Blue Bombers Forum
July 13, 2020, 07:42:42 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Would Andrew Harris Be This Mad If He Was Guilty?  (Read 4627 times)
booch
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2864


« Reply #45 on: December 18, 2019, 06:49:05 PM »

Harris haters and Riderfans are never going to let it go or forget it happened.
Yeah I see in a post there now they say Augustine is an obvious juicer lol
Logged
BlueInCgy
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1456


« Reply #46 on: December 18, 2019, 07:17:51 PM »

Yeah I see in a post there now they say Augustine is an obvious juicer lol

In the same thread where they're whining about signing LaFrance when Augustine's a potential FA I assume?
Logged
booch
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2864


« Reply #47 on: December 18, 2019, 07:25:49 PM »

In the same thread where they're whining about signing LaFrance when Augustine's a potential FA I assume?

I believe that is the one correct
Logged
blue_gold_84
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 29090


GC107 Champions!


« Reply #48 on: December 18, 2019, 07:53:51 PM »

The whole thing should have been over after he served his 2 game suspension, but here we are months later rehashing it. Time to let it go.

If this is your view, feel free to excuse yourself from the discussion. I agree: this should've been over long ago, but it isn't. The media made sure to pour enough fuel on it.

Harris haters and Riderfans are never going to let it go or forget it happened.

Good thing their opinions are irrelevant, much like that garbage dump of a forum.
Logged

#forthew
#gotthew

No drought about it.
Still can't fix stupid. And you apparently can't quarantine, it either.
TecnoGenius
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4354


« Reply #49 on: December 19, 2019, 03:28:22 AM »

The whole thing should have been over after he served his 2 game suspension, but here we are months later rehashing it. Time to let it go.

This.  Doesn't matter if he "did the crime or not" because he's now done the time.  The time is the same no matter what Harris' intentions.  It's done, over.  If Ridersfans think it's not enough "time" then get Ambrosie to stiffen the penalties.  But you can't retroactively apply them to Harris.

(P.S. I believe AH33 and booch.)

Harris haters and Riderfans are never going to let it go or forget it happened.

Yes, that is the problem.  I won't repeat some of the gossip they are saying there, since some people here don't understand the difference between reporting their discussions vs holding their opinions.  But some over there hold very nasty opinions of AH's entire career.  Funny how they don't apply the same standard to 2018-suspended Thigpen.

Does someone have a list of all the recent (say 5 or 10 years) failed drug test CFL players?  Or can we compile one from memory?  Thigpen, Banks, Bourussa, AH... might help to illustrate the hypocrisy, as from what I can tell every other player has been forgiven.

Funny how Banks', league MOP, reputation and legacy are now apparently spotless, and all sins forgiven, after his 2016 failed drug test... And Bourussa got a CFLPA award on the same year he failed his drug test!  Anyone singling out Harris as somehow worse than all the other PED-positives is just looking to rip on Harris, and this just makes a convenient excuse.

I say we, as the WPG fans, should just drop the whole topic.  Let Ridersfans be the only ones harping on it.  Why add fuel to the fire?  The only way it can get put behind him/us is to let it fade away into the sunset.
Logged

Never go full Rider!
Big Daddy
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1440


« Reply #50 on: December 19, 2019, 04:07:11 AM »

I've read all the posts here, and a lot of good points.  Booch - thank you for your insight into the world of supplements and the cfl.  It really does shed some light.

I keep reading how the facts are he took a substance, took a chance, got caught, that's it.  Doesn't matter if it would help or not.  Doesn't matter the level of substance detected.  It as there, he should have known it was a risk.

I think booch covered a lot of this.

Something I haven't seen so far - AH was tested a week (I believe - very shortly before the positive test) and this was negative.  This is significant as it shows the substance was only a trace amount shown on the one occasion, and not right before.  Clearly not used extensively.  

I am medical - trace amounts means it is either showing a long time after it was used as levels in the body slowly decrease over time  (so it could have only been used at an effective level a long time before) or it was taken at a dose that had no benefit whatsoever.  The fact that a test right before was negative proves the latter.

This was taken by accident.  There was no intent to enhance performance by using this substance at the time he tested positive.  Period.  If it is in trace amounts on the one occasion he tested positive and not a week before, he did not take it at a level that could have been beneficial when he tested positive.  Is that clear?

One more point.  I suggest reading Paul Friesen's article as to why he didn't think AH should've been excluded from voting.  It makes sense.  The rules are clear, if you test positive then you are suspended for 2 games.  That's it.  Nothing banning from awards.  He sat for 2 games, and he still dominated his position.  His numbers showed he should not have been snubbed like he was.  Based on the rules he stood above others, and the media chose to take a stand and vote against him.  

I believe some of them when they wrote their apologist diatribe explaining why they chose to vote against him.  But as the rules are in the cfl (not eliminating anyone that tested positive), they clearly decided to make the vote about themselves grandstanding against cheating, and not about the cfl.  Not saying they are wrong, just saying they are not sticking to the criteria for these votes.  So yes, they went outside the criteria.

AH did not knowingly cheat based on these results - unless he is an idiot that went against all scientific data and somehow believed taking tiny traces of a banned substance would be beneficial to him to the point he would risk being caught.  I'm pretty sure he isn't an idiot.

You can argue the factors of taking a substance not on the approved list.  But suggesting he may have taken this banned substance knowingly is worse than conjecture - it goes against the facts.



Logged
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 8060



« Reply #51 on: December 19, 2019, 02:00:59 PM »

Here's the story we are to believe, based mostly on conjecture, not facts.

Everyone is taking supplements. Most are are taking unapproved supplements. Harris is the only one in years who got a 'contaminated' batch in a completely unregulated industry, then got tested or at least the only one using this excuse. It's not his fault because it could have happened to anyone, but didn't. No intent. Just the worst luck of any CFL player in the last few years.
Logged

Winnipeg Blue Bombers - 2019 Grey Cup Champs.
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 21906



« Reply #52 on: December 19, 2019, 02:31:34 PM »

I've read all the posts here, and a lot of good points.  Booch - thank you for your insight into the world of supplements and the cfl.  It really does shed some light.

I keep reading how the facts are he took a substance, took a chance, got caught, that's it.  Doesn't matter if it would help or not.  Doesn't matter the level of substance detected.  It as there, he should have known it was a risk.

I think booch covered a lot of this.

Something I haven't seen so far - AH was tested a week (I believe - very shortly before the positive test) and this was negative.  This is significant as it shows the substance was only a trace amount shown on the one occasion, and not right before.  Clearly not used extensively.  

I am medical - trace amounts means it is either showing a long time after it was used as levels in the body slowly decrease over time  (so it could have only been used at an effective level a long time before) or it was taken at a dose that had no benefit whatsoever.  The fact that a test right before was negative proves the latter.

This was taken by accident.  There was no intent to enhance performance by using this substance at the time he tested positive.  Period.  If it is in trace amounts on the one occasion he tested positive and not a week before, he did not take it at a level that could have been beneficial when he tested positive.  Is that clear?

One more point.  I suggest reading Paul Friesen's article as to why he didn't think AH should've been excluded from voting.  It makes sense.  The rules are clear, if you test positive then you are suspended for 2 games.  That's it.  Nothing banning from awards.  He sat for 2 games, and he still dominated his position.  His numbers showed he should not have been snubbed like he was.  Based on the rules he stood above others, and the media chose to take a stand and vote against him.  

I believe some of them when they wrote their apologist diatribe explaining why they chose to vote against him.  But as the rules are in the cfl (not eliminating anyone that tested positive), they clearly decided to make the vote about themselves grandstanding against cheating, and not about the cfl.  Not saying they are wrong, just saying they are not sticking to the criteria for these votes.  So yes, they went outside the criteria.

AH did not knowingly cheat based on these results - unless he is an idiot that went against all scientific data and somehow believed taking tiny traces of a banned substance would be beneficial to him to the point he would risk being caught.  I'm pretty sure he isn't an idiot.

You can argue the factors of taking a substance not on the approved list.  But suggesting he may have taken this banned substance knowingly is worse than conjecture - it goes against the facts.

I agree with this as the most likely scenario. However, the only odd thing in my mind is that this means he took a new/different supplement between tests and in the middle of the season. How often do athletes change that regime mid-season? And if he did, surely it would be pretty obvious which it was. If it was simply a new container of some supplement he always takes, then he's an extremely unlikely guy and no wonder people would doubt that explanation.
Logged
booch
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2864


« Reply #53 on: December 19, 2019, 03:09:44 PM »

I've read all the posts here, and a lot of good points.  Booch - thank you for your insight into the world of supplements and the cfl.  It really does shed some light.

I keep reading how the facts are he took a substance, took a chance, got caught, that's it.  Doesn't matter if it would help or not.  Doesn't matter the level of substance detected.  It as there, he should have known it was a risk.

I think booch covered a lot of this.

Something I haven't seen so far - AH was tested a week (I believe - very shortly before the positive test) and this was negative.  This is significant as it shows the substance was only a trace amount shown on the one occasion, and not right before.  Clearly not used extensively.  

I am medical - trace amounts means it is either showing a long time after it was used as levels in the body slowly decrease over time  (so it could have only been used at an effective level a long time before) or it was taken at a dose that had no benefit whatsoever.  The fact that a test right before was negative proves the latter.

This was taken by accident.  There was no intent to enhance performance by using this substance at the time he tested positive.  Period.  If it is in trace amounts on the one occasion he tested positive and not a week before, he did not take it at a level that could have been beneficial when he tested positive.  Is that clear?

One more point.  I suggest reading Paul Friesen's article as to why he didn't think AH should've been excluded from voting.  It makes sense.  The rules are clear, if you test positive then you are suspended for 2 games.  That's it.  Nothing banning from awards.  He sat for 2 games, and he still dominated his position.  His numbers showed he should not have been snubbed like he was.  Based on the rules he stood above others, and the media chose to take a stand and vote against him.  

I believe some of them when they wrote their apologist diatribe explaining why they chose to vote against him.  But as the rules are in the cfl (not eliminating anyone that tested positive), they clearly decided to make the vote about themselves grandstanding against cheating, and not about the cfl.  Not saying they are wrong, just saying they are not sticking to the criteria for these votes.  So yes, they went outside the criteria.

AH did not knowingly cheat based on these results - unless he is an idiot that went against all scientific data and somehow believed taking tiny traces of a banned substance would be beneficial to him to the point he would risk being caught.  I'm pretty sure he isn't an idiot.

You can argue the factors of taking a substance not on the approved list.  But suggesting he may have taken this banned substance knowingly is worse than conjecture - it goes against the facts.





well said...nice to see another person who understands these things, obviously knows what a drugs half life is..clinical dose to be beneficial..etc..etc...and I agree with all you wrote
Logged
booch
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2864


« Reply #54 on: December 19, 2019, 03:16:52 PM »

I agree with this as the most likely scenario. However, the only odd thing in my mind is that this means he took a new/different supplement between tests and in the middle of the season. How often do athletes change that regime mid-season? And if he did, surely it would be pretty obvious which it was. If it was simply a new container of some supplement he always takes, then he's an extremely unlikely guy and no wonder people would doubt that explanation.

Not necessarily true actually...we recommend prior to each serving of a supplement...especially a powdered one mixed in a drink that you shake the every living heck outta it to ensure it is mixed thoroughly and there is no settling.

I have experienced first hand the difference in a pre-workout for example where it had settled and it basically had no effect, or not the effect it was supposed to, and yeah guys will switch things up mid-season...thats not uncommon

Also for the most part store employees don't know much if anything about their products other than what you can read on the label, and comments from customers who have used them..so take their advice/comments at face value. The supplement he got dinged on was from a health food store as opposed to a Popeyes or GNC...and not to to be taken as truth or anything but I actually think it was a supplement moreso for his bedroom performance not for training...
Logged
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 29366



« Reply #55 on: December 19, 2019, 04:20:29 PM »

Not necessarily true actually...we recommend prior to each serving of a supplement...especially a powdered one mixed in a drink that you shake the every living heck outta it to ensure it is mixed thoroughly and there is no settling.

I have experienced first hand the difference in a pre-workout for example where it had settled and it basically had no effect, or not the effect it was supposed to, and yeah guys will switch things up mid-season...thats not uncommon

Also for the most part store employees don't know much if anything about their products other than what you can read on the label, and comments from customers who have used them..so take their advice/comments at face value. The supplement he got dinged on was from a health food store as opposed to a Popeyes or GNC...and not to to be taken as truth or anything but I actually think it was a supplement moreso for his bedroom performance not for training...

Really?  I hadn't heard this item being reported... I didn't realize they had released any information about the source of the suspected contamination.  If that is true, it explains a lot...

As to the other players who have been suspended for violations of this policy, how many were legit cheating, and how many were suspected contamination?  Just curious.
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Jesse
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 13680



« Reply #56 on: December 19, 2019, 05:18:54 PM »

Really?  I hadn't heard this item being reported... I didn't realize they had released any information about the source of the suspected contamination.  If that is true, it explains a lot...

As to the other players who have been suspended for violations of this policy, how many were legit cheating, and how many were suspected contamination?  Just curious.

That doesn't explain a lot. What do you even mean?

And I don't know if you heard, but it's not cheating gif players don't intend to do it and none of them know how it got in their diet.
Logged

My wife is amazing!
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 29366



« Reply #57 on: December 19, 2019, 05:53:45 PM »

That doesn't explain a lot. What do you even mean?

And I don't know if you heard, but it's not cheating gif players don't intend to do it and none of them know how it got in their diet.

If he bought a supplement from a health food store, rather than a supplement store, I can understand the staff not knowing the source the way a supplement store would. 

As to "intent", some players are actually juicing with the intent to cheat.  Some (like I believe Harris did) accidentally ingest an item in contravention of the rules, and are subject to the penalty.  Big difference between the two...
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
The Zipp
Global Moderator
*****
Posts: 13584


Who gives a flying Buck...


« Reply #58 on: December 19, 2019, 06:20:09 PM »

Not necessarily true actually...we recommend prior to each serving of a supplement...especially a powdered one mixed in a drink that you shake the every living heck outta it to ensure it is mixed thoroughly and there is no settling.

I have experienced first hand the difference in a pre-workout for example where it had settled and it basically had no effect, or not the effect it was supposed to, and yeah guys will switch things up mid-season...thats not uncommon

Also for the most part store employees don't know much if anything about their products other than what you can read on the label, and comments from customers who have used them..so take their advice/comments at face value. The supplement he got dinged on was from a health food store as opposed to a Popeyes or GNC...and not to to be taken as truth or anything but I actually think it was a supplement moreso for his bedroom performance not for training...

yes it was a male geared supplement...that was indicated in the initial reporting.  Can't remember if it was a brick and mortar store or a website (I don't think they said but I could have forgotten)
Logged
GCn19
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 24796


« Reply #59 on: December 19, 2019, 06:33:07 PM »

Listen, there are ultra reliable places to get your supplements. They are expensive. There are also the supplements that a lot of gym rats take that are more dubious and cheaper. In all likelihood, AH had a supplement recommended to him by what he thought was a reliable source and it ended up being a sketchy supplement. Happens all the time. Gym rats don't care what is in their supplements because they don't have to pee test. AH made the mistake of using what was likely a highly effective but dubious supplement and he should have researched it more as very rarely does a supplement come back tainted on a one time basis.

Also, as Booch alludes to, there is a chance that he was taking meds for increased sexual performance. Very common for those that use supplements to buy these, but if so, he should have known that these type of supplements in particular are known for testing highly for tainted substances.

Bottom line is that anyone who knows more than a thimble full of knowledge about steroids knows that no one in their right mind would take big stan unless you were trying to win a bodybuilding competition that has no testing. It is probably the easiest steroid to detect, hardest to hide and is one of the more expensive steroids that there is and has very specific use to add extreme muscle mass quickly.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2019, 06:37:02 PM by GCn19 » Logged

Some people take this forum way too seriously.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!