 |
| Author |
Message |
|
mikeak
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 10:19 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm Posts: 1390
|
|
I love how you guys are arguing about this for the sake of arguing. You are COMPLETELY missing the point.
Sherman's name was pulled in the random drug testing system MONTHS ago. The test he took was INVALIDATED YESTERDAY
THEREFORE SHERMAN IS STILL UP TO BAT, STILL NEEDS TO TAKE THE TEST, NEVER TOOK A PROPER TEST THIS YEAR
not sure what is so complicated with this
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
AF_Hawk
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 10:21 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:18 pm Posts: 1336 Location: Marysville, WA
|
mikeak wrote: I love how you guys are arguing about this for the sake of arguing. You are COMPLETELY missing the point.
Sherman's name was pulled in the random drug testing system MONTHS ago. The test he took was INVALIDATED YESTERDAY
THEREFORE SHERMAN IS STILL UP TO BAT, STILL NEEDS TO TAKE THE TEST, NEVER TOOK A PROPER TEST THIS YEAR
not sure what is so complicated with this This. The report is probably misleading us to believe it was "random" when actuality it is probably required due to the fact that his last test was mishandled (no pun intended).
_________________ 
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Seahwkgal
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 10:31 am |
|
| * NET Hottie * |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:27 pm Posts: 1309
|
mikeak wrote: I love how you guys are arguing about this for the sake of arguing. You are COMPLETELY missing the point.
Sherman's name was pulled in the random drug testing system MONTHS ago. The test he took was INVALIDATED YESTERDAY
THEREFORE SHERMAN IS STILL UP TO BAT, STILL NEEDS TO TAKE THE TEST, NEVER TOOK A PROPER TEST THIS YEAR
not sure what is so complicated with this That would be fine. So why is it being stated as "random". Why isn't it being stated as a "make-up" test?
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
mikeak
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 10:33 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm Posts: 1390
|
|
Technically still the random test just being done now.......
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
scutterhawk
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 10:34 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm Posts: 2086
|
Seahwkgal wrote: If it is part of a work contract, random pee tests are not an infringement of your rights. My husband gets randomly tested all the time at his job. He signed the agreement and he doesn't touch any non prescribed medications. Pretty simple really. He would be livid if a false positive came up though. I got randomly tested in the workplace, and mine came back dirty, Trust me, I'm no druggie. They didn't even bother to test me over again, even tho they had every right to, only because having known me for over 15 years my employer told them that someone had obviously made a mistake. I wasn't just po'd about their misreading, I was pissed that there was an obvious flaw in their system. The Sherman gig though only shows that they want to make it clear, that they still don't believe him, and that they are now going to harrass him for showing them up, just because they legally can Those drug tests can and sometimes ARE flawed, and I would testify to that under oath.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
-The Glove-
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 10:38 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:12 am Posts: 2752
|
mikeak wrote: I love how you guys are arguing about this for the sake of arguing. You are COMPLETELY missing the point.
Sherman's name was pulled in the random drug testing system MONTHS ago. The test he took was INVALIDATED YESTERDAY
THEREFORE SHERMAN IS STILL UP TO BAT, STILL NEEDS TO TAKE THE TEST, NEVER TOOK A PROPER TEST THIS YEAR
not sure what is so complicated with this And I said earlier in a post, if that's the case, I completely understand. But as of RIGHT NOW, it seems like its the league trying to get back at Sherman.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
scutterhawk
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 10:51 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 8:48 pm Posts: 2086
|
AF_Hawk wrote: How did this all of a sudden become a pissing contest? Because it's what I do, and what I'm good at 
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
chris98251
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 10:52 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
 |
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm Posts: 6143 Location: Renton Wa.
|
|
There was nothing stated anywhere about a re test, I still think Roger wanted a quick test to see if they could shut him down, I'll also bet the results are processed faster then normal. I know you can get them done in 24 hours based on my own expereience.
_________________  To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question................Seahawks kick Ass !!!! Used to be an Alumni till they pulled a USC on me... .Net official Clueless, Dumbass, Douche, Simpleton, CensoredTard , and Idiot.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
mikeak
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:06 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:24 pm Posts: 1390
|
scutterhawk wrote: Seahwkgal wrote: If it is part of a work contract, random pee tests are not an infringement of your rights. My husband gets randomly tested all the time at his job. He signed the agreement and he doesn't touch any non prescribed medications. Pretty simple really. He would be livid if a false positive came up though. I got randomly tested in the workplace, and mine came back dirty, Trust me, I'm no druggie. They didn't even bother to test me over again, even tho they had every right to, only because having known me for over 15 years my employer told them that someone had obviously made a mistake. I wasn't just po'd about their misreading, I was pissed that there was an obvious flaw in their system. The Sherman gig though only shows that they want to make it clear, that they still don't believe him, and that they are now going to harrass him for showing them up, just because they legally can Those drug tests can and sometimes ARE flawed, and I would testify to that under oath. Great by your employeer Have the NFL players done ANYTHING to show that they deserve to be trusted more than a piss test? Not in my mind and nor has any other athlete. If this was an MLB player would you take his word over a test?.... Don't get me wrong - based on handling of the case Sherman's original test was properly thrown out. But I also think that clearly comes with at least one re-test and a heightened level of checking
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Scottemojo
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:13 am |
|
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am Posts: 7322
|
|
I wonder if the NFL requires drug testing for the drug testers?
_________________ SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
loafoftatupu
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 12:26 pm |
|
| *Loaf of Smack* |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:17 pm Posts: 2348 Location: Auburn, WA
|
|
Sherman is clean. Even if he wasn't when he took the first test, he had to assume that another one would be coming shortly with all of the issues surrounding him. in fact I was under the impression that once a positive test occurred that the league could take following tests at will.
In any case, the first test was invalid, so they had the right to complete a valid test on the initial random one.
_________________ "What Jefferson was saying was, Hey! You know, we left this England place 'cause it was bogus; so if we don't get some cool rules ourselves - pronto - we'll just be bogus too! Get it?" -- Jeff Spicoli
Last edited by loafoftatupu on Fri Dec 28, 2012 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Starrman44
|
Post subject: Re: Sherman "randomly" tested today Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:37 pm |
|
| NET Starter |
 |
 |
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:35 pm Posts: 453 Location: Canby, OR
|
|
It makes sense if one was nullified that he would be required to take another one.
Personally, as I said, I think Sherman is clean, so I am not worried.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Users browsing this forum: bloodkingg, CANHawk, Cartire, chihawk, CPHawk, Evil_Shenanigans, FormerEvil, GawksAtHawks, geoff21, GhostHawk, GoldenTater81, grizbob, Hawker, hawker84, Hawkfish, HawkinSinCity, JerHawk81, Majestic-12 [Bot], Mojambo, MSN [Bot], NYCoug, oldhawkfan, Osprey, RampagingMice, Scottemojo, T-Sizzle, Throwdown, volsunghawk and 145 guests |
| |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
 |
Seahawks.NET is an independent fan site and not associated with the Seattle Seahawks or the NFL (National Football League).
All content within this Seahawks fan page is provided by, and for, Seattle Seahawks fans. Copyright © Seahawks.NET.
|