[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Another lie. A test did exist for THG in 2003 but MLB did not test for it
[/ QUOTE ]
MLB began testing for THG in 2003, almost immediately after it was added to the FDA schedule of bannedsubstances....(remember, you were already wrong about that one.) [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
[/ QUOTE ]
Tsk tsk, just takes a simple Google search to prove this wrong....
Read article
I'll highlight for you...
The newly discovered steroid THG was not tested for, and baseball cannot retest because the samples weren't saved. But it already has been added to the banned list for next year. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
[/ QUOTE ]
Tsk, Tsk....the FDA added THG in Oct 2003, and the "2004 baseball year" begins in Oct 2003.....
It's all in the details.... [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
Put simply, MLB begin testing for THG as early as Oct of 2003.
Which last time I checked, despite being classified by the CBA as part of the "2004 baseball season"....is most definately still a part of the 2003 calendar year.
After all, why would they have tested in the early part of 2003 when the substance wasn't even illegal.
Nevermind that you originally and incorrectly asserted that it was illegal all along and that MLB didn't test for THG at all....[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Don't sweat being wrong, bro....you seem to get lot's of practice at it....you're still upset about being dead wrong about THG's legality in 2003, aren't you?
[/ QUOTE ]
If this is so regarding testing for it in October 2003, why does an article posted on November 13th talk about testing of it in the future tense, "next year."
For somebody trying to sort out which of you is giving the correct facts, this is confusing.
Please clarify with source.