Strasburg suspended from nhra competition

[twostep]

(sorry for the long rant)

No need to apologize for that rant, Chris. I think it makes a great deal of sense. Exceptions can be made. It appears Graham Light is allowing Mike to attend races, tune cars and service his customers, should he so desire, if the quote from him that I'm reading in the Competition Plus update is correct. That's an exception and a sensible one. Kudos to NHRA for it.

The testing lab had the same option. If Strasburg had been known to 'partake' in the past and was under suspicion anyway, then sure, you go by the book. But he wasn't. He was as clean as the driven snow, by all accounts. It wasn't like he was asking the lab to make an exception just for him and let the whole matter slide. All he was asking for is an alternative means to prove he was innocent of any wrongdoing.

I still maintain they could have split and tested the sample they received, or given Mike a bit more time. Two cents worth of compassion and understanding on the part of a lab tech, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

[Muddy]

The fact of the matter is he didn't fail to take the test. He went and passed the first test and failed to provide a sufficient sample as required by the testing company. This is a medical condition that he couldn only pee a pint instead of a quart. There is no violation of any written rule. Someone with some common sense needs to step up and take control of this. The testing company is acting like a government bureacrat that is overly impressed with their authority.

 

[Tony]

No need to apologize for that rant, Chris. I think it makes a great deal of sense. Exceptions can be made. It appears Graham Light is allowing Mike to attend races, tune cars and service his customers, should he so desire, if the quote from him that I'm reading in the Competition Plus update is correct. That's an exception and a sensible one. Kudos to NHRA for it.

The testing lab had the same option. If Strasburg had been known to 'partake' in the past and was under suspicion anyway, then sure, you go by the book. But he wasn't. He was as clean as the driven snow, by all accounts. It wasn't like he was asking the lab to make an exception just for him and let the whole matter slide. All he was asking for is an alternative means to prove he was innocent of any wrongdoing.

I still maintain they could have split and tested the sample they received, or given Mike a bit more time. Two cents worth of compassion and understanding on the part of a lab tech, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Amazing. Now it's the fault of the testing lab and the technician. The level of paranoia on the NitroWhiner is beyond belief.

 

[Tony]

The fact of the matter is he didn't fail to take the test. He went and passed the first test and failed to provide a sufficient sample as required by the testing company. This is a medical condition that he couldn only pee a pint instead of a quart. There is no violation of any written rule. Someone with some common sense needs to step up and take control of this. The testing company is acting like a government bureacrat that is overly impressed with their authority.

Yet more paranoia!
Medical condition? If Strasburg had peed even close to a pint he would have ok.
No written rule? Maybe you should re-read (or read) Jeff Arend's posts.
Common sense? Maybe the NHRA should let the Chronic Complainers on the NitroWhiner take control of the testing.

 

["Dr. Dirt"]

Maybe it's just Mike? At Pomona 1 a few years back he lost out on his first round points and money because he couldn't keep his "all volunteer" crew indefinitely on the grounds awaiting the rain to stop two days later. They had paying jobs. Oh, he won the first round, earned the money and points but another unwritten rule factored in the "unusual" circumstances and hosed him there as well.
This is nothing new.

 

[Rat]

ok I get it tony bad day, man. It's a discussion not a brewing bar fight.

 

[twostep]

Amazing. Now it's the fault of the testing lab and the technician. The level of paranoia on the NitroWhiner is beyond belief.

You graced this forum with the same crap back in September, when Allen Johnson's suspension was the topic of the day. I agree with the whining problem. The only problem is you're the one doing it.

I'll stand 100 percent behind what I posted. Rules are rules; this is a black and white subject and favorites cannot be played. Nonetheless, the lab, with a half-ounce of common sense and leniency which would have in no way affected the outcome or shown favoritism, very possibly could have prevented this event that may ultimately end up ruining a man's racing career.

You certainly don't have to agree, Baker.

 

[vegasnitro]

Yet more paranoia!
Medical condition? If Strasburg had peed even close to a pint he would have ok.
No written rule? Maybe you should re-read (or read) Jeff Arend's posts.
Common sense? Maybe the NHRA should let the Chronic Complainers on the NitroWhiner take control of the testing.

While I certainly think Strasburg should have been given a wider berth here, I do not fault the lab techs. They did what they were supposed to do. NHRA, in turn, did what the rule book says to do. My only point is there should be some type of ability for someone in charge who has a half-a-brain to be able to intercede on the side of common sense. Instead, everyone just throws up their hands, shrugs their shoulders and moves on down the line because of something that is written on some piece of paper somewhere, so it has to be right.

While I understand the intent of the policy, and I certainly understand it being written with as little wiggle room as possible, let's get together and burn a few calories figuring this thing out. The punishment does not fit the crime.

PS I don't think the policy is bad or in need of an over-haul (it seems to me in this instance it worked too well), so I don't think all of us "whiners" who are willing to stand up for a stand up guy need to run it.

 

[.]

Maybe it's just Mike? At Pomona 1 a few years back he lost out on his first round points and money because he couldn't keep his "all volunteer" crew indefinitely on the grounds awaiting the rain to stop two days later. They had paying jobs. Oh, he won the first round, earned the money and points but another unwritten rule factored in the "unusual" circumstances and hosed him there as well.
This is nothing new.

Are you seriously going to re-run this 2 years later?

You got schooled in 2009, by Randy Goodwin no less, about the difference between 1st round winner and 2nd round loser payout, and staying on the property. You didn't like it then, and you don't like it now.

But you still think NHRA is out to get the little guy. Honestly?

 

[Bob]

Yet more paranoia!
Medical condition? If Strasburg had peed even close to a pint he would have ok.
No written rule? Maybe you should re-read (or read) Jeff Arend's posts.
Common sense? Maybe the NHRA should let the Chronic Complainers on the NitroWhiner take control of the testing.

If someone can provide a copy of the actual substance testing document that the testing company presents to each testee and verbally explains every point made before the testee signs it, this discussion could be much more cut and dried. IOW, if Mike couldn't pee enough during the first time he went to the trailer, had to get back to his car to make a pass, then went back to the trailer to try to produce more pee before the end of the 24-hour time frame to comply, is there a specific restricted time frame from the start of the first pee attempt and the last pee attempt? If there is, would that time frame make an actual difference in real world sobriety testing?

I think there are too many unknowns for you to be hurling insults at people who want to know what actually happened and why it happened.

 

[Randy]

If the testing facilites are independent, then each different facility probably has it's own standards as far as how much specimen is required, whether it must be a split sample, etc. I doubt that NHRA has mandated to these facilities how they perform the tests, whether they require a split sample, quantity of specimen required etc., but just that they report if any of NHRA rules are broken. Maybe the testing facility used in Vegas does require a certain quantity, and that it be a split sample. When Mike couldn't produce this to the testing facility requirements, then NHRA was notified that he had not produced a sample, which is true if the sample did not meet the minimum criteria required by the facility. Seems to me that the procedures and requirements should be the same for all of the facilities used on the tour. Either way, I think Mike waited too long to try and produce a specimen.

 

[BigDaddyB]

I think that there are different standards involved here. I think that the word standardization comes to my mind. If it is done one way all of the time then there is no need for controversy. Does the NHRA pay the testing people money to conduct the test? Are there any guidelines provided to the test provider such as time, place, standards, and method? If I'm paying for something then I figure I should have some say so in what I'm paying the provider to do for me. It seems like in an organization where spec's are an integral part of its operation it would not be hard to come up with a spec for drug testing. As in previous post common sense should prevail in a situation where there was an honest attempt at complying with the policy. A one year suspension is to harsh and should be modified. If there is one standard (i.e. one cup or two cups) then everyone is on the same page. Varying the standard from test to test only leads to what has happenned here.

 

[you]

Where's that dead horse icon when you need it.

 

[Sean D, shondoo]

Where's that dead horse icon when you need it.

Amen, brother!

Sean D

 

[Zak]

I didn't go talk to Mike - but Terry McMillen did. He told Terry that he was sitting there trying to produce enough sample when timed expired. He offered blood and hair and his offer was refused.

I instructed Terry (as if he'd really listen to me) to take a 6 pack of beer and a 5th of liquor in the event he couldn't pee. Just fail the breath test and see ya next race.

As far as how random these test are.... let's just say Terry get's tested every Charlotte and every Vegas. We're not sure if they keep "randomly" picking him because they know he can pass - or can't believe that he did.

Charlotte last year he wasn't given the papers until Saturday. The 'tester' said she couldn't find Terry on Friday. Of course he went immediately and passed. But if you can't find Terry at the track you just ain't looking. He spends the better part of each day at the end of the trailer signing autographs.

And for those that say you can just waltz right in there and be back at your trailer in 10 minutes haven't tried to do it. Last year in Charlotte we killed the better part of 1-1/2 hours from the time we left the pits, waited our turn and returned (we weren't the only ones wanting to get tested first thing Saturday morning).

So in a 4-5 hour window that Terry had to be with sponsors and fans - he spends 20% of that time peeing and breathing into a tube.

Want to make it "random" and time efficient? Show up at the trailer with a vile and breath test and get it done right then and there - hell get the team members while you're there.

What am I saying?? I don't know - I'm just saying... We should be having drug test - I'm just not sure it's being administered properly - especially given Mike's case. They should have taken his blood and not made a deal about it. That generic press release that was put out didn't tell the whole story and in my opinion opened up the NHRA to possible legal issues.

$100 bucks says Terry gets tested again in Charlotte - any takers?

 

[my friends call me Zappy]

The punishment does not fit the crime.

Yer right, a driver test pos. for alky - gets ONE RACE suspention.
This driver does NOT test pos for anything - gets one year + $2500 fine.....

Whats wrong with this picture???

 

[big guy]

The Bottom line is NHRA gave him 24 hours to comply (24 hours)and everybody on here wants them to give him more time.It was his own fault for not taking just 15 minutes out of 24 hours to give piss.I am sorry if I sound harsh, but thems the facts.

 

[my friends call me Zappy]

Sounds to me like he did comply within the time allotted, he just did not produce enough of a sample. My question is: why is he judged guilty when he did not test positive??

You are right, he did not produce the required amount in the time allowed.
Yet, with a clean sample, he is punished 22 times worse than the driver that did test positive.

 

[big guy]

Sounds to me like he did comply within the time allotted, he just did not produce enough of a sample. My question is: why is he judged guilty when he did not test positive??

You are right, he did not produce the required amount in the time allowed.
Yet, with a clean sample, he is punished 22 times worse than the driver that did test positive.

if you call coming to the test tent(or what ever they are in) in the last 20 minutes on time.he had 24 hours.

 

[mick]

every time you turn around these days there's some g*d*#n substance cop
in your face........can't smoke in buildings, can't smoke in public spaces,
can't hardly drink 1 beer unless you're off for the next 2 days.
we are all obviously incapable of policing ourselves.......
getting sick of it.