Vernon Adams Suspended

I think he (and Khari) knew it would likely be upheld and it wasnt worth the commotion. If it was two games you can bet it would be appealed.

I wonder if the commissioner knew this when he handed out 1 game instead of 2.

Head CFL official admits referees erred by failing to eject Vernon Adams Jr.

https://3downnation.com/2019/09/24/head-cfl-official-admits-referees-erred-by-failing-to-eject-vernon-adams-jr/

cheater Harris? So you know for a fact he did this on purpose?

Is it any better if he cheated but not on purpose?

Burris says the other night “so often in sports it’s guilty until proven innocent”.

Hank. He tested positive. That’s the proof.

I also believe he did it on purpose until he can prove otherwise.

it takes intent to be a cheater.

how does he do that?

Guilty until proven innocent it is then

No, he’s already guilty. He tested positive for a steroid. Not borderline, not a rumor.

He has not named the substance he took. Has he sued anyone? Has he taken any steps to prove his innocence other than talking?

If I commit a traffic violation and I’m given a ticket, it’s up to me to fight it and prove my innocence before a judge.

I agree with Crash on this one. Harris tested positive for steroids, in other words, ingested banned steroids were found in his urine samples. I am not a chemist or lab worker, so have no idea as to the level discovered or the effect that the substance would have on his performance, training regimen or recovery rate. Nevertheless, I have difficulty believing that he took it “accidentally” or in a “contaminated” product. It seems every athlete who tests positive first denies it, then claims he or she accidentally took it in a contaminated product, and only when cornered finally admits to the juicing. Does the name Ben Johnson or Lance Armstrong ring a bell?

Harris showed evidence of having done the crime and has now done his time. He has a second chance and I hope he continues to produce and shine as a running back. But if he tails off, then there will always be that lingering doubt, won’t there?

Huh “If I commit a traffic violation” Saying those words is already admitting your guilt to the ticketed charge against you. I suppose you meant "If I didn’t commit a traffic violation but was handed a ticket…

And, in court you do not prove your innocence, you defend your innocence, if necessary. For a conviction, the crown has the burden to provide the evidence that you contravened all the points of the law, of which you are charged, beyond a shadow of doubt. If the Crown doesn’t provide this evidence, you’re declared not guilty, you’re not declared innocent. There is no such legal decision as “proven innocent” in the courts.

Ok so is it fair to say that the test Harris was given and failed twice is enough to consider him guilty of taking steroids?

Considering he already served the punishment?

It is well nigh impossible to prove that something did not happen, which is why the onus should always on the plaintiff, or the crown, to prove that it did. That is the beauty of conspiracy theorists. They can make virtually any claim, about any subject, knowing that it is virtually impossible to prove it did not happen.

or NOT guilty of DELIBERATLY taking steroids, or other banned substance. Could be either

Like in, “No Dad, I wasn’t drinking, somebody must have spiked my Coke when I wasn’t looking.”

Or another one is “No Dad. It’s not my weed. My friend asked me to hold it for him.”

Not taking responsibility is the new norm.

where as assuming unproven guilt is a really old norm

The fire is around here somewhere. We’ll find it once all the smoke clears. 8)

unless it is just a smoke bomb

And this cheating increased his performance by ?? ?? 50% ? Turned him from an average RB to a prolific/All-star RB?
Letz get serious here. May have increased his endurance a bit but not much more. The guy was and still is an all star.

The steroid was in the urine, and the urine was in the bottle. It is my understanding that when a positive test occurs, a second sample is then tested before the final conclusion occurs. He peed it out. So how is the guilt unproven?