PDA

View Full Version : another day goes by still no word...



underrated29
11-29-2007, 09:16 AM
So we have gone another day, and another week since travis's appeal, with still no word. PFW and espn, both said (on hunch not info) that since he has not recieved the news that he just might not get suspended.

Will the league hand down the suspension next week?
Will they maybe only suspend him for a few games to save face?
Will he be free and clear?

What do you think will happen? Why has the league taken so long to make a descision?

Tned
11-29-2007, 09:33 AM
So we have gone another day, and another week since travis's appeal, with still no word. PFW and espn, both said (on hunch not info) that since he has not recieved the news that he just might not get suspended.

Will the league hand down the suspension next week?
Will they maybe only suspend him for a few games to save face?
Will he be free and clear?

What do you think will happen? Why has the league taken so long to make a descision?

Yea, I am blown away at how long this has taken. I really thought the league would ignore his evidence (hair, lie detector) and suspend him based on the positive test, for fear of setting a precident that other players would follow. Regardless, I didn't expect the answer to take this long. I wonder if it has something to do with the court case/injunction that Henry followed, or if they simply aren't sure how to proceed.

While I am not sure the Broncos will keep him if he is suspended (some are sure he will be cut, but I haven't a clue), the fact that it has taken this long, means that he is lot for almost all of 2008, where from the Broncos perspective, it would have been better to have him suspended in week 5 or 6, and then get him back for the last 9 to 10 games next year.

omac
11-29-2007, 10:11 AM
I have a feeling he beat the suspension.

Can they prove that what was in his body was not 2nd hand smoke? Also, the Shanny's lie detector test and drug test results would seem to put the NFL's testing procedure in question, what with Henry not having his own testing representative present.

Lonestar
11-29-2007, 11:42 AM
I have a feeling he beat the suspension.

Can they prove that what was in his body was not 2nd hand smoke? Also, the Shanny's lie detector test and drug test results would seem to put the NFL's testing procedure in question, what with Henry not having his own testing representative present.


It does not matter second hand or if he took a toke.. He was in a situation he should not have been. That is the whole idea about Goodell cracking down.

I thought it was lawsuit that was being held/heard, did not know that the league could overturn said decision..

Tned
11-29-2007, 11:48 AM
It does not matter second hand or if he took a toke.. He was in a situation he should not have been. That is the whole idea about Goodell cracking down.

I thought it was lawsuit that was being held/heard, did not know that the league could overturn said decision..

As I understand it, the only thing the lawsuit did was make an attempt to not test the B sample without Henry's representative present. However, the NFL or NFLPA stated that they didn't need the B sample tested to take action, the league would take action on only a positive A sample, the B sample was simply a means for the player to prove that the A sample was a false positive.

The NFL has mantained that they can proceed, regardless of what happens in the court case.

Lonestar
11-29-2007, 11:57 AM
As I understand it, the only thing the lawsuit did was make an attempt to not test the B sample without Henry's representative present. However, the NFL or NFLPA stated that they didn't need the B sample tested to take action, the league would take action on only a positive A sample, the B sample was simply a means for the player to prove that the A sample was a false positive.

The NFL has mantained that they can proceed, regardless of what happens in the court case.

Thanks for letting me know.

I would think if they (NFL) violated the terms of the NFLPA that they would not be able to suspend him. He should have legal recourse, I was under the impression that was what the lawsuit was blocking and they were waiting on a judges decision not the NFL.

Tned
11-29-2007, 12:14 PM
Thanks for letting me know.

I would think if they (NFL) violated the terms of the NFLPA that they would not be able to suspend him. He should have legal recourse, I was under the impression that was what the lawsuit was blocking and they were waiting on a judges decision not the NFL.

From what I had read, but who knows if any of what was reported was completely accurate, Henry filed an injunction to prevent the NFL from testing his B sample, because the NFL said that Henry's expert could not be present. The reason his expert could not be present, was that the lab that was going to test his B sample (a different lab then tested his A sample) was affiliated with Henry's expert in some way. Therefore, the NFL said that Henry could bring another expert that was not affiliated with this second lab and provided him with a list of 'independent' experts to choose from.

Henry filed the lawsuit to try and prevent them from testing his B sample, and possibly (this was hard to determine from the reports) to attempt to get the court to force the NFL to allow Henry's expert to be present.

As I understand it, Henry's suit in no way tried to Block the NFL from taking action, make a claim that he was innocent, etc., it only related to blocking the NFL from testing his B sample, because they refused to allow his expert to be present.

The NFL (I am not sure who at the NFL, but this was reported as the NFL saying) then stated that they could and would take action based soley on an A sample, and that they don't need the B sample tested to confirm a positive test prior to suspending or taking other action.

Tned
11-29-2007, 12:22 PM
Court: Suffolk Civil Supreme
Index Number: 028834/2007
Case Name: HENRY, TRAVIS vs. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE
Track: Standard

Motion Information:

001 10/02/2007 PLAINT Preliminary Injuction 10/10/2007 Open: Before Justice: EMERSON

Based on the above, there has been no response to their motion for injuction. I did not find actual text of the injuction/motion.

silkamilkamonico
11-29-2007, 12:40 PM
Can they prove that what was in his body was not 2nd hand smoke?

Unfortunately for Henry, Henry would have to somehow prove that it is second hand smoke to get off on that, and that's near impossible. It likely is impossible to prove.

Lonestar
11-29-2007, 12:40 PM
There must be some reason for an A and B sample. I suspect that the NFLPA says before you can suspend for a year or whatever you must also test B. I understood that they did do this and that is the reason he was going to be suspended. I was lead to believe he was suing to block the results of this test since he rep was not present, thus violating the NFLPA.

Tned
11-29-2007, 12:59 PM
There must be some reason for an A and B sample. I suspect that the NFLPA says before you can suspend for a year or whatever you must also test B. I understood that they did do this and that is the reason he was going to be suspended. I was lead to believe he was suing to block the results of this test since he rep was not present, thus violating the NFLPA.

Again, I have no specific knowledge, only going by what the reporters are reporting, but they say that isn't the case.


From the league's perspective, Henry's "B" urine sample - players give two samples when tested - would not have to be tested in order for its disciplinary procedures to begin. The testing of the "B" sample is a usual option for the player, but not required in the policy.

...

But the league's testing policy shows the player may ask for the "B" sample to be tested - within two days of notification of a positive test from the "A" sample - but that the disciplinary policy, the sources said, is set in motion by the "A" sample.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/nfl/article/0,2777,DRMN_23918_5721614,00.html

broncos9697
11-29-2007, 01:11 PM
So we have gone another day, and another week since travis's appeal, with still no word. PFW and espn, both said (on hunch not info) that since he has not recieved the news that he just might not get suspended.

Will the league hand down the suspension next week?
Will they maybe only suspend him for a few games to save face?
Will he be free and clear?

What do you think will happen? Why has the league taken so long to make a descision?

I have been saying all along he will free and clear he passed the hair sample and the poly-graph which is 99.9% right.....
why fine him or anything he was in the right he did nothing wrong....
he's a bronco and will retire as a bronco

Tned
11-29-2007, 01:22 PM
A few more details. This is from the:

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE POLICY AND PROGRAM FOR SUBSTANCES OF ABUSE 2006



Section 3 e

Test of Split Sample: Any player Testing positive from the “A”
bottle of his split sample may, within two days of receiving
notification of his Positive Test, ask the Medical Advisor for a Test
of the other portion of his specimen from the “B” bottle. The “B”
bottle Test is to be performed within ten working days of such
request. The player may not be present at the “B” bottle Test, but,
at his own expense, he may be represented at the “B” bottle Test
by a qualified toxicologist not affiliated with a commercial
laboratory. The “B” bottle Test will be performed at the same
laboratory that did the original Test. The “B” bottle Test need only
show that the substance, revealed in the “A” bottle Test, is evident
to the “limits of detection” to confirm the results of the “A” bottle
Test.

http://www.nflpa.org/pdfs/RulesAndRegs/Drug_Policy_2006.pdf

underrated29
11-29-2007, 01:49 PM
NOT THAT I DONT LIKE WHere the discussion is going, but regardless of the NFLPA rules/ violations or proving he was indeed second hand or not. (all true which every has said).

The fact remains the same- Despite all of that, we havent heard anything yet. If the league were looking at the second sample, or the second hand smoke, we most likely would have heard something by now,jmo.

I think the longer we wait until we hear something the better, adn he might just be cleared.

Tned
11-29-2007, 02:01 PM
NOT THAT I DONT LIKE WHere the discussion is going, but regardless of the NFLPA rules/ violations or proving he was indeed second hand or not. (all true which every has said).

The fact remains the same- Despite all of that, we havent heard anything yet. If the league were looking at the second sample, or the second hand smoke, we most likely would have heard something by now,jmo.

I think the longer we wait until we hear something the better, adn he might just be cleared.

Or, the NFL is just confirming with their legal staff that the fact Henry has filed an injuntion regarding the B sample wouldn't come back to haunt them if they go ahead and suspend.

Lonestar
11-29-2007, 02:26 PM
I have been saying all along he will free and clear he passed the hair sample and the poly-graph which is 99.9% right.....
why fine him or anything he was in the right he did nothing wrong....
he's a bronco and will retire as a bronco

But neither of the above are in the NFLPA agreement protocol therefore they are not going to set precedent by allowing it for him.

Nor would the NFLPA want to open this up as it was negoiated in good faith with the NFL owners. To allow it would undercut the contract..

They do it for him everyone will try it.

Lonestar
11-29-2007, 02:32 PM
Or, the NFL is just confirming with their legal staff that the fact Henry has filed an injuntion regarding the B sample wouldn't come back to haunt them if they go ahead and suspend.

I think this is more likely.

It sounds like ROCK and HARD spot to me.

If they did indeed used the sample without his rep there they violated the NFLPA Agreement. Therefore the results are flawed.

They no longer have a sample to use, so can't re test it.

I see them setting on this till the off season and letting it slide. The only semi graceful way out of it. Still they set precedent, but I'll guarantee that they will never retest with out a players rep being there..

underrated29
11-29-2007, 02:33 PM
Or, the NFL is just confirming with their legal staff that the fact Henry has filed an injuntion regarding the B sample wouldn't come back to haunt them if they go ahead and suspend.


AYE, TOUCHE:wink:

TXBRONC
11-29-2007, 07:06 PM
Yea, I am blown away at how long this has taken. I really thought the league would ignore his evidence (hair, lie detector) and suspend him based on the positive test, for fear of setting a precident that other players would follow. Regardless, I didn't expect the answer to take this long. I wonder if it has something to do with the court case/injunction that Henry followed, or if they simply aren't sure how to proceed.

While I am not sure the Broncos will keep him if he is suspended (some are sure he will be cut, but I haven't a clue), the fact that it has taken this long, means that he is lot for almost all of 2008, where from the Broncos perspective, it would have been better to have him suspended in week 5 or 6, and then get him back for the last 9 to 10 games next year.

I've been thinking the same thing. From this side of the fence it looks like whatever Henry has is forcing the League to give pause.

pnbronco
11-29-2007, 07:44 PM
So will we hear anything this week or will they wait till next I wonder? Also with the death of Sean Taylor are they busy trying to deal with all of that? I'm surprised it's taking this long also.

broncofanatic1987
11-29-2007, 07:50 PM
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2007/nov/29/broncos-henry-learn-his-fate-friday/

Let's hope this means he won't be suspended.

underrated29
11-29-2007, 08:42 PM
i had no idea henry had taken a test before and right after the leagues and both were negative.


Hes not gonna be suspended! WWOOOHOOOOO. One less whole to fill at draft time, and now we got a good rb locked up long term. Go travis, now put up as many tds as you have children in the next 2 games.

Tned
11-29-2007, 08:48 PM
i had no idea henry had taken a test before and right after the leagues and both were negative.


Hes not gonna be suspended! WWOOOHOOOOO. One less whole to fill at draft time, and now we got a good rb locked up long term. Go travis, now put up as many tds as you have children in the next 2 games.

Shanahan, to the NFL's Chagrin, stated that he had a clean test something like three days before and three days after the positive one; reported the results of the lie detector and hair tests; reported the level of around 21 ngl (or whatever that measurement is), which is below most state laws.

The NFL was reportedly very unhappy with Shanahan for telling the press all of the above.

Astrass
11-29-2007, 08:50 PM
Shanahan, to the NFL's Chagrin, stated that he had a clean test something like three days before and three days after the positive one; reported the results of the lie detector and hair tests; reported the level of around 21 ngl (or whatever that measurement is), which is below most state laws.

The NFL was reportedly very unhappy with Shanahan for telling the press all of the above.

Lol...thats awesome. Wonder if he got one of those home drug tests at his local pharmacy or soemthing lol.

underrated29
11-29-2007, 09:26 PM
shanny is the shiznit.:beer:

Lonestar
11-29-2007, 10:02 PM
I guess the question remains why would he put himself into a situation where "second hand" air would be possible.

If your out on bail for your second DUI arrest (not saying he has done this more than once), do you tempt fate and go into a bar the night before going to court..

It sounds to me like Thenry is just a toke away from being on the watch list again.. Destructive behavior is not something that should be celebrated. IMO

Lets hope IF he does indeed get a reprieve he cleans up his act and says super clean not going into areas that could compromise himself in.

Tned
11-29-2007, 10:22 PM
It sounds to me like Thenry is just a toke away from being on the watch list again.. Destructive behavior is not something that should be celebrated. IMO


Every player in the NFL is only one toke and a urine test away from being on the watch list.

TXBRONC
11-29-2007, 11:33 PM
I was perusing the Rocky Mountain News web site and I came across this article. It looks like the League will give its decision tomorrow and the fact that it is doing so on Friday seems to bode well for Henry.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2007/nov/29/broncos-henry-learn-his-fate-friday/

Broncos’ Henry to learn his fate on Friday
By Jeff Legwold, Rocky Mountain News
Originally published 04:03 p.m., November 29, 2007

After weeks of waiting, a decision on Travis Henry's appeal of a failed drug test is expected from the NFL on Friday.

Henry said Thursday he did not want to discuss the potential resolution.

However, there is now a feeling among some both in the league and the Broncos front office that if Henry is indeed told the result of his appeal hearing just two days before a game – because of competitive issues – the ruling could be favorable toward him. The Broncos play at Oakland Sunday.

The running back was notified earlier this season by the league that he had failed a drug test – for marijuana – and has disputed the results to Broncos officials, the league and his teammates since.

Henry had his appeal hearing Nov. 16 in Phoenix with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and other league officials. In that appeal, at least part of Henry's presentation was that the thresh-hold of what was detected was too low to be anything except second-hand inhalation. Henry is believed to have also shown that he had been tested just days before and just days after the positive test and both of those were negative.

Henry also submitted results – both negative Broncos officials, including coach Mike Shanahan, have said – of a hair sample drug test as well as a lie detector test.

He also filed a lawsuit in September, that's still on-going, against the league over portions of the drug policy.

Shanahan, who said Thursday the team had not yet been notified of a decision by the league, has publicly defended Henry and said if he believed the running back had failed a drug test because he had smoked marijuana Henry would have already been released from the team.

Because he had been suspended for four games in 2005 for a failed drug test, Henry is facing the potential of a year-long suspension if the appeal doesn't go his way.

Mike
11-30-2007, 10:09 AM
I am guessing that means that he won't be suspended. I still don't care for the guy though.

Tned
11-30-2007, 10:55 AM
I am guessing that means that he won't be suspended. I still don't care for the guy though.

I've learned to seperate on field and off field behavior/deeds. Far, far too many NFL (and other sports) players conduct themselves in a manner that I think is wrong (offr the field), but then again, so do many actors, for instance.

So, I have resigned myself to seperating someone's 'personal' behavior or beliefs from their performances (sports or entertainment).

underrated29
11-30-2007, 11:40 AM
Oh my gosh, come on.... They know they cant suspend him for smoking the lettuce, because he didnt smoke it. Its been proven. So why dont they hurry up and just say it. NOT GUILTY!

The suspense is killing me....and now i am hungry. got to go

Tned
11-30-2007, 11:41 AM
Oh my gosh, come on.... They know they cant suspend him for smoking the lettuce, because he didnt smoke it. Its been proven. So why dont they hurry up and just say it. NOT GUILTY!

The suspense is killing me....and now i am hungry. got to go

The only proof is the urine test. Hair and lie detectors are not part of the NFL/NFLPA agreement.

underrated29
11-30-2007, 12:00 PM
The only proof is the urine test. Hair and lie detectors are not part of the NFL/NFLPA agreement.

right, but if he didnt fail the test before, and after, and his was so low it barely came up positive..... 2/3 aint bad....then considering he had to stick it out 2 more weeks and then all records would be clear...The guy is telling the truth.

Maybe he shouldnt have been in that situation (which he shouldnt have.). But the NFL does not suspend people for being in the situation, they suspend them for breaking the rules. Which he did not.

pnbronco
11-30-2007, 12:18 PM
The only proof is the urine test. Hair and lie detectors are not part of the NFL/NFLPA agreement.

It sounds like it's a big tight rope with everyone involved and cans a worms everywhere. I hope Henry learns a valuble lesson from all this as well as the other players on the team. That risky behavior, which includes being at parties where other people are smoking, can make a short career much shorter.

Tned
11-30-2007, 01:21 PM
right, but if he didnt fail the test before, and after, and his was so low it barely came up positive..... 2/3 aint bad....then considering he had to stick it out 2 more weeks and then all records would be clear...The guy is telling the truth.

The problem is we don't know the details of the tests three days before and after. Shanny mentioned them in a press conference, but we don't know if they were NFL tests, Broncos organization tests, CDL tests, home tests, etc. If they were not NFL tests, conducted by NFL collection people and testing labs, you can't expect them to consider tests that they didn't conduct.


Maybe he shouldnt have been in that situation (which he shouldnt have.). But the NFL does not suspend people for being in the situation, they suspend them for breaking the rules. Which he did not.

If it was second hand smoke, then it is still his fault, because the NFL can't determine how it got in his system, only that it got there.

If he doesn't like the policy, then he has a union that negotiated it, he needs to lobby them to change the policy.

Lonestar
11-30-2007, 02:45 PM
The problem is we don't know the details of the tests three days before and after. Shanny mentioned them in a press conference, but we don't know if they were NFL tests, Broncos organization tests, CDL tests, home tests, etc. If they were not NFL tests, conducted by NFL collection people and testing labs, you can't expect them to consider tests that they didn't conduct.



If it was second hand smoke, then it is still his fault, because the NFL can't determine how it got in his system, only that it got there.

If he doesn't like the policy, then he has a union that negotiated it, he needs to lobby them to change the policy.

Great points if there are rules we all have to follow. Not running red lights not driving drunk, not beating your girl or kids.

There is a reason for rules. You either follow them or you suffer the consequences. Hopefully he has learned from this and all of the team will be wiser for it..

silkamilkamonico
11-30-2007, 03:56 PM
Great points if there are rules we all have to follow. Not running red lights not driving drunk, not beating your girl or kids.

There is a reason for rules. You either follow them or you suffer the consequences. Hopefully he has learned from this and all of the team will be wiser for it..

Before anyone argues against "rules" per say, our society needs them. Without rules there is no structure. Without structure there's nothing but chaos and disorder.

Lonestar
11-30-2007, 04:46 PM
Before anyone argues against "rules" per say, our society needs them. Without rules there is no structure. Without structure there's nothing but chaos and disorder.

Kinda like the NBA huh?

underrated29
11-30-2007, 06:43 PM
ok say as we all know nothing has been announced yet.

cbs said that they have not and shanny will not speculate. I know i said before that the longer they wait the better his chances. With that said, maybe this wont turn out well as they dont want to screw the raiders over for game planning for him. I bet we find out on monday or tuesday. Now i am not so high on the favorable ruling.

fcspikeit
11-30-2007, 07:19 PM
The only proof is the urine test. Hair and lie detectors are not part of the NFL/NFLPA agreement.

This is from nfl.com

"Henry's case is believed to revolve around the hair sample and also his passing drug tests days before and after the positive urine test he took as part of his involvement in the NFL's drug program, suggesting what was found couldn't have been anything more than second-hand smoke."

So the tests he passed before and after were official NFL tests.

That being said, this whole thing should be dropped.

I mean come on, If he took 3 NFL tests, 2 came up clean and 1 came up dirty there was a mistake some where. Why would they assume the 2 clean tests were the mistake? :confused:

Ravage!!!
11-30-2007, 08:15 PM
This is from nfl.com

"Henry's case is believed to revolve around the hair sample and also his passing drug tests days before and after the positive urine test he took as part of his involvement in the NFL's drug program, suggesting what was found couldn't have been anything more than second-hand smoke."

So the tests he passed before and after were official NFL tests.

That being said, this whole thing should be dropped.

I mean come on, If he took 3 NFL tests, 2 came up clean and 1 came up dirty there was a mistake some where. Why would they assume the 2 clean tests were the mistake? :confused:

Because they can.

broncosfanscott
11-30-2007, 09:36 PM
Since this is the NFL, I am surprised that the decision is taking this long. However, the longer it takes for a decision to be made, hopefully it will favor Henry.

Lonestar
11-30-2007, 11:05 PM
This is from nfl.com

"Henry's case is believed to revolve around the hair sample and also his passing drug tests days before and after the positive urine test he took as part of his involvement in the NFL's drug program, suggesting what was found couldn't have been anything more than second-hand smoke."

So the tests he passed before and after were official NFL tests.

That being said, this whole thing should be dropped.

I mean come on, If he took 3 NFL tests, 2 came up clean and 1 came up dirty there was a mistake some where. Why would they assume the 2 clean tests were the mistake? :confused:

I do not believe that all the tests were indeed NFL sponsored. If they were it would be a weak case at best.

I'm guessing that the before and after ones were administered by the Broncos or at his request to make sure he was clean before his one year check up. But were not Offical NFL tests..

pnbronco
12-01-2007, 04:17 AM
I just read this on another site:

Adam Schefter now reports that we will learn of the Henry decision on MONDAY.

So hopefully we will hear something then.

omac
12-01-2007, 04:27 AM
I'm actually glad the NFL is taking this long; it means they really are deliberating.

I do appreciate what Goodell brings to the NFL and what he's done, but his reign was starting to look a bit gestapo-ish. Him taking longer shows that he's willing to listen first and watch out for the player's rights too.

TXBRONC
12-01-2007, 08:49 AM
I'm actually glad the NFL is taking this long; it means they really are deliberating.

I do appreciate what Goodell brings to the NFL and what he's done, but his reign was starting to look a bit gestapo-ish. Him taking longer shows that he's willing to listen first and watch out for the player's rights too.

There is something that causing Goodell to take his time.

underrated29
12-01-2007, 09:38 AM
I just read this on another site:

Adam Schefter now reports that we will learn of the Henry decision on MONDAY.

So hopefully we will hear something then.

I dont like that news at all! To me that means that goodell and Co dont care, and are going to go through with the full suspension. Thus, adequetly giving us and our opponent time to adjust for the next game.

omac
12-01-2007, 11:19 AM
I dont like that news at all! To me that means that goodell and Co dont care, and are going to go through with the full suspension. Thus, adequetly giving us and our opponent time to adjust for the next game.

With the tests he has taken before and after the offical NFL test, I wonder if he can sue the NFL, and put their testing policy in question.

SR
12-01-2007, 11:24 AM
With the tests he has taken before and after the offical NFL test, I wonder if he can sue the NFL, and put their testing policy in question.

That's what he's doing right now by suing the NFL! :tsk::laugh:

omac
12-01-2007, 12:19 PM
That's what he's doing right now by suing the NFL! :tsk::laugh:

Oh, okay. :laugh:

Btw, here's another article .....

Henry case delays give good omen ... http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_7595235

underrated29
12-03-2007, 06:06 PM
THEY DO KNOW WHAT Monday is dont they?.

namely- TODAY!!!!

you know the day after sunday, and the day before tuesday.

Goodell?

Stand Ablaze
12-03-2007, 06:47 PM
THEY DO KNOW WHAT Monday is dont they?.

namely- TODAY!!!!

you know the day after sunday, and the day before tuesday.

Goodell?

I heard he was busy attending Sean Taylor's funeral, so I guess we should see a decision come Tuesday.