Originally posted by InVerseI'm paraphrasing here some what, but I believe WWE's official response was something along the lines of "Go fuck yourself. The policy isn't for the wellness of the talent, it's for the wellness of our public relations department."
Phenomenal summation. I've always been confuse/annoyed by their wellness policy and how it's enforced. I'm not talking of the glaring issues of certain people possibly not all the time getting tested regularly for things, I'm talking about how strange it is that WWE is a mom-n-pop business; you have direct interaction with the chairman, CEO, and majority shareholder on a regular basis. This isn't a faceless corporation with thousands of employees. If someone pisses hot for something but they have a legit doctors note, it's odd to me that WWE's response is usually what you said. Suddenly the guy with the note becomes the pariah because he claims fair use, when he's expected to just shut up and eat his bowl of shit. It's a cult. (A cult where creativity is imperative to the success of the business, yet frowned upon when the "wrong people" show any, but that's a topic for another time)
The problem with just taking a doctor's note is many of WWE's problems with drugs have come directly from doctors, and doctor notes can easily be backdated or manipulated to cover whatever needs to be covered at that time. In this particular case, that doctor's note was seemingly dated after Rose tested positive. Rose was claiming he'd previously given notice - he'd have to, but that's the note we'd need to see.
I'd check, but I'd have to look around to find it. Adam Rose seems to have deleted that message and others about this issue. I think that's actually a good sign - you'd only delete it if you think it might keep you employed.
Maybe making this thread sticky would be a good idea.
Anyway, as posted in the Other Sports forum:
"The UFC organization was notified today that the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has informed Brock Lesnar of a potential Anti-Doping Policy violation stemming from an out-of-competition sample collection on June 28, 2016. USADA received the testing results from the June 28, 2016 sample collection from the WADA-accredited UCLA Olympic Analytical Laboratory on the evening of July 14, 2016.
"USADA, the independent administrator of the UFC Anti-Doping Policy, will handle the results management and appropriate adjudication of this case. It is important to note that, under the UFC Anti-Doping Policy, there is a full fair legal review process that is afforded to all athletes before any sanctions are imposed. The Nevada State Athletic Commission also retains jurisdiction over this matter as the sample collection was performed in close proximity to Lesnar’s bout at UFC 200 in Las Vegas.
"Consistent with all previous potential anti-doping violations, additional information will be provided at the appropriate time as the process moves forward."
No word from WWE yet but precedent would suggest they'll have to suspend Brock for 30 days when/if his B sample comes back positive. And we're just over 30 days from Summerslam.
Can you really suspend someone who only works a few days a year? I think he should be suspended for 30 contracted days, which I believe would expire in 3 years or so.
Brock Lesnar has not performed for WWE since WrestleMania and is not scheduled to return until Sunday, August 21.
You could read this as WWE saying they're not going to do anything to Brock about it, or that they've suspended him for 30 days already but aren't taking him off SummerSlam. (Surely the plan had to be for Brock to show up before SummerSlam, but who knows.)
Interestingly, the AP apparently has seen copies of three letters from a week prior stating that other tests came back clean. From what I read in an article, Lesnar was tested eight times. Odd only one would come back like this.
Meltzer has said this was the 6th of 6 or 7 tests Brock took, and at least the previous 5 have all come back clean. But he's also noted that sort of thing, people passing tests in a short time and then failing, has happened before.
We can suspend Titus O'Neil 60 days for daring to touch Vince McMahon, but WWE will never suspend Brock Lesnar when there's a big SummerSlam match coming.
"It's called a hustle, sweetheart." --Judy Hopps, Zootopia
Certified RFMC Member-- Ask To See My Credentials!
Co-Winner of Time's Person of the Year Award, 2006
Originally posted by ekedolphinWe can suspend Titus O'Neil 60 days for daring to touch Vince McMahon, but WWE will never suspend Brock Lesnar when there's a big SummerSlam match coming.
It may not matter. In the states where athletic commissions regulate pro wrestling, they may uphold any suspension he gets. That would include New York.
Interestingly, the suspension starts tomorrow. Wonder what THAT'S about.
EDIT: Twitter quickly informs me that WWE chose to make this announcement on girlfriend Paige's birthday, just to twist the knife that started its plunge when they relegated them to separate shows
Doing it on Paige's birthday is not very nice, but I'd guess they knew for a few days - it's clear after the Roman one that WWE gets to choose when the suspension starts, and they started this one only after ADR could give back his win to John Cena (again).
At least he gets time at home with Paige while she's out on the disabled list? Unless they tell her get on the road immediately or something, which wouldn't be out of the WWE zone.
Originally posted by andy1278At least he gets time at home with Paige while she's out on the disabled list? Unless they tell her get on the road immediately or something, which wouldn't be out of the WWE zone.
I agree. James Caldwell of The Torch is one of the worst wrestling writers out there. His "analysis" is almost always utterly useless and obvious. Yeah, I know you meant the farting angle is terrible. They're both terrible.