re: VolTiger -Kristian Fulton

No, I'm saying the very moment that the tester saw him pour the other urine out of the specimen cup and down the drain and assumed he was going to try to cheat the test, the whole process should have stopped and he should have been given a failed test automatically. Instead, he was still allowed to go forward with the test. A test in which he passed. But he was given a 2 year suspension based up "cheating a test". It should have never gotten that far.

No one does fully I don't think. There's lots of grey areas in the rules apparently. Hence our push to have the ruling changed, and their re-opening of the case.

Guilty of carrying gun where it did is not allowed. Damn.

quote:

---

Ahhh. So the fact that the tester saw him pour the “fake specimen” out there was no actual attempt at cheating. Much like if they had just caught him with “fake specimen” prior to even taking the test. You can’t prove that he was actually going to cheat if he never turns in a “fake specimen”?

I don’t fully understand all the rules behind this.

---

I dont know what the new evidence that his lawyer is bringing forth but one thing that was discussed here earlier is that in a court of law a sample is not a sample until that seal is applied and chain of custody is signed. So nobody knows if that standard does or should apply here but it makes for good argument. That point makes it a plausible that if the NCAA does not re evaluate the case then he has the option of going to court to get an injunction to suspend the suspension while it could be processed in the courts. Going to court opens Pandora's box for the NCAA and their penalties as they affect a persons ability to market their skills for the NFL...

quote:

---

I hate how everyone is getting fired up that he may get to play this year. There is no way the NCAA is going to budge on their original decision.

---

Someone had to ruin the party. Why the hell would the NCAA reopen the case just to give him the same ruling? If you're not considering a change in ruling then why in the hell are you (NCAA) giving this case the time of day again? Think about it dude....

I open this thread, and I see so much speculation. People seem to know the facts, but everyone is just guessing about what the argument is.

I'm a litigator. I do this shite every day. You have to know the rules to know how to apply the rules to the facts, and then you can form your arguments.

It's a simple issue really. Which Rule applies, Rule 3.3 or Rule 3.4:

3.3. Breach of Protocol. A student-athlete will be in
breach of protocol and treated as if there was a positive
test for a banned substance other than an illicit drug if
the student-athlete:
• Fails to arrive at the collection station without
justification as determined by Drug Free Sport;
• Fails to provide a urine specimen according
to collection procedures;
• Leaves the collection station without
authorization from the certified collector before
providing a specimen according to protocol; or
• Attempts to alter the integrity of the collection
process.
A breach of protocol will be documented by the
certified collector.

3.4. Tampering. A student-athlete who is involved in
a case of clearly observed tampering with an NCAA
drug-test sample, as documented by a drug-testing
crew member, shall be charged with the loss of a
minimum of two seasons of competition in all sports
and shall remain ineligible for all regular-season and
postseason competition during the time period
ending two calendar years (730 days) from the
date of the tampering.

No offense to VolTiger13.

[quote]I hate how everyone is getting fired up that he may get to play this year. There is no way the NCAA is going to budge on their original decision.[/quo

"Hope" is a wonderful thing. I chose to maintain hope as long as there is a chance of him being reinstated. I do believe that the NCAA is going to review the case in an objective manner.

I have hope!

3.4 sounds more like what happened.

Thanks for the heads up