The bizarre case of Texans linebacker Brian Cushing took another turn toward Cuckootown with a report from Adam Schefter of ESPN that Cushing “took and passed a lie-detector test” in order to prove that he didn’t “take a PED.” This 140-characters-or-less item from Schefter on Twitter raises a lot more questions than it answers.
When did Cushing take the test?
Why did he take it?
Who administered it?
And, most importantly, why should we care? Cushing had in his systems something that violated the league’s policy regarding anabolic steroids and related substances. Thus, he DID take a banned substance.
Perhaps we’re merely now seeing the latest enhancement in the excuse-making arsenal of those who test positive. In addition to claiming that their Muscle Milk had been spiked with Nandrolene, they can claim — without scrutiny — that they “passed a lie detector test” regarding whether they cheated.
Since Cushing doesn’t seem to be contending that someone slipped him a steroid unwittingly, one thing he should do is authorize the NFL to disclose all details regarding his positive test, including but not limited to the substance for which he tested positive and all information provided in connection with his appeal and the written decision upholding the suspension.
Though we still would reserve the right to be skeptical, having access to the information on which the league relied in deciding to suspend Cushing would be far more persuasive than the assertion that he must not be a cheater because he “passed a lie detector test.”
Alternatively, we’d be willing to hire someone to impose a lie-detector test regarding the question of whether Cushing took a lie-detector test. Because our B.S. meter tells us he didn’t.