Jump to content

GDT - Banjo Bowl - Riders @ the Champs

JCon
in Blue Bomber Discussion

Featured Replies

  • Replies 684
  • Views 40k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Most Popular Posts

  • Booch
    Booch

    Look at all the Rider games and the DLine offsides they get...it's astonishing...that..and all the selfish undisciplined play/penalties...that's a poorly coached team ..inmates running the asylum ther

  • bearpants
    bearpants

    Just want to point something out on the first half melee… I didn’t catch it all during the game… saw the Harris helmet rip after the fact… should he have been kicked out? Maybe…. But it seems a lot of

  • Noeller
    Noeller

    I just wanted to take a second to say, again, how thankful I am that someone like Booch, who has infinitely more knowledge about the CFL than any of us ever will, participates on this message board. I

comment_520480
1 minute ago, Rod Black said:

2 games suspended for “I couldn’t make pee pee” is cheaper than 4 games for juicing. 

I believe first time violators only get 2 game suspensions. Glad he got the max suspension for a first time violation, but next time he says he can't pee I hope the penalty increases or this will be a bad precedent to set

    comment_520503

    I've tested hundreds of individuals through my workplace over the years. 

    Invariably they are dirty when they use the can't pee defence. What they don't mention in the article is whether the CFL mandates that the player be witnessed while urinating (to eliminate using a concealed sample in a eyedrop bottle or "Whizzinator" for example).... which can lead to the "shy bladder" argument. Of course this only flys for so long before nature insists. You also don't need that much pee to test. 

    It's still a bizarre situation, as any adulterant in the sample won't disappear in the short number of hours  that would pass before any healthy individual would need to urinate. 

    Its almost as if they think the tester will forget about the test. Ha  

     

    comment_520505

    re...Cadwallader

     

    " Though little is known about the historical Cadwaladr, he became a mythical redeemer figure in Welsh culture. He is a prominent character in the romanticstories of Geoffrey of Monmouth, where he is portrayed as the last in an ancient line to hold the title King of Britain. "

     

    descended from a king.    put him in!

    1 hour ago, Rod Black said:

    2 games suspended for “I couldn’t make pee pee” is cheaper than 4 games for juicing. 

    from my childhood, I remember " mum, I havta" , opposite problem. hopping  around holding private parts.

    Edited by Mark F

    comment_520507
    9 minutes ago, Pete Catan's Ghost said:

    I've tested hundreds of individuals through my workplace over the years. 

    Invariably they are dirty when they use the can't pee defence. What they don't mention in the article is whether the CFL mandates that the player be witnessed while urinating (to eliminate using a concealed sample in a eyedrop bottle or "Whizzinator" for example).... which can lead to the "shy bladder" argument. Of course this only flys for so long before nature insists. You also don't need that much pee to test. 

    It's still a bizarre situation, as any adulterant in the sample won't disappear in the short number of hours  that would pass before any healthy individual would need to urinate. 

    Its almost as if they think the tester will forget about the test. Ha  

     

    I did not know this. Thank you. 

    comment_520509
    36 minutes ago, Pete Catan's Ghost said:

    I've tested hundreds of individuals through my workplace over the years. 

    Invariably they are dirty when they use the can't pee defence. What they don't mention in the article is whether the CFL mandates that the player be witnessed while urinating (to eliminate using a concealed sample in a eyedrop bottle or "Whizzinator" for example).... which can lead to the "shy bladder" argument. Of course this only flys for so long before nature insists. You also don't need that much pee to test. 

    It's still a bizarre situation, as any adulterant in the sample won't disappear in the short number of hours  that would pass before any healthy individual would need to urinate. 

    Its almost as if they think the tester will forget about the test. Ha  

     

    About a month ago I went for a blood test, and completely forgot about the urine sample too. I had emptied the old bladder at home a few times cause I didn't want to use the bathroom in the clinic and knew I'd be waiting for a while....they then told me they wanted two urine samples. It took me a minute but I got it done. He's 100% hiding something. 

    comment_520513

    It is strange for him to withhold, since he knows the penalty is the same. And it’s not like a DUI where you refuse to blow and get the same charge as if you blew over .08. In that case, a higher reading (more than double) automatically becomes aggravating at sentencing, so I am aware of cops who say if they were to get caught under suspicion of driving drunk, always blow if you think you are under or on the line, but absolutely refuse if you know you are going over, to avoid the extra punishment of a super high reading.  Since there is no extra suspension derived from higher amounts in the system, why avoid the test? Unless he wanted to go the Andrew Harris route of “only trace amounts, so I can claim inadvertent tainted supplement with plausible deniability”, and figured recent usage would make that claim more dubious than it already is. 

    Edited by TrueBlue4ever

    comment_520521

    It could also depend on how many different panels you are using (types of drug groups you are testing for), because very broad testing can be quite expensive. Cocaine, Cannabis, Benzos, Amphetamines, and Opiates are types of panels.

    For example, I would not be testing all football players across the board for opiate use as many would come back positive due to the Rx pain killers that many are on. (There are many types of opiates and certain panels could show up positive for opiates whether the individual shot Heroin, ate too much poppeyseed loaf, or used Rx oxycontin) I also may not test for Cannabis if it wasn't explicitly prohibited as a PED because I may not want to open that can of worms (since many players smoke weed and it is now legal.)

    Different companies/groups have different rules. The CFL, addictions treatment centres, and even the Federal Dept. of Transport have different dos and don'ts. for their employees.

    I have no idea what type or number of panels you would need for PEDs. I'm guessing it is quite extensive.

     

    Edited by Pete Catan's Ghost

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    Go to topic listing