Sherman has two arguments for his PED appeal


Next Friday, Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman will attempt to overturn his four-game suspension for violation of the league’s policy against performance-enhancing drugs.

Per a source with knowledge of the situation, Sherman has two separate arguments.

First, and as initially reported by Mike Garafolo of USA Today, Sherman claims that he drank from the water bottle of a teammate that had been spiked with Adderall.  The teammate has both a prescription and a therapeutic use exemption, allowing the teammate to ingest Adderall, which contains amphetamines.

Sherman has denied that account in text messages sent to Curtis Crabtree of KJR, who works part-time for PFT.  However, we’ve confirmed Garafolo’s account.

Second, Sherman believes there were flaws in the method of obtaining his urine for testing.

It’s unknown whether both arguments will actually be advanced at the hearing.  Given that the two contentions are somewhat inconsistent (i.e., “I accidentally ingested it” and “the testing methodology generated a false positive”), Sherman would be wise to pick a horse.

The problem is that both horses likely will lose.  As to the water-bottle excuse, it won’t matter.  Players are responsible for anything that is in their systems.  As to the attack on the collection process, the problem is that the procedures for pursuing appeals allow the NFL to refuse to provide most of the evidence that would help the player establish irregularities.

As the source explained, these cases are lost not in the hearing room; they were lost at the negotiating table.  Unless and until the league and the union agree to testing procedures that require the NFL to prove with a high degree of certainty the accuracy of the collection and testing of a sample that, if positive, will result in a suspension, players will be at risk of being wrongly suspended.

17 responses to “Sherman has two arguments for his PED appeal

  1. They should tack on a $5k fine if he wastes time with lousy excuses, such as the drinking out of somebody else’s water bottle, which should have a stupid tax on itself for that action if he chooses to bring that up. As for the testing irregularities, well I hope he’s got a good explanation for that one.

  2. Seems reasonable.

    When I have prescription pills it’s such a pain to have to swallow a pill. As such, I like to just grind them up and put them in my drinks that I leave sitting around.

    If this is at all true (may not be) they should really investigate whether this guy actually graduated from Stanford.

  3. I guess he has to make up some basis for the appeal, because the real reason is so he won’t miss the same four games as Browner.

  4. He denied the first option yet everyone accuses him of being stupid for floating that idea……that seems stupid.

    His collection irregularity defense is unknown at this point so we have to wait until friday. Again, seems stupid to say he is a liar or a cheater at this point, until we see what he has to say.

    I wonder what should happen if someone is wrongly accused and the proper safety procedures were not followed allowing for an incorrect result? I think perhaps there should be an appeal system that allows that player to challenge the results……..Oh….Wait…..there is…..Next Friday.

    Just saying..

  5. manilovethepftcensors says:
    Dec 7, 2012 7:17 PM
    This guy is even stupider than I thought and I thought he was pretty stupid


    Says the guy who apparently believes “stupider” is a word.

  6. Sherman would have done the same as Browner, but he really did take it unknowingly, that’s why he feels the need to fight it

  7. Didn’t Travis Henry once get out of a suspension for saying the marijuana in his system was from secondhand smoke?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.