Just now on Dan Patrick Show (1 Viewer)

Guitarzan

Banned
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
15,575
Reaction score
2,991
Age
63
Location
Appalachia
Offline
Rick Riley from SI just said that the NFL's treatment of Thomas is unfair. He said the test probably needs adjustment. Patrick agreed.
 
Good to hear that, but too bad it won't help us any.
 
It is nice to hear that kind of talk. However, like everyone is saying, we are without him for 4 games.
 
To play devil's advocate, their presumptions are kind of unfair.

Due to the confedentiality agreement, the NFL can't come out with "their" side of the story.

What would very telling would be either an ADA lawsuit by Thomas or some revision to the testing program in the offseason agreed to by the NFL and the union. In that scenario, I would have to believe that Thomas may possibly have gotten the shaft.

But like many posters have stated in the other threads, if that doesn't materialize that sends a clear signal as well.
 
If it was really in his medication then that is wrong and th NFLPA should have a stronger voice. Heck maybe even the Ameican Disabilities Act should prevail.

HOWEVER, Thomas has had Asthma all his life and why is it just now he has tested positive? Why has it not shown up before?

I am more believing that the Asthma medication was an excuse the saints were trying to use but the real reason for the positive test is something else.
 
I want an extra draft pick, for Hollis to be exonerated and the NFL to be found to owe punitive damages to him and the team as the result of a civil juries verdict. is that asking too much. I really think not.
 
If it was really in his medication then that is wrong and th NFLPA should have a stronger voice. Heck maybe even the Ameican Disabilities Act should prevail.

HOWEVER, Thomas has had Asthma all his life and why is it just now he has tested positive? Why has it not shown up before?

I am more believing that the Asthma medication was an excuse the saints were trying to use but the real reason for the positive test is something else.

The steroid that got him into trouble wasn't added to the list until June of 2006. his doctor prescribed it.
 
If it was really in his medication then that is wrong and th NFLPA should have a stronger voice. Heck maybe even the Ameican Disabilities Act should prevail.

...

I've seen comments posted in regards to the ADA in several of the HT threads. Also mentions of OSHA, HIPAA, and other federally-mandated acts to protect workers from harm, disclosure of personal info, etc. Does anyone know if these apply to NFL players ? If so, seems to me the standard NFL injury report violates HIPAA, but maybe the NFLPA has the authority to waive some of these laws for their players ? :shrug:
 
Saints DT Thomas suspended by NFL
Medication allegedly contains banned substance
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
By Jimmy Smith
Saints defensive tackle Hollis Thomas has been suspended by the NFL for four games because, he said, one of the many asthma medications he takes contains a steroidal substance that is banned by the league.
The suspension, without pay, takes effect immediately, but Thomas would be eligible for reinstatement for the postseason should the Saints qualify. The suspension is mandatory after a first positive test, according to the league's collective bargaining agreement.
Thomas tested positive for clenbuterol, which is a Beta-2 agonist, part of a daily prescription regimen that helps facilitate his breathing and allows him to partake in the physical activity necessary to play professional football


http://www.nola.com/saints/t-p/index.ssf?/base/sports-2/1165387743164820.xml&coll=1
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom