NFL Suspends 6 for Starcaps

[denverYooper]

Yeah, review the facts. That's it. I doubt he's a Vikings fan. I mean, he's only lived and practiced in St. Paul for what, 30 years? 40?

http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=1461

Why wouldn't he just issue an immediate injunction then?


Too obvious I suppose....

Yeah, he's no spring chicken, he's not gonna blow it by doing such a thing .

[Rastak]

Here's the scoop, I guess he was ripping on both.

A federal judge in St. Paul ruled today that five NFL players--including Minnesota Vikings Pat and Kevin Williams-- can continue practicing and playing.

U.S. District Court Judge Paul Magnuson is blocking the NFL from suspending the five players for violating league's anti-doping policy. He said he's going to take some time before he issues an order on the broader underlying issues of jurisdiction and the NFL's drug testing procedures.

During the hearing, Magnuson aggressively questioned lawyers for all sides in the dispute over whether the Williamses should be allowed to continue to play despite testing positive for a banned diuretic.

The NFL Players Association and Peter Ginsberg, a lawyer for the Williamses, wanted the players to be allowed to continue to suit up. NFL lawyer Daniel Nash wanted the judge to keep a four-game suspension in place. Lawyers for the Vikings say there is no harm in allowing them to continue to play while a further examination of legal matters plays out in court. But Nash said the NFL followed the rules under the drug policy and the players simply don't like the suspension.

"The fundamental issue is they are disappointed they lost," Nash said.

The NFL sought to dissolve a temporary restraining order obtained Wednesday by the Williamses that allows them to play.

That NFLPA lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Williamses and New Orleans Saints players Charles Grant, Deuce McAllister and Will Smith. The five players took a weight-loss supplement called StarCaps. The supplement contained the banned product bumetanide, which was not listed as an ingredient. The players claim the league has known about the presence of bumetanide in StarCaps since 2006 and failed to warn its players.

The NFL, which maintains a list of approved products, has steadfastly claimed it is not obligated to issue warnings about specific products..

The give-and-take with the judge and the lawyers was aggressive throughout the hearing.
When Magnuson specifically pointed out there is no allegation of steroid use here, Nash balked. "We don't know," Nash said. Magnuson responded firmly, "You know. You know you can't make allegations of use of steroids," he said.

On the issue of warnings, Nash said the NFL didn't tell players about the substance in StarCaps because then players might get the impression another supplement was OK because it isn't on a banned list. He emphasized that the drug policy is "replete with warnings about supplements" and players "are responsible for what's in their body."

Ginsberg, the lawyer for the Williamses, said both players called the NFL hotline to inquire about StarCaps. "They got no answer," he said.

The union lawsuit does not include Houston Texans long snapper Bryan Pittman, who was also suspended Tuesday. David Cornwell, Pittman's lawyer, told the Associated Press that his client isn't included because his circumstances "differ substantially from the men who used StarCaps."

[CaptainKickass]

Every case the NFLPA has brought against the NFL (that I know of) has been in federal court by the way.

I don't even understand how this situation qualifies as a "case".

Policy says "x" players chose "y" = potential suspension.

The reason Gravy hasn't been suspended yet is because he's being lazy. Key word here "yet".

And I further fail to understand how the hell it got to the federal level so quickly. It's not like Joe Schmoe can get a case heard by the feds that fast.

[PackerTimer]

This is so stupid. Why does he need more time to read the list of approved supplements to see if StarCaps are on it or not?

The NFL's fault in the matter is by not specifically telling players that if what they are taking is not on the approved list given by the NFL, and they are caught, they will be suspended regardless of whether it contains a banned ingredient or not. Take ONLY what the NFL says you can take. Eliminate the "take anything else at your own risk" part of it completely and just say that taking anything else is a violation of NFL policy. Leave no gray area whatsoever.

This is should not be a legal matter. The NFL is more strict about what it's players take than the law is about what any joe schmoe can take. The NFL should be able to enforce policy without the federal government intervening. What the hell is this doing in a federal court in the first place?

Because it isn't as simple as you'd like to make it. The policy is crystal clear yet one player was never suspended. In addition, questions remain. Did the NFL act in bad faith by not telling the players (and the FDA for that matter), instead choosing a more general warning when they has SPECIFIC knowledge?

These are some of the things that will be considered I would guess.


Let me ask you this, if the policy is so crystal clear why did the first player not get suspended?


It's in Federal court because it's labor law and the judge may determine the NFL acted in bad faith in the CBA.

The Norris-LaGuardia Act says otherwise.

Shoot me a link, I'd like to see that.


edit: Every case the NFLPA has brought against the NFL (that I know of) has been in federal court by the way.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode29/usc_sec_29_00000101----000-.html

I was having a little fun with you in that other post. There are other circumstances that can make 29 USCA 101 less cut and dry than the language in the above link.

But, I do tend to agree with the NFL on this one, even after taking out the fact that losing the Williams wall sure would help whatever slim chances the Packers have left at the playoffs.

[Rastak]

Every case the NFLPA has brought against the NFL (that I know of) has been in federal court by the way.

I don't even understand how this situation qualifies as a "case".

Policy says "x" players chose "y" = potential suspension.

The reason Gravy hasn't been suspended yet is because he's being lazy. Key word here "yet".

And I further fail to understand how the hell it got to the federal level so quickly. It's not like Joe Schmoe can get a case heard by the feds that fast.

When someone feels like they got fucked by their employer they can file a lawsuit and it's then called a "case". If it completely lacks merit it gets immediately tossed.

I guess this does not lack merit to the person that matters most. The federal judge hearing the arguments.

[PackerTimer]

Every case the NFLPA has brought against the NFL (that I know of) has been in federal court by the way.

I don't even understand how this situation qualifies as a "case".

Policy says "x" players chose "y" = potential suspension.

The reason Gravy hasn't been suspended yet is because he's being lazy. Key word here "yet".

And I further fail to understand how the hell it got to the federal level so quickly. It's not like Joe Schmoe can get a case heard by the feds that fast.

When someone feels like they got fucked by their employer they can file a lawsuit and it's then called a "case". If it completely lacks merit it gets immediately tossed.

I guess this does not lack merit to the person that matters most. The federal judge hearing the arguments.

I tend to agree with you. Despite my personal feelings about the law involved a federally appointed judge wouldn't hear a case like this unless he sees some merit in it.

[denverYooper]

Here's the scoop, I guess he was ripping on both.

Oh yah. That's a Magnuson for ya.

(full disclosure: my grandmother was a Magnuson)

[CaptainKickass]

they can file a lawsuit and it's then called a "case"[/quote]

Sorry Ras -

Can you dumb that down for us little people here? I mean, maybe use some laymans terms or perhaps you could use pictures and word bubbles.

Please learn us good.

[Rastak]

Hearing scheduled for later in December....from the Red Star:

Report: Injunction extended
December 11th, 2008 – 4:07 PM by Judd Zulgad

This story just moved on the Associated Press wire. Obviously, Kevin and Pat Williams will continue to play for at least the next two weeks.

Here is the AP story

A Minnesota judge has extended his preliminary injunction against the NFL’s suspension of five players for violating the league’s anti-doping policy. In his ruling Thursday, U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson asked both parties to propose a schedule by Dec. 22 to file pleadings in the case. That means the players are cleared to play for at least the next two weeks.

Kevin Williams and Pat Williams of the Vikings and Charles Grant, Deuce McAllister and Will Smith of the New Orleans Saints were suspended last week for four games each. They tested positive for a banned diuretic in the dietary supplement StarCaps. The union argued the NFL didn’t properly inform players about what it knew about the product. The NFL’s attorneys argued that that claim, and others, had been considered and rejected in a process set out by the league’s collective bargaining agreement.

[Freak Out]

Should work out better for the Packers if they were suspended the first four game of next season anyway as Harv pointed out.

[denverYooper]

Should work out better for the Packers if they were suspended the first four game of next season anyway as Harv pointed out.

Yep.

[Rastak]

Should work out better for the Packers if they were suspended the first four game of next season anyway as Harv pointed out.

Two things, I'd say it's 50-50 they ever serve a suspension. Second thing is, it works out 100x better for Minnesota to have it be the first 4 games. They'd have all offseason and all camp to get a plan in place for those first 4 games.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

Atleast we only have another 2-3 years of those fat fucks being together.

[Pacopete4]

Should work out better for the Packers if they were suspended the first four game of next season anyway as Harv pointed out.

Two things, I'd say it's 50-50 they ever serve a suspension. Second thing is, it works out 100x better for Minnesota to have it be the first 4 games. They'd have all offseason and all camp to get a plan in place for those first 4 games.

what sort of plan can u possibly have for missing 2 of the best DT's in the game for the first 4 games of the season? It hurts Ras.. trust me as u will be 1 and done this post season if u even get in

[Rastak]

Should work out better for the Packers if they were suspended the first four game of next season anyway as Harv pointed out.

Two things, I'd say it's 50-50 they ever serve a suspension. Second thing is, it works out 100x better for Minnesota to have it be the first 4 games. They'd have all offseason and all camp to get a plan in place for those first 4 games.

what sort of plan can u possibly have for missing 2 of the best DT's in the game for the first 4 games of the season? It hurts Ras.. trust me as u will be 1 and done this post season if u even get in

For one thing you manage your roster based on the fact. In addition, you schedule reps all camp knowing ahead of time what the situation will be.

WAY better than end of year.