It is just a one-page legal document from the US Court of Appeals in Richmond, VA. Where Jeremy Mayfield is concerned, it could be the final nail in his media coffin.
After a week that saw Mayfield appear on television, radio and the Internet there is a distinct possibility that the end is near. From talking endlessly to local TV station reporters in Charlotte to unleashing a personal and slanderous rant against Brian France on SiriusXM, this has been a masterful week of media manipulation by the Mayfield camp.
Now, not only has the court decided to again suspend Mayfield by lifting the temporary junction granted earlier, but late word is that Mayfield has also sold his team and racing equipment. Click here to read a brief summary of the court decision. Click here to read about Mayfield selling his team.
This turn of events leaves Mayfield with no shop, no team and no real way back into the sport. While rumors of Mayfield appearing at Indy continue to circulate, there is now no real reason why he would travel to the track. His words and thoughts have been heard, but the justice system seems to have tolerated just about enough.
There is very little chance that viewers will see Mayfield on this weekend's NASCAR TV programs. From RaceDay to NASCAR Now, the real stories of the season-to-date and the Indy racing tripleheader are going to dominate. What is there left for Mayfield to say?
Mayfield has been moved away from the track again and this time there is nowhere else to go. Until additional legal proceedings get underway many months from now, Mayfield should begin to slowly fade from the NASCAR news.
It should be very interesting to see if Mayfield goes on one final media tour to promote his cause. With the NASCAR media long gone to Indy, Mayfield may once again use the local Charlotte TV stations and SiriusXM to get himself media access. Keep your eyes peeled for Mayfield sightings specifically aimed at detracting from the Indy race on Sunday.
TDP is proud to have become a source for debate and information on this topic of Mayfield using the media. Click on the titles for some additional resources:
Why is NASCAR's drug policy in my mailbox?(6-1-09)
Mayfield and the media about to dance again.(6-30-09)
Mayfield mayhem stumps "NASCAR Now."(7-3-09)
Marty Smith explodes the Mayfield chaos.(7-10-09)
Drowning face down while waiting for the truth.(5-20-09)
Dude, where's my sample?(7-14-09)
Mayfield drowns face down. (7-17-09)
Let's use this post to offer final comments on this Mayfield issue and how the media has done a good and not so good job handling this topic for the first time. Should any Mayfield issues arise this weekend, we will update this post.
To add your opinion on this topic, just click on the comments button below. This is a family-friendly website, please keep that in mind when posting. Thank you for keeping this discussion serious and focused. As always, we appreciate you taking the time to stop by.
44 comments:
I think the media tour is done. There is nothing left for Mayfield to say, except in court at this point. And frankly anyone who believes him at this point already does and anyone who doesn't isn't going to be persuaded by any more front-yard speeches.
When Mayfield had won his injunction against NASCAR, he could take the position of "See, I'm innocent, and NASCAR will have to prove their case to show everyone I am guilty."
Now, at least media-wise, that tune has changed to "I'm guilty and I'll have to prove my case to show everyone I am innocent."
It's confusing, baffling, weird, and just plain SAD if he is an addict.
I won't miss the back and forth of confusing articles/videos/Twilight Zone music.
I hope he is able to step back and look within at how he has handled this mess...And gets whatever help he needs to get his life back in order.
The media failed. It wasn't until yesterday - literally - that we finally saw a story comparing NASCAR and Mayfield's testing to that of other sports. The story basically claimed that Mayfield's negatives wouldn't hold water (no pun intended) in any other sport because they were not observed.
Sorry, but there was calls on this very blog for that very story weeks ago. And the observations/conclusions of that story were also made here weeks ago.
The most thorough analysis of the NASCAR court documents -- from the readers of this blog.
The most detailed hashing out of the arguments (hair test, lab qualifications, testing process, etc) on both said -- from the readers of this blog.
The only thing we got from NASCAR media was repetition of court decisions and holding open microphones for people to talk into. There were never any serious follow-up questions of either Mayfield or NASCAR. There were never any stories to explain the testing process. To this day we still have not had any reporting on the crew members suspended the same day as Mayfield - despite the fact that crew memebrs are every bit a part of the team as a driver is.
The job of the media is to investigate and find the truth. They didn't do that -- they made the rookie mistake of airing both sides equally and calling that fair. But fans of all sports look to the media to do something more -- provide context. If NASCAR says A and Mayfield says B -- and one of those is ridiculous, it is the media's job to call that out and give it lesser weight in reporting and legitimacy.
I give the NASCAR media F -- and I don't blame the reporters. None of them have editors who care about the NASCAR beat, otherwise it would have been the editors (or producers for on-air talent) telling the reporters what stories to go find. Believe me, when Manny Ramirez was busted same day as Mayfield, there were sports editors telling their writers "Get me a story on this angle, Get me a story on this angle. Explain this drug to our readers, do a write up on this history" etc etc. The NASCAR writers seem on their own, too afraid to upset any of their sources, too awed by the drivers they cover, too unschooled in basic journalism.
To me the absolute lowpoint was when Mayfield was at Lowe's during the All-Star race. Marty Smith breathlessly reported how word leaked into the media room that he was on the property. Smith was quickly running to where he thought he could find him -- he wanted the big scoop! At that moment there was all the potential in the world.
But Smith blew it. What did he do? He climbs up on a trailer, has a 15-minute conversation with Mayfield that is basically off-the-record. But one thing Smith DOES report (incredibly) is that he shared with Mayfield his own personal opinion of the case and some of the thing he thought NASCAR was doing wrong.
Sorry, but a subject should NEVER know the opinion of a journalist covering him, especially one covering him all the time. I don't know what Mayfield said to Smith after that massive breach of ethics -- we'll never know. But by the time he climbed down and was on the record, a group of reporters had gathered and Smiths' only exclusive was 1) hey, I'm buddies with Mayfield, see me talking to him and being the one to convince him to come down and 2) I was never schooled in journalism ethics.
I really think that was a media low point in the story. A chance for a super exclusive at the beginning of the story, ruined by a fanboy attitude and unprofessionalism. It didn't help that Mayfield climbed down and started telling a wild story -- and not one reporter present confronted him with inconsistencies. Not one. What a shame.
Was it possible to get a gag order issued? Can either side request one?
JM and attys aren't going away. They'll figure out someway to stay in the public eye.
From Switzerland.
It's over, I think, and I can't say I'm unhappy about that. His career is over.
But the public loves comeback stories, in which a well-known figure survives scandal or tragedy and reclaims an degree of contentment or success in their lives. Mayfield will never race again in NASCAR, but he's young and healthy enough to turn his life around, if he wants to. It's entirely up to him at this point.
@ Anon 10:30, Bravo/a.
Here is a link that I believe will show why this case will never come to trial and Mayfield will be the one doing the settling (not NASCAR):
http://tiny.cc/qHnHh
This links to a PDF of testimony from Dr. Black of Aegis Labs that was made before Congress. The subject was an inquiry into something related to the WWE (wrestling), for which Dr. Black devised the testing program.
What is interesting in the very long interview/testimony, is that
A) Dr. Black lays out his credentials and they are most impressive
B) Lays out the history of his lab and what makes it unique and talks at length about the number of clients they work for from military to sports leagues to major corporations.
C) Talks a lot in detail about how they go about assuring there are no false positives.
D) Talks in a lot of detail on how he developed the WWE drug testing program with various attorneys. Granted, that is not NASCAR, but the detail he talks about makes you think there was something similar with NASCAR, and if so there was a LOT of thought and prep into making the policy.
E) Goes into many other ares that might overlap with a Mayfield case (this was in 2007) and shows how he is an expert witness who can break down the science in a fashion that will be very hard to overcome with mere wild accusations.
It's long, but worth a read for anyone who wants to know how deadly serious this Dr. Black is as a scientist and as a case witness under oath.
@ Anon 10:42, Ironic that the NASCAR drug testing program is modeled after the WWE. Whatever works.
Thanks for the pointing out the highlights.
p.s. I screamed WEEKS ago for observation of the specimen gathering. If you don't have proof of that, the rest is spinning your wheels. I think I posted that on the Gibbs blog.
Good points all! Truth is here somewhere...sigh.
since this is a media blog, i'm going to try & stick with commenting on the media aspect of this whole mess. besides, my belief in the validity of the science that resulted in a series of positives tests is well known at tdp!
i think anon@10:30pm is flat out right about this. when the clearest understanding of the science of this comes from the fans, the media is failing one significant aspect of its job: explaining the situation to the fans. that means explaining the science involved, what could/couldn't have happened, what the procedures and standards are and, at its most basic, what IS nascar's policy? this is the stage during which the media should have been able to nail down whether all hard card holders have a list of banned substances or if there even IS such a list. pretty basic stuff, not requiring interpretation.
when the tough questions, the very questions that can clear up misconceptions and address specific opinions, when these come from the fans across various sites, the media is being lazy. when we, as fans, seek out the actual court documents, read thru them, ask questions and gain understanding and the present these opinions to the media via blogs, we are met with silence. not one reporter has taken any of what has been discussed here, at tdp, and run with it, at least not that i have seen.
and when presented with all of this, the media still does the "'here's my mic, say what you want without fear that i'll ask a tough question or challenge a ridiculous statement," then the failure becomes epic.
i am not in the position to confront jeremy mayfield or his attorney about the case but the media certainly is and yet, to a man and woman, they have failed to do so. just today, buric got away with claiming "but that’s so scientific that I can’t get into all of it myself,” science that we've been discussing for weeks. in fact, the question came about b/c buric was asked outside the station why, if mayfield is still taking adderall as was claimed on air, the test results from labcorp didn't indicate any amphetamine in mayfield's urine. sound like a familiar question, doesn't it?
the media has not done its job in this case: the fans have done their jobs for them. and we're not getting paid!
(and will someone PLEASE attempt to talk to the crew members suspended at the same time? at least TRY to speak to them? how hard can that be? right now, i'd even take a "no comment" from those guys.)
@sophia: the 7/6 sample collection WAS a direct observed collection according to both the court filing by nascar and mayfield's attorney.
the A sample from that collection tested positive for d-methamphetamine; the B sample is still sealed.
if what you're asking for is an article outlining how a sample should be taken, etc., i agree -- another example for the media not doing its job. i have seen articles subsequent to mayfield's bust, quoting drivers who say that the sampling procedures have been tightened by nascar so i guess that's a start.
how about an article on how team personnel are chosen to be tested? how about we get somewhere to bring that info back into the mix? that might quiet some of the "they're out to get mayfield" conspiracists . . .
red
Yes! OBSERVATION of voiding the bladder is the key, especially since JM "claims" 15 negative, and 2 positive. Thus my gripe was only one done that way, I guess yes, since JM carried on how "humiliating" that was, remember?
well heck, if he is sending in other guy's samples of COURSE the test is negative.
So that's been my main 'missing question' along with so many others you and the rest of the gang here has posted about. and many anons have given me food for thought.
And an old friend of mine 20 years ago was ordering drug tests on guys in halfway houses and it was STRICT monitoring. That was before internet and cheating with store bought urine or powdered urine became so prevalent.
But time to focus on the races, TS good year, older guys doing well :-)
I am ready for the Mayfield button to be muted.
It was overwhelming..the long videos, the sound bites.
Serious lack of details.
a lot of the 'out to get him' stuff came from what NASCAR has done in the past....and it's coming back to haunt them. Frankly, at this point I think JM is guilty, but that doesn't mean NASCAR's policy doesn't need work. But thank you Sophia, for remembering that Jeremy needs help. We all should be thinking about that. It's a serious tragedy.
Who cares about the "15 negative tests". It doesn't negate the one positive test.
Can you imagine if after Ben Johnson got busted for steroids running the 100 yard dash in the Olympics if he suddenely said "But I've taken 15 clean tests since then - I mean, unobserved tests, but I've been clean since then" Would it hold any weight?
If Barry Bonds comes out now and says "I took a test today that was negative" does it mean his old usage was irrelevant?
Goodbye Jeremy Mayfield. And good riddance.
I think the media performance on the JM case has been absolutely terrible. Unfortunately, that was what I expected from the media whose main job is NASCAR coverage. It is the same sort of coverage they have demonstrated in the past.
With very few exceptions, NASCAR media can be sorted into two groups. The first are the cheerleaders who work for the networks who broadcast races. They subscribe to the See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil school of journalism. We can't even depend on them for truthful weather predictions.
The second group is happy to report a little feud or a little negative information provided it isn't too complex and is confined to personalities within the sport. This excludes information which might reflect negatively on the sanctioning body. This group thought the JM mess was just too complicated and might end up with mud on NASCAR. They wanted the JM business to go away so they could write an insightful article about Kyle Busch's latest temper tantrum.
I sometimes wonder if there aren't a few serious journalists who really would like to dig more deeply into larger issues but can't get support from their bosses. If these people do exist, it must be a frustrating feeling.
I mourn the loss of many newspapers and the poor financial health of the survivors. Many papers had a tradition of devoting the time and resources to thoroughly research complex issues and write comprehensive articles. The internet media which has displaced the newspapers appears to have little interest in that type of work. Instead everyone is supposed to be thrilled to get a daily serving of fluff spiced with trivia delivered in seconds by twitter.
I have formed no conclusions about JM's guilt or innocence. As a matter or principle, I believe the best course is to let events play out in court. It's an imperfect process, but it's better than any other alternative. However, the media should not take that as an excuse not to thoroughly report all aspects of the case as events occur. That is the responsibility of a true journalist.
JM's NASCAR career is over regardless of how the court case turns out. His age and his relations with previous team owners removed him from consideration for a competitive team even before the drug issue. I never had any particular feelings for him either way during his driving career, but I still hate to see his career end this way. I choose to remember him for the way he won the 2000 Pocono 500. He was faster than Dale Earnhardt SR who held the lead but couldn't quite get around him. In the last corner of the last lap, he put the bumper to SR and moved him out of the groove. JM drove by to take the checkered flag. I had seen SR do it to others many times, and I was thrilled to see a driver like JM do it to SR. It made my day, and that's the way I will remember JM.
Michigan fan
"I think the media tour is done. There is nothing left for Mayfield to say, except in court at this point."
Oh, it looks to be far from over. Davd Rodman has a fresh article up on NASCAR.com where Jeremy is claiming to be 80% complete in having a huge, multi-year, multi-million dollar sponsorship lined up for himself.
He says his sponsor wants to buy up naming rights for several events and tracks. And they are going to give him $15 or $20 million in walking around money to go buy himself a ride with one of the top-tier teams.
He never mentions the sponsor by name, but implies heavily it is "someone who stands up for the little guy and won't let a big corporation run them over", (Can we say Union?) and, "they have worked with me in the past". (UAW).
So there you have it... Jeremy's latest utterance from upon high (pun intended) is that the UAW is gong to come in as his sponsor and clean them good old NASCAR boys clocks if they try to pick on poor Jeremy.
Full story at http://www.nascar.com/2009/news/headlines/cup/07/22/jmayfield.indy.ban.sponsor/index.html?imw=Y
Lets clear up a little misconception that seems to have taken hold of some in this thread and indeed the author.
This ruling may be last last we have heard of Mayfield but given all that's gone before it's not likely.
The main point is this ruling only reversed judge Mullen's injunction, NASCAR's appeal of his original ruling is yet to be heard and ruled on by Mullens.
Once he does it will give Mayfield more than enough opportunity to flap his lip.
BTW, as you can see here, Mayfield has publicly stated he last had his hair cut on May first.
It will be interesting to see if he takes a hair test sometime in mid to late August when his hair will be long enough to give an accurate sample.
I'm betting the issue goes away has he doesn't take one.
Pertaining to the hair test, the sample doesn't have to be head hair. It can come from the arm pits, the chest or anywhere that body hair is sufficient lenght.
You think Jeremy's lawyer doesn't know this? Again, another delay/smoke screen tactic on their part.
I think the media has tip toed
through the questioning to avoid
being a defendant in JM's lawsuit
for "robbing" him of his livelihood. One bad question and
they will look like the executioner. The media could, however, do a much better job
of the technical aspects and comparisons.
The Society of Forensic Toxicologists (SOFT) and the Toxicology Section of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences remain on record as not supporting hair testing for employee substance abuse programs due to lack of scientific knowledge, technologies and certification programs.
Hair testing for drugs should not be confused with other kinds of tests
that have a more established record of reliability.
Hair testing for particular DNA, despite using the same sampling
material as a hair test for drugs, is altogether different. For one
thing, the analyte in the actual detection phase of the test is present
in millions of times the quantity as would be the analyte in a drug
test.
Hair drug testing should not be equated with urine drug testing either.
Urine tests, although still not perfect, have several advantages in
terms of reliability:
-- The mechanism of drug deposition in urine is reasonably understood.
With hair it is not clear if the blood, sweat, or sebum is the
depositing medium.
-- The analyte, if present, would be there in larger quantities in urine
than in a hair test.
-- The sample does not need to be washed. The washing step may introduce
contamination and is controversial for other reasons.
-- The probability of environmental contamination is less. Urine comes
from inside the body.
-- With urine, there is no cutting step. Hair needs to be chopped into
small pieces. This is another place where contamination can occur.
-- There is no liquefaction step. Apparently there are three different
ways to liquefy hair. Comparative benefits and hazards do not appear to
be clearly established.
-- The relationship between levels of detected analytes and usage has not
been established with hair tests. There have been no large-scale
controlled dosage studies. Consequently, so-called cutoff levels do not
have a scientific basis and are not standardized.
-- With urine testing there is a great deal of experience: the procedure
is established and is legally certified. Hair tests are not legally
certified. There is no oversight whatsoever.
SAMSHA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) currently is not certifying laboratories for drug hair tests.
STATEMENT FROM SAMSHA
Presently, urine is the only specimen collected for Federally regulated Workplace drug testing programs and for most private sector programs. Urine drug testing in the Federally related Workplace is currently recognized as the “Gold Standard” because of its proven accuracy, reliability, and fairness.
I don't think the Mayfield affair is over yet. It may go quiet for a while, but it's not over. Aegis Labs, the labs who does the testing for NASCAR, is also the same labs that does the testing for the WWE. Anyone remember WWE wrestlers Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero? That says something about their reliability and trustworthiness. Also, there's Dr. Black's statement about adults not having ADD/ADHD. Dr. Black is a toxicologist, not an expert on ADD/ADHD. This could come back to burn him. NASCAR also has a history of playing dirty with drivers who they aren't happy with. This could also come back to haunt them. Is Mayfield innocent? Maybe, maybe not. That'll be up for the courts to decide. Is his career finished? At this point, even if he is found completely innocent, he probably won't return to NASCAR. Not when he knows they'll be gunning for him and looking for any, and I do mean any, excuse to take his legs out from under him.
50 yr Fan 9:40 has it about where I see it: it has become obvious that the stakes here are so high that reporters who earn their livings in NASCAR are tiptoeing thru the tulips on this one. Nobody wants to take a chance on stepping on the wrong toes.
As for the observation of test sample gathering: JM should have been informed that it is NORMAL for someone to watch as the sample is deposited. My son, a petty officer in the Navy, was done with his 4 year enlistment last year. He had a few weeks left and his ship was out of port. The command assigned him temporary duty at Naval Station San Diego observing sample submission by sailors who were required to undergo routine drug testing. This is daily routine in the military, no matter if it's embarrassing.
I still can't form a conclusion as to what's going on in this case; that's not unusual considering it's still in the "he said, they said" stage. Until they actually get into court, we're not going to get much different from what we've been getting: a circus sideshow.
The WWE program has nothing to do with the NASCAR program. Testing programs are set up to accomplish specific goals, be it detection of performance enhancing drugs, street drugs, or whatever. All the labs do is report back what is found. It is up to the specific league, employer, or other sponsoring organization what to do with that information. Does anyone think Vince McMahon had the same objectives in mind as did Brian France?
DannyBoy said - "it has become obvious that the stakes here are so high that reporters who earn their livings in NASCAR are tiptoeing thru the tulips on this one. Nobody wants to take a chance on stepping on the wrong toes."
How does that explain why many "journalists" haven't made the slightest effort at questioning Mayfield on his idiotic allegations about "spiked" samples, his proven lie about taking a hair test when busting his suspension at Lowes and many other examples of Mayfields nonsense?
It doesn't, the so-called "journalists" were more than happy to have him in their presence spewing utter crapola they could place their bylines on the sensational remarks and gain readership.
Andrew S - "All Jeremy needs to now is to take a test that is witnessed and he passes and then the stuff hits the fan."
Do ya think?
It doesn't look like it, First of all no drug program accepts independent tests as evidence, that's true of every program run by the major sports.
Secondly, even if they were accepted they would fail to prove he wasn't on the drug when the test was conducted at Richmond.
His ONLY hope is to prove that Richmond test, and the two positives since than were faulty in some way.
Otherwise he's a goose that's cooked.
A lot of very good points.
It seems to me that the media has done a routinely mediocre job the past 3 seasons with any big story that was new to NASCAR - Toyota coming to Cup, the ownership battle at DEI, the Grant suit, and now the JM drug test controversy. If I give the media the benefit of the doubt, it is because they had become used to doing stories simply by talking to people in the garage and were not used to actually having to do real research to obtain facts - and when in doubt simply bash NASCAR. In any event, it is much easier to write a story if you are not burdened by facts, especially inconvenient facts.
I suspect the life of the Mayfield story is going to be a matter of supply and demand - it will live on in the media until there is something more interesting to write about. And of course the NASCAR-bashing segment of the media has to have fresh meat for those who agree with them.
I suspect JM and his attys are likely to want to keep the story in the "news" to keep the pressure on NASCAR to settle to make the whole mess go away and to influence the jury pool in the event the case in District Court could be a jury trial.
In regard to Dr. Black's statement about JM and ADD - obviously I do not know what he really said. However, I believe it was in NASCAR's countersuit that I saw that Dr. Black asserted that what he told JM was that it surprised him that JM could be diagnosed as having ADD and needing to take Allderall (sp?) based on the 30 minute session with the doctor that JM told Black about.
(and again, jd: feel free to delete if you desire but i'm starting to become more than a little annoyed at the tone of this poster.)
ok, steven, time to step away -- again.
for me, when someone begins to toss around historical references when discussing nascar, i can only smile. surely you can't seriously think of nascar in the same vein as stalin or the ancient pharoahs? really, steven, try to keep this case in perspective, ok? weak and fallacious hyperbole simply undercuts your attempt to make a point.
you still ignore the science of the case, you continue to claim that nascar wants to destroy mayfield without offering any explanation as to why they would bother and your anger at nascar is clouding any ability you have to accept some of the unpleasant realities and dismiss the silliness.
again, i strongly encourage you to make time to read the science involved in the testing before you go off on nascar again. i'm no apologist for nascar but i am still waiting for you or anyone else to explain why they would go thru all this nonsense just to bust jeremy mayfield.
yes, they are often an arrogant organization and yes, their own lack of transparency has come back to bite them in the butt and yes, what they intentionally did to tim richmond was disgraceful, immoral and appalling.
but mayfield ain't no tim richmond and today's nascar ain't the nascar of big bill or bill jr.
again, steven: make time to read the science before going off again and then we can discuss. but just ranting without any support for your accusations is unpleasant at best and irritating beyond acceptance for me.
Steven, I sense that we are not in complete agreement, except maybe for one very important thing - this whole mess needs to be thoroughly pursued, settled in the light of day, and let the chips fall where they may.
I've been a NASCAR follower for nearly 40 years and I AGREE with what Steven posted. Who said "this ain't the NASCAR of Big Bill?" maybe not...it's worse. Out of everyone involved in this mess, I certainly trust NASCAR the LEAST of all...a long, and current history of heavy handedness. Time after time we witness NASCAR's wrong doings...TECH, SPONSORS, SCHEDULES, DRIVERS...the list goes on and on...and in EVERY case, it gets down to what lines the NASCAR brass'es pockets with money, and NEVER what's in the best interest of racing. And anyone that dosen't see that, either hasn't been around long or, like the lemmings Steven mentions.
Why would NASCAR want to bust Mayfield and how do they benifit? Easy. A chain of events that starts with the "typical" way NASCAR executives pocket money. A some point NASCAR gives Dr Black "exclusive" rights. just like they pull with everything else, and you can bet, NASCAR made money on that deal. Not in intrest of acuracy, but to just make a dollar. Black made a mistake first round, NASCAR backs their "exclusive" client, after all, Mayfield is small potatoes. What NASCAR didn't count on was Mayfield not wanting to go along. By now, NASCAR is in too deep to back down, and counting on their usual mass of lawyers, plan to win, with ZERO regard to what's right or fair.
Besides...even "IF" NASCAR loses, well, all they have to do is point the finger at Dr Black and say it wasn't thier fault. EXACTLY like they did with Tim Richmond.
You really don't see this?
anon@8:25: nope, don't see it.
look, i get it: nascar management stinks and isn't what it used to be -- or something. (actually, my view of "the good old days" of nascar management is far less sanguine than others, apparently. you wanna see a bully and tyrant in action? check out big bill and his banning of curtis turner for life b/c of turner's attempts to unionize nascar. but i digress.)
none of these scenarios explain the SCIENCE of the issue and that's what's being minimized by these conspiracy theories. what in heaven's name does aegis have to gain by sacrificing their reputation in order to have an "exclusive" with nascar? by the way, my understanding is that each sport has it's own testing agency and doesn't farm the testing out to several agencies. so, by definition: each sport has an "exclusive" drug testing agency. nascar is no different.
regardless, the science is what it is: mayfield has repeatedly tested postive for d-meth. that's the bottom line.
and by the way: what does nascar have to gain by busting crew members under these conspiracy scenarios? and what about mayfield supporting the testing when his crew member was busted early on? how to fit all of these into the theories?
again: bottom line is the science. and the science says mayfield's urine tested positive for d-meth. not amphetamine, not adderall, not claritin-d, not sudafed. d-methamphetamine.
and that's an illegal drug for anyone, list or no list.
Easy...
The "science" is crap.
Read the article over at cbssports.com/columns/story/11978765
The ONLY thing about science you can believ is...it WILL change every day. THAT should tell you something.
I've ALWAYS belived that so-called drug tests should only be used to start an "investigation" and NOT EVER trust as the word of God. They are never 100% acurate 100% of the time...so why on earth do so many seem to thing they are FACT??
anon, with a starting point of "the science is crap," there's no need for me to continue a discussion.
we disagree.
Sorry...my point is actually more, no science is 100%, so in my way of thinking, to trust it 100%, is crap.
The chance of mistakes is reasonably high in this case, intentional or not. I personally belive there is a very real chance the first test was an error / mistake / screw-up of some sort...then the second test was CLEARLY a conflict of interest...if NASCAR really wanted to be certain, they would have used an un-bias lab and they didn't. That seems to be suspect.
Curiously it would appear that both NASCAR and Mayfield are relying on the same science to prove their point. So the question would be who applied the science properly. It's a shame the media has not done more to explore and explain the science for the fans.
NASCAR doesn't need another Tim Richmond. This needs to be fully settled and out in the light of day.
anon - ".then the second test was CLEARLY a conflict of interest...if NASCAR really wanted to be certain, they would have used an un-bias lab and they didn't. That seems to be suspect."
Suspect? Well then so is your grasp of facts. NASCAR tested sample "A" and "B" from Richmond using Aegis, another test was conducted, tested as positive for meth, by another lab, meaning not Aegis.
It's a matter of court record, you should read it.
Furthermore I've seen a lot of Mayfield's sycophants and apologists make claims of conflict of interest but I haven't see a single one answer the following question:
If NASCAR's contract with Aegis is a conflict of interest, why isn't Mayfield and his lawyers hiring of LabCorp a conflict of interest.
And BTW, "anon", no where in the Fed Guidelines is a requirement for a separate lab to test the "A" sample and "B" samples.
Of course a requirement to follow Fed Guidelines is also a load of hooey put out by Mayfield, they are not and never have been required of private entities.
Post a Comment