players, but the NFL has a good reason (and its been adjudicated well before this) not to take any stance other than "its YOUR body"
Reply
5-24-2009 @ 12:49PM
JDUBBS1280 said...
Sorry, this case isn't over. The Williams Boys are going back to State Court (where this case originated) and it looks as though they still have a great shot at beating this.
See Mike Florio's post on ProFootballTalk.com
As for this being a "good thing" for the NFL, you couldn't farther from the truth. Consider these facts...
1. Between 2005-2007 eight NFL players tested positive for this diuretic from StarCaps and were NOT suspended. Why these guys?
2. The NFL's own Dr. in charge of testing (Dr. Lombardo) testified that he DID NOT believe these players were taking the suppliment to mask steroid use, but only to lose weight. He also said he didn't feel they should be suspended.
3. Whether they were legall obligated to or not, the NFL withheld important info from their players. Even the Federal Judge said this was "baffling".
Fact is, the NFL's testing policy violates MN state laws. The NFL will not be able to hide behind the CBA to avoid this mishap. Even the CBA doesn't supercede state laws. The NFL will have to adjust their testing policy to comply with all state laws.
After all, we aren't talking about Steroid use here, but a weight loss suppliment. And before you start talking about it's use as a masking agent, take a look at my above comments concerning the NFL's Dr. in charge of testing.
Reply
5-24-2009 @ 1:37PM
JDUBBS1280 said...
U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson’s ruling late Friday that dismissed a lawsuit brought by the NFL Players Association and sent Pat and Kevin Williams’ suit back to state court appeared to be a victory for the league in the ongoing StarCaps case.
But a closer examination shows the Vikings’ Pro Bowl defensive tackles still have a chance of escaping four-game suspensions for violating the NFL’s anti-doping policy. That’s because the Williamses stand to enjoy the home-field advantage of Minnesota state laws put in place to protect employees.
“This gives my clients a terrific case and Judge Magnuson kept alive the heart of our case which is that the NFL improperly violated Kevin and Pat’s privacy rights and due process in administering these suspensions,” said Peter Ginsberg, who is representing both players in a suit separate from the NFLPA action. “We brought this case in state court because we believed the state courts in Minnesota had the most interest in protecting its employees rights. Judge Magnuson agrees and now it’s back to state court, which is the forum that the NFL tried to run away from.”
The league claims it has no concerns about this latest development. Greg Aiello, NFL senior vice president of public relations, e-mailed the following statement Saturday on behalf of the league: “We believe there are very significant barriers to a successful suit in the Minnesota courts against our collectively bargained program with the NFL Players Association that covers 32 teams and all NFL players. We are not concerned with the case as it now stands.”
Ginsberg is right in that it was the NFL that moved to shift the Williamses’ case from state court — where the two obtained a temporary restraining order to continue playing after their suspensions were handed down last December — to federal court.
The suspensions of the Williamses and three New Orleans Saints, Charles Grant, Will Smith, and Deuce McAllister, came after they tested positive for the diuretic bumetanide. One of the arguments made before Magnuson was that NFL executives knew StarCaps contained bumetanide but did not notify players. Magnuson sided with the NFL by ruling that players are responsible for what is in their bodies.
What Magnuson didn’t do was dismiss the fact that Minnesota law provides the Williamses’ with certain rights. Two key ones, as first pointed out by the website Profootballtalk.com, are this:
1) Under the Minnesota Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act, state law prohibits employers from imposing discipline based on a single positive test and demands other procedural protections before sanctions are imposed.
2) The Minnesota Consumable Products act states that employers can not take action against employees who have, “engaged in the use or enjoyment of lawful consumable products, if the use or enjoyment takes place off the premises of the employer during non-working hours.”
StarCaps might have contained a substance banned by the NFL but the supplement isn’t illegal and if the Williamses’ took them at home that could be important.
Ginsberg said there were a “series of important procedural protections that the NFL violated,” in regards to the first statute. Among them is the complaint the Williamses weren’t afforded the opportunity to provide an explanation for their positive tests. “Any argument that the NFL allowed Kevin and Pat to provide an explanation is a farce,” he said of the fact the two had a hearing in New York last winter.
David Valentini, who runs the Minneapolis-based law firm Valentini and Associates and has represented Vikings players on various legal matters, isn’t involved with this case but called this “a favorable jurisdiction” for the Williamses.
The matter now will be handled by Hennepin County District Judge Gary Larson, who issued the original temporary restraining order that halted the Williamses’ four-game suspensions. Ginsberg said he hopes to have a conference with Larson “as soon as possible” to try to set a schedule.
“I know Pat and Kevin are anxious to get this matter resolved as quickly as they can,” Ginsberg said. “I hope that Pat and Kevin’s professional lives are disrupted as little as possible. I’d like for it to be resolved either before training camp or at the end of next season but that’s up to Judge Larson to make that determination.”
Ginsberg would not comment on if he has had any settlement talks with the NFL but he did predict a trial will be likely. The Williamses’ lawsuit against the NFL that is seeking $10 million in damages also remains alive.
“I’m in favor of reaching a resolution as quickly as we can,” Ginsberg said. “Judge Magnuson said there were questions of fact that needed to be resolved and generally that means a trial is going to be necessary. I think the evidence easily could substantiate a finding now in Kevin and Pat’s favor. But judge’s are more inclined to hear the evidence before granting those sorts of motions.”
As for the case involving the three Saints players, NFLPA outside counsel Jeffrey Kessler said in a statement the union is exploring its options. “We are disappointed in the ruling and continue to believe that the NFL violated its fiduciary and health and safety obligations to the players,” Kessler said. “We will review the opinion with the players and their counsel and consider our appellate options.”
Reply
5-24-2009 @ 3:43PM
ken72864 said...
The writer of this article is a complete moron! Probably an overweight, pale nerd that never played organized sports, unless you count playstation!!!
Reply
5-25-2009 @ 3:33PM
bladsnp29 said...
why do you say that? cus of his opinion about the players and what the consequences should be? Because I, an athlete, totally agree with him. It's athletes like them that ruin sports for a lot of other athletes. I wouldn't even consider them athletes if they are taking steriods, more like pathetic bums.
5-24-2009 @ 4:54PM
Dave Johnson said...
Dan Graziano you apparently only read the head lines of the StarCap case and not the story. Cause if you had...you wouldn't have spewed forth the ill repute that you did. You are a disgrace and should NOT be allowed to be a writer. It was just an opinion (of mis-information) and we all know the saying with that
Get your damn facts straight.
Reply
5-25-2009 @ 2:01AM
YouFaceTheTick said...
Never get why anyone cares if players use drugs. I love the NFL. Love it. And I don't care if every player is juiced. It's not relevant.
Reply
5-25-2009 @ 9:02AM
gjuiced said...
Did you even read the ruling....
What kind of hack job are you..People skim the headlines.. oh yeah.. another bunch of cheaters...
Consider a new line of work...
Reply
5-25-2009 @ 6:42PM
Stoney said...
You idiots. Talk to Cory Stringer's wife and Lyle Alzado's kid ask them if drugs are OH KAY!
Reply
5-27-2009 @ 12:23AM
YouFaceTheTick said...
So two guys out of thousands who have played professionally are your evidence that drugs are bad? There are over 1500 guys in the NFL at any given moment. If 1% died per year from steroid abuse do you think - if roids were legal - the other 99% would use?