Nitromater
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Strasburg suspended from nhra competition
- Thread starter Dick
- Start date
mick
Nitro Member
do not disagree with you.
Am I missing something here? The rules are saying that a first time positive test as determined by the MRO mandates that the driver/official participate in substance abuse counseling and submit a clean sample WITHIN SEVEN DAYS, and failure to do so results in NHRA being advised of a First Violation infraction - which then results in the driver/official being fined $2500 and suspended for one year.
If that is indeed the case, why is Strasburg even in trouble? I'm assuming this is his 'first positive test'. Not chemically positive, but positive by failure to submit on time. According to the rules as I interpret them, he should have been bounced for this one race, given a week to attend 'therapy' and produce a clean sample, at which time the MRO would clear him to race and the NHRA would not have even been notified of the infraction. That's what it says right there in the rules - what am I missing??
Unless Mike is a repeat violator, it appears this is an appeals slam-dunk.
If that is indeed the case, why is Strasburg even in trouble? I'm assuming this is his 'first positive test'. Not chemically positive, but positive by failure to submit on time. According to the rules as I interpret them, he should have been bounced for this one race, given a week to attend 'therapy' and produce a clean sample, at which time the MRO would clear him to race and the NHRA would not have even been notified of the infraction. That's what it says right there in the rules - what am I missing??
Unless Mike is a repeat violator, it appears this is an appeals slam-dunk.Usual password less 1
Nitro Member
Am I missing something here? The rules are saying that a first time positive test as determined by the MRO mandates that the driver/official participate in substance abuse counseling and submit a clean sample WITHIN SEVEN DAYS, and failure to do so results in NHRA being advised of a First Violation infraction - which then results in the driver/official being fined $2500 and suspended for one year.
If that is indeed the case, why is Strasburg even in trouble? I'm assuming this is his 'first positive test'. Not chemically positive, but positive by failure to submit on time. According to the rules as I interpret them, he should have been bounced for this one race, given a week to attend 'therapy' and produce a clean sample, at which time the MRO would clear him to race and the NHRA would not have even been notified of the infraction. That's what it says right there in the rules - what am I missing??
The information on the drug testing sheet that you sign clearly states (word for word from the copy in my hand) in bold red letters;
YOU MUST REPORT FOR TESTING EVEN IF YOU HAVE BEEN ELIMINATED FROM COMPETITION. FAILURE TO REPORT AND PRODUCE A SPECIMEN FOR TESTING WITHIN 24 HOURS OF THIS NOTIFICATION WILL RESULT IN A MANDATORY SUSPENSION OF ONE YEAR AND A FINE OF $2500.00
In other words it is better to give a sample even if you know you may not pass. Once the results come back from the lab (they don't do it at the track, it is sent to an independent lab for testing) and they notify you if you have failed, you have 7 days to attend counselling and then produce a "clean" sample. If you do that, and it is your first time, NHRA never really finds out about it and you are good to go. If you however do not go to counselling or produce a sample that fails again, NHRA finds out and you are in the "first positive test" scenario.
So, no matter what you have to get your "specimen" in by the deadline or you are suspended. Obviously, if you fail the breathalyser test first, NHRA finds out right away and you are done for that race only (as per the written rules), and still have to report to counselling and submit a "clean" specimen before you can get back to racing.
Thanks, Jeff, I understand. In effect, then, it would be better to blow a .025 in the breathalyzer and urine-test positive for black tar heroin than to show up at the lab in the closing minutes short on pee. Example A gets you canned for a weekend; example B tells you to come back in 2012 and bring a $2500 check.
Just mouthing off; I understand rules are rules, guidelines are guidelines and they must be adhered to no matter how vague the infraction or your standing in the race community. Somehow it just doesn't seem fair. I don't believe for a moment Mike Strasburg is a substance abuser. He simply got snared by a system that, unfortunately, takes no prisoners.
Just mouthing off; I understand rules are rules, guidelines are guidelines and they must be adhered to no matter how vague the infraction or your standing in the race community. Somehow it just doesn't seem fair. I don't believe for a moment Mike Strasburg is a substance abuser. He simply got snared by a system that, unfortunately, takes no prisoners.
my friends call me Zappy
Nitro Member
If NHRA wants to suspend him for one year for failing to comply with in the time allotment, that's one thing. But to ban him from the track also???
This is a public sporting event, how can they deny him the right to purchase a ticket and inter-the property???
This is a public sporting event, how can they deny him the right to purchase a ticket and inter-the property???
my friends call me Zappy
Nitro Member
Okay thank you Carl, I must have missed read the story the first time. I stand corrected.
my friends call me Zappy
Nitro Member
Under the story " I couldn't provide a sample in time", read the fourth paragraph from the bottom.
It clearly states that the NHRA suspension bans him from attending any events.
It clearly states that the NHRA suspension bans him from attending any events.
Last edited:
I'd say, with over 7000 hits on this post it's got some peoples attention... I have been in the trucking and flying business for over 40 years. I was around when the first drug testing for the DOT came around in the 70's... I have NEVER had to give 2 samples.... And most of the time they tell you "whatever you can get in the cup is fine"... I'm TOTALLY on Mike's side... There is no reason in the world they could not have tested what he gave... I was diagnosed with cancer of the right kidney 4 years ago during a test with about a teaspoon in the cup... I'm not sticking up for Mike just because he's my friend, I'm just saying I think the testing company and the people involved
maybe got a little carried away with this whole deal... Eventually if this keeps up with stiff fines for everything you do, and rules that bust your balls every time you move, the whole idea of small underfunded teams will dissappear.. When that happens, the NHRA will dissappear too.
maybe got a little carried away with this whole deal... Eventually if this keeps up with stiff fines for everything you do, and rules that bust your balls every time you move, the whole idea of small underfunded teams will dissappear.. When that happens, the NHRA will dissappear too.
NHRA is going to disappear over this? Really? For not applying written rule, or because they do?When that happens, the NHRA will dissappear too.
Did you read the whole post, or just the last sentence? Or just what you wanted to read.......
I read that YOU never had to give 2 samples. How does that matter? Have you ever been tested at a national event?Did you read the whole post, or just the last sentence? Or just what you wanted to read.......
I read that you are TOTALLY on Mikes side? That doesn't cloud your judgement? I also read that you are his friend. Same logic.
I read that you were diagnosed with cancer off of a teaspoon of urine. Sorry, I need a few more conclusive tests than that before I accept that I have the big C.
I read that you think the NHRA is busting balls on small, underfunded teams. That isn't the case at all. Unless you just want to take shots at NHRA, which we all know is unheard of around here.
I read you pointing fingers at the people that due the testing. Uh, yeah, they have a problem with the small teams I suppose.
And, I read that when those underfunded teams go away, so does NHRA. Which, is not even remotely true.
Close enough?
Look, I feel bad for the guy. But the rules are the rules, for everyone And nobody is aiming for him, or other small teams. Using that excuse is deflecting from the real issue.
If he had taken this so serious, why was he waiting until right before (yeah, even the run log mentions it) his run to do his business, after 24 hours notice?
If you dislike NHRA so much, walk away. Don't continually take shots at the organization. Go watch IHRA, or ADRL. If you can find them on TV, that is.
Last edited:
And you're clearly right
Apparently Graham Light has the discretion to either ban Strasburg from driving only, or ban him from even being on the grounds. Thankfully he chose the former.
And you're clearly right
Apparently Graham Light has the discretion to either ban Strasburg from driving only, or ban him from even being on the grounds. Thankfully he chose the former.
Now has Mr. Light created a precedence here for future enforcement of the rules. The rule clearly states that anyone one violating the substance abuse policy will be banned from all national events and member tracks. As written it provides no wiggle room or gray area. Now what would have been a good thing to do is include a clause giving the powers to be an ability to review the violation an make a judgement unto its fairness. I was under the impression that this was a zero tolerenace policy for which if you violate the full weight of the rules are on your shoulders. Now the paper that Mr. Arend presented leads your to believe that if a driver is late he is supended from driving. But nowhere in the Official Rulebook is this situation addressed. When these types of situations arise to try an make acceptions or interpretations leads to arbutary application of the rules and at some point in time another individual will expect the same treatment whether it it be justified or not be justified. Inclusion of this situation should have been in the rulebook. Look we all are guilty of being late for meetings, paying bills, for lunch, its an imperfect world. Mr. Strasburg made every asttempt to comply with the rule and to make him the example on his first offense is to severe. This was not a flagrant attempt at gaming the system.
I looked in my rulebook and it's states clearly the policy as far as random but not a page addresses the policy on how much specimen and operating time for testing. The rulebook tells you appeals steps and processes and what kind of testing will be done, they left out how much sample is needed and what timeframe, but the penalty is noted for sure. Sure it may be smart for all drivers to stop everything and go test, but it seems like the NHRA may give short notice and when your a pro with 2 passes on a day, how do you get it done with all the obligations?
Last edited:
And you're clearly right
Apparently Graham Light has the discretion to either ban Strasburg from driving only, or ban him from even being on the grounds. Thankfully he chose the former.[/QUOTE
Now has Mr. Light created a precedence here for future enforcement of the rules. The rule clearly states that anyone one violating the substance abuse policy will be banned from all national events and member tracks. As written it provides no wiggle room or gray area. Now what would have been a good thing to do is include a clause giving the powers to be an ability to review the violation an make a judgement unto its fairness. I was under the impression that this was a zero tolerenace policy for which if you violate the full weight of the rules are on your shoulders. Now the paper that Mr. Arend presented leads your to believe that if a driver is late he is supended from driving. But nowhere in the Official Rulebook is this situation addressed. When these types of situations arise to try an make acceptions or interpretations leads to arbutary application of the rules and at some point in time another individual will expect the same treatment whether it it be justified or not be justified. Inclusion of this situation should have been in the rulebook. Look we all are guilty of being late for meetings, paying bills, for lunch, its an imperfect world. Mr. Strasburg made every asttempt to comply with the rule and to make him the example on his first offense is to severe. This was not a flagrant attempt at gaming the system.
I never thought I would say this, but if it is in fact true, that the decision maker can determine the severity of the penalty, then I commend Graham Light for only suspending Mike from driving.
vegasnitro
Nitro Member
I very firmly believe rules like this are put into place so people don't have to think or use judgement or in this case, common sense.
I don't believe anyone thinks that Mike was trying to avoid the test.
I don't believe anyone thinks that Mike would have failed the test.
I don't believe anyone at NHRA is unsympathetic with Mike's situation or is trying to make an example of him.
But since it was in black and white, and the procedure was explained to Mike very clearly including penalties, everyone just gets to throw up their hands and say "rules are rules" and move on down the road no matter the consequences for one of the good guys in the game.
I work with a man who is a scout leader here in Vegas. His son is in 9th grade. His son grabbed my co-worker's backpack and took it to school by accident, apparently they are very similar in appearance. There was a small, 2 inch pocket knife in the bookbag used on a scouting trip and the metal detector picked it up on the way into school. His son was immediately expelled and will spend the rest of the year in the "Juvie Detention" school. His son was all A's and B's and in AP courses, now he is in lockdown with gang-bangers taking the lowest level courses required to pass this trash to the next grade, as well as anti-violence/behavioral counselling, when the kid has never been in trouble in his life. My co-worker has appealed this several times and spent a few thousand on a lawyer to appeal the case to a higher court, but the answer is always "we have a zero tolerance policy ... sorry ... there is nothing we can do". My co-worker's son will not be able to get this year removed or hidden from his transcript, so in a couple of years when he starts applying to colleges they will see it. He will also be a year behind where he would have been in his AP courses, also adversely affecting his transcripts.
Seems to me something similar is happening to Mike Strasburg because NO ONE in the country wants to actually use their brains and take a stand, they just want to hide behind some piece of paper.
We all make mistakes, and Mike freely admits his here, and I am sure would be willing to offer up as many samples as the drug testers wanted for the rest of the year. Where would ANY of us be if someone didn't make an exception or give us a second chance somewhere down the line???
(sorry for the long rant)
I don't believe anyone thinks that Mike was trying to avoid the test.
I don't believe anyone thinks that Mike would have failed the test.
I don't believe anyone at NHRA is unsympathetic with Mike's situation or is trying to make an example of him.
But since it was in black and white, and the procedure was explained to Mike very clearly including penalties, everyone just gets to throw up their hands and say "rules are rules" and move on down the road no matter the consequences for one of the good guys in the game.
I work with a man who is a scout leader here in Vegas. His son is in 9th grade. His son grabbed my co-worker's backpack and took it to school by accident, apparently they are very similar in appearance. There was a small, 2 inch pocket knife in the bookbag used on a scouting trip and the metal detector picked it up on the way into school. His son was immediately expelled and will spend the rest of the year in the "Juvie Detention" school. His son was all A's and B's and in AP courses, now he is in lockdown with gang-bangers taking the lowest level courses required to pass this trash to the next grade, as well as anti-violence/behavioral counselling, when the kid has never been in trouble in his life. My co-worker has appealed this several times and spent a few thousand on a lawyer to appeal the case to a higher court, but the answer is always "we have a zero tolerance policy ... sorry ... there is nothing we can do". My co-worker's son will not be able to get this year removed or hidden from his transcript, so in a couple of years when he starts applying to colleges they will see it. He will also be a year behind where he would have been in his AP courses, also adversely affecting his transcripts.
Seems to me something similar is happening to Mike Strasburg because NO ONE in the country wants to actually use their brains and take a stand, they just want to hide behind some piece of paper.
We all make mistakes, and Mike freely admits his here, and I am sure would be willing to offer up as many samples as the drug testers wanted for the rest of the year. Where would ANY of us be if someone didn't make an exception or give us a second chance somewhere down the line???
(sorry for the long rant)
Last edited:
