Sherk Appeal Postponed Until November 13th
UFC Lightweight Champion Sean Sherk’s steroid appeal has been postponed yet again by the California State Athletic Commission. His appeal will now continue on November 13th. Sherk’s attorney, Howard Jacobs, presented information to the CSAC in advance of today’s hearing but it was not distributed in time for a ruling to be made today. Instead, the commission will review the evidence in preparation for another hearing in two weeks.
Sherk tested positive for the banned steroid nandrolone following his win over Hermes Franca at UFC 73 in Sacramento in July.
A decision is expected to be handed down at the upcoming hearing barring another delay. He currently faces a $2,500 fine and one-year suspension until July 6th of 2008. His appeal is seeking to have the suspension overturned outright or reduced. His defense has focused on over the counter supplements which could have resulted in a false positive and a polygraph test Sherk successfully took to prove his innocence.
The continued delays in the case have put the lightweight division on hold pending the outcome of the appeal. If the case is upheld UFC President Dana White has stated he will strip Sherk of the lightweight title and contenders Joe Stevenson and BJ Penn were expected to square off for the vacant belt in December at UFC 79. If the test is overturned Sherk was expected to face Penn on the same card. The latest delay, however, has put those plans in jeopardy. With just one and a half months remaining once the case is resolved on November 13th it is not known if the fighters will be prepared for a title fight on such short notice.
Continue reading for the official UFC statement on today’s hearing…
The UFC has released the following statement on UFC.com:
At a hearing in Los Angeles today, the California State Athletic Commission (CSAC) granted a second continuance for UFC Lightweight Champion Sean Sherk’s appeal of his positive test for the banned substance “Nandrolone” after his July 7th win over Hermes Franca at UFC 73 in Sacramento.
The continuance will allow the CSAC to review documents submitted by Sherk’s attorney. It is expected that Sherk’s continued appeal will take place in the next meeting Nov. 13, 2007.
Stay tuned to MMAFrenzy.com for more updates on the case in the coming weeks.
Tags: BJ Penn, Joe Stevenson, Sean Sherk
Loading ...
Haven’t they had plenty of time for discovery? It seems now like they are just stalling the inevitable. I mean really, how long have they had to view this evidence?
man i am tired of waiting already they are stalling 2 much just take the title away from sherk and let bj and joe fight 4 it already becasue its taking way 2 long and watch when nov 13th comes up there going 2 delay it next year or somethin
It wasn’t the fact that they needed plenty of time for discovery, it was the fact that whoever was in charge of passing along the information to ALL the committee members. It sounded as if some had the information while others did not. The CSAC is turning out to a joke, to be honest.
This is getting ridiculous. I went from supporting Sherk, then I did an article on Nandrolone and hearing interviews from NSAC people and I figured there was no way out for Sherk unless he proved a substance that was legal on their listing ended up being illegal. Now, I don’t care. I just want to see the title stripped already.
CSAC has had horrible decision making skills. They allowed a boxer to come in and berate the committee, I believe it was Toney, and he got his suspension REDUCED. Baroni positively tested for TWO steroids that aren’t naturally forming, REDUCED. I mean, what the hell kind of example is this? Adam Smith should have just got off completely.
i dont beleive that sherk actually took any steriods cuz i watched the ufc all access on him and he does alot of over the counter supplements i think the total number was like 23 supplements i can see somehow something getting mixed up and actually him taking some sorta steriod…but its all good for some reason there gonna post pone and post pone and post pone cuz the whole commission is wrong and they know it so there stalling for time so people dont realize whats going on then over-turn the conviction behind closed doors or some **** like that…i dunno jus thinking out loud here
even if he is taking 27 supplements…. he has to know what each one is made if… other athlets say well my coach gave me this supplement, blah blah… but it is the fighters duty to know what they put in their body…
and watching UFC all access just shows how much he watches what he puts into his body…. gee how’d that get there?
i say let Joe and BJ fight. gonna be another year for a lightweight title fight….. its almost been one for a WW title fight. yet the UFC says it is going to ask randy to fight this week (not set this week) to see if he will refuse…. A. he just fought. B. he broke his arm in his last fight. C. the UFC reps are being dicks
The UFC is going to ask him to fight Nog in January or Febuary, not right away. That was the initial plan anyways. They just want to schedule it, and find out where he stands. They have every right to offer him this fight right now. He is THEIR champion, and he has 2 more fights to fight in abou 13 months. That is far from unreasonable. His arm is supposed to be completely healed by the middle of next month anyhow. It was a hair line fracture, not a break.
Jesus, people just are not happy unless they are complaining. Sherk is a dude, I do not believe for a second that he WILLINGLY took roids. People are so quick to jump on the band wagon of hate. Yes its taking a long time, yes the CSAC are rubbish at making decisions, but if I was Sherk i would not care if it took till the end of NEXT year to get sorted, I would patiently wait to clear my name.
What people are forgetting is that he had like 12 units as opposed to the average 6, people that take the roid to gain benefit from it usually have like 50-60 units! Have you seen how hard the man works? does it not cause reasonable doubt that he just naturally produced it, or ingested the tiny amount through his supplements (and before I get berated by everyone with an opinion, Yes, I know you should be in control and knowing everything you are putting in your body) I mean come on, that man will not walk through a casino because he does not want to inhale smoke, he took a freakin’ polygraph test to prove that he didn’t do it, which came back NEGATIVE. How many of you would do that? Infact, if you knew you DIDN’T do something, how many of you would DEMAND a polygraph to prove your innocence? What the hell do you guys want?
Well, in a previous life he could have had training on how to pass a lie-detector. He did used to work for the CIA and ****. Kidding, let him off already, let him fight BJ and get on with it.
Chris,
Do some research, I did quite awhile ago. 12 ng/mL is tough to reach without using nandrolone. If there were traces, a number of his supplements would have to be tainted to raise the level that high. Thirdly, it is next to impossible to naturally get your body to produce over 5 ng/mL, let alone to the limit 6, naturally is out of the question.
If Sherk had tainted supplements, he didn’t test them, therefore his suspension will most likely be reduced. If he can prove one of the supplements from the legal list is tainted, he probably gets off completely. If he can prove the polygraph tests are admissable, he may be able to get off completely as well.
Apparently, you don’t know how polygraph tests work though. They don’t have 100% accuracy, or even 90% accuracy. It’s just under 90%. That’s horrible. And the accuracy can be determined by the examiner’s questioning and tone. Bad move. The CSAC is dumb enough to admit it though. There is a reason it is basically banned from being used in courts throughout the world. It isn’t accurate enough.
It is IMPOSSIBLE to produce 12 ng/mL naturally. I don’t care how hard you work out, it’s impossible. Pregnant women are the only people who can produce upwards of 6 ng/mL.
http://www.mma-analyst.com/post/The-Sean-Sherk-Chronicles-In-depth-look-at-his-appeal.aspx
Check out the research
Leland,
Wow, I am impressed. A reasonable response to a mail, without shouting, accusation, name calling, belittling, berating. Just facts. I am genuinely impressed and grateful. Thank you.
Obviously, I have not researched or my argument would be more complete. My feeling on it is that he did not WILLINGLY take a substance, period. I genuinely feel for the guy, he is at the point of almost losing everything he has worked so hard for. If it is his supplements, then I would say he is partly to blame, you should know what you are putting in you yadda yadda yadda…but just looking at his exposure, his fitness level, his hunger, his work ethic…do you think he is someone that would risk everything by taking something on purpose? I don’t. Especially, regardless of the inaccuracy, the polygraph. I bow to your superior knowledge on how these things work, yet I find it hard to believe that someone would take a banned substance, lie about not having taken it, appeal, agree to testing, doctors reports, further testing, take a polygraph, pass the polygraph, continue to appeal…There are just too many variable in there, too many things that he has to get completely right, If one other thing went against him, it would be goodnight. Am I the only one that thinks this…?
I genuinely didn’t know about how nandrolone is produced, thank you for letting me know. Am I at least right in the fact that he had a far lower amount in his body than someone would have if they were purposefully taking the substance (50-60ng/mL?) I feel that my argument is clutching at straws lol
My main bugbear is that people are so quick to change their minds and complain. Yesterday he was the best thing since sliced bread, now he is public enemy number one. Will that change if he is found innocent? Fickleness p*sses me off. Just because the hearing has been put back and so everything is not fitting in to THEIR time frame for what THEY want, they kick up a fuss, do you know what I mean? I would work until the end of the world to clear my name of something I know I didn’t do, I would not care how long it took me, and my work ethic is about 1/100th of Sean Sherk
Anyway, I have full confidence that he will be cleared. Thank you for the education, but I stand by my point that it was not a willing action.
Regards…
if when the decision comes through it is a not guilty wont that give every fighter something to say when they are caught?? its a shame if he hasnt known what he was taking but he is a pro.serve the ban and come back fighting clean and the ufc can send out the right message.
Show me one fighter that is as clean living and hard working as him, then they may have a case as well. He went on record today stating “I want to clear my name and not have (steroids) attached to me,” “I want to fight as soon as possible, I have to make a living, I have a family and I have a title (to defend) that I worked my entire life for.”
If he accepts it, even if he comes back and is champ again, he will always have the whole “He used to be on steroids” stigma. Would you want that or would you want to clear you name of something you KNOW you didn’t do?
if it comes out that he is guilty then he will have no choice but accept it.are we just supposed to take the guys word for it or look at facts? if they dont impose any ban on him then you are opening all kinds of get outs for fighters who are caught out whether a mistake or not.and he wouldnt be the first sportsman/woman to swear they didnt do it deliberatly would he? i take your point that i would want to clear my name but the fact is he has failed the test and thats why he will have that stigma attached.im not against sherk just against a sport that has had problems going mainstream giving itself more problems.
I see your point my man, I really do. And I agree that if they clear him they will be opening up a can of worms they could definitely do without at the moment. It will be down to the case that the defense puts across for him and how solid it is. I disbelieve a lot of people that claim they didn’t do it, but I don’t know what it is, I just find him doing it intentionally very hard to believe. It will be hard to clear his name after a positive test, but not impossible….
I for one have my fingers crossed….if only so I can watch him smash BJ ;p
I have to say, this is the first forum I have written on on this subject where people are really reasonable and put across a good, reasonable argument as opposed to ‘$%%£ you, your a !**%$, I know everything, you suck, my opinion is the only one there should be’ etc etc. Its refreshing
i find it hard to believe anyone would do it intentionally when they know they gonna get tested in any sport but sadly they do. this is the best forum. always upto date and everyones opinion counts.i take your point to and whichever way the decision goes sherk is a major player in the division and i hope to see him fight bj penn because that would be a great fight.
50-60 ng/mL, I’ve heard of it being produced from simply using eyedrops. If you were injected it, of course, you would test that high. I believe in my research when I did that article, there were a few Olympic athletes that tested above 200 ng/mL that were found to be using a certain eyedrop, but the level was so ridiculously high that the IOC looked into a domestic product all three were using.
To be honest, Sherk will get a reduction or it will be thrown out completely based on the last few cases. Baroni was straight screwed in his decision. His decision should have been overturned. He had 1 out of 5 tests come back positive. Pavia sent the same samples to another facility that is ALSO used by the CSAC, but somehow the CSAC discounted those samples. There was only one sample he tested positive for, the others in the same batch did not. Seems fishy.
In the end, the CSAC needs to be cleaned out. With Baroni’s case, Sherk’s lawyer should do the same thing. Have all the samples retested by the OTHER CSAC approved lab and check out the results. It seems one of the labs is either mistakenly getting results wrong or mixing up the samples in some way. It’s odd that 4 samples would test negative, but 1 tests for 2 different steroids.
[...] was given on when his hearing will now take place though a November 13th hearing to coincide with Sean Sherk’s continued appeal appears the most [...]
They created limits for a reason.
This thing is taking forever. Hopefully we get the Sherk vs. Penn fight that all of us want. Stevenson is a very good opponent for Penn, but Sherk is a great opponent for Penn. We gotta have Penn fight Sherk some time soon, hopefully Sherk is innocent,
and we get the greatest 155 pound main event ever.
Somebody stated it was impossible to have 12ng/ml in your body naturally. I agree with that statement but….. Excessive creatine and protein intake, mixed with high levels of cariovascular exercise will raise the level.
This means the man good have taken everything he thought he was taking, no mistakes, accidents, etc, and still have raised his levels. Yes, 12ng/ml is twice as high as the average high performance athlete, but in response to somebody who says that level has never been achieved before legally the answer is: not yet….perhaps until now.
Remember excessive creatine and protein ingestion would not be naturally gaining that high a level of nandrolone, but it would be legal.
Look, the guy is a fitness freak. If something like this were possible he would certainly be the one to do it.
The biggest problem I have with the entire scenario though was already mentioned by somebody else. People who test postive for nandrolone have 40ng/ml or higher. Royce Gracie had over 50. Nate Marquardt had about 45. I have looked up between 30-40 people who have tested positive for nandrolone and not one of them has been under 40ng/ml. If somebody can find me one person who tested positive for a low amount like sherk did then I shall gladly retract my statement.
Now for lie detectors….No they are not admissable in court because a small percentage of the time they are not accurate. I believe somebody stated it was about 89%. That is actually a deceptive number. It is in reality higher. That 89% is a number used to measure the percentage of overall questions which are right or wrong. A polygraph test is more than just an individual right or wrong answer. It is a list of questions conducted over 3 to 4 different tests to gauge an overall response.
A person may be able to intentionally or unintentionally provide an inaccurate answer for a question from time to time, but very few people can provide inaccurate answers successfully for an entire series of tests. Those that can tend to be sociopaths or highly trained goverment employees. So the overall accurracy is a little bit closer to 97-98%.
Hey condoms are only 99% effective, but we still trust them. In fact most law enforcement agencies require a polygraph test before employment.
Guess we’ll all find out soon enough, but I just don’t see how the CSAC can punish him with all of this “reasonable doubt” floating around.
Actually, even with insane levels of supplements and obsessive fitness routines, you can barely break 6 ng/mL. They’ve done studies on it. If obsessive fitness and too many supplements caused 12 ng/mL, we’d see more cases of this. Sherk cannot be the only guy in the world producing those levels if it was done naturally.
Polygraphs test are still not admissable in court. The CSAC will probably admit it as evidence considering they don’t care what happens.
That last argument left by Leland is solid but….. On that same note why is the amount in his body so low in comparison with everybody else who tests positive for nandrolone? He can’t be the the only person in the world taking the substance illegally who doesn’t have 40+ ng/ml in his system can he?
Sooooo perhaps that points to a faulty test?
His count is likely so low because, if he was taking it, his timing cycle was off by a week or so. He was on the bottom line of testing positive so much lower and we never would have heard about it. The people with extremely high levels typically risk testing positive and make no attempt to get it out of their system by the time of their fight.
He probablly stopped as to throw the tests off. The thing about the “lie detector”is this…
The reason they are not admissable in courts is they produce a reasonable doubt. Both sides, prosacution and defense must prove beyond a reasonable doubt. I too find it hard to believe that he naturally has 2 times the amount normally found in the body. If they can’t find another case of someone else naturally having that amount in their body, then he should be found guilty, and stripped of the title plain and simple.
Nandrolone has a short half-life, you can literally cycle within limits after 2-3 days from taking full doses of the stuff. There are charts outlined on the Internet sketching out it’s levels over a certain period of days. 2-3 days is the norm.
From what I’ve researched it varies greatly on the kind being used from several hours to 10 days or more. The key is that half life is only for half of it to exit the body, then half of that total leaves again in another span of the time, and so on. I am not aware of what the level is when someone is in the middle of taking it but I’d venture his relatively low levels could be a result of the process and it just didn’t have time to be completely expelled.
Like I said it really varies and all we know is he tested positive for Nandrolone Metabolite so it’s hard to say if he took something with a 3-4 hour half life or a 10+ day half life. This all assumes the tests are correct of course which, based on the Phil Baroni case, they may not be.
Baroni’s case is different. He took Boldenone, which has something like a 5 months half-life. He’d have been dumb to think he could beat that.
Right, two different drugs all together but his case showed that the tests are not as definite as the commission and the public once felt they were.
The situation with Baroni makes no sense. They give him a shortened suspension because back up samples he gave to a private company were negative. I’m a little wary of any testing done with a private company being used as a defense, but nonetheless the shortened suspension makes it seem as if the CSAC feels as if it has merit. It still doesn’t make any sense though. He either should be suspended for the full year or not suspended at all.
It also had to do with only one test being positive and the company the CSAC used for the tests.