Sean Sherk's Suspension Reduced

Off Topic
1

Credit www.mmaweekly.com
Following his July 7 Ultimate Fighting Championship welterweight title defense against Hermes Franca, Sean Sherk was suspended for one year and fined $2,500 for testing positive for Nandrolone, according to the California State Athletic Commission.

On Tuesday, he again went before the Commission. When all was said and done, Sherk�??s suspension was reduced to six months, while his fine was upheld at $2,500, MMAWeekly.com�??s Tom Hamlin reported.

An initial motion to uphold the one-year suspension failed. The second motion, to reduce Sherk�??s suspension, initially failed in a 3-3 deadlock, but upon further discussion, it was re-introduced and subsequently passed by a margin of 4-2.

�??You don�??t know what you�??re going to get until you get there,�?? said Sherk in the days leading up to the hearing. �??I�??m optimistic because we do have a lot of facts supporting my innocence.�??

But he was also leery of the process, saying, �??They don�??t really have rules and regulations that they have to follow. All I want is a fair trial. I just want an opportunity to present facts that we have, supporting my innocence that I did not take Nandrolone.�??

Apparently, Sherk believes that he wasn�??t given the fair trial that he wanted. Following the hearing, he stated, �??I�??m not happy at all with (a six-month suspension and fine). This is not over,�?? indicating that he would be discussing possible legal action with his attorneys.

As it stands, Sherk will be eligible to return to action in early January.

Thoughts? Will UFC strip Sherk of the title?

I really don’t get the whole reduction thing. Either he tested positive or he didn’t. If he did, then the suspension stands. If he didn’t test positive, then he’s a free man.

The reduction definitely helps Sherk’s pocketbook as he’ll likely get to fight sooner than later; but he still gets stuck with the rap of having used steroids.

I think UFC will strip him of the title, then maybe have him fight the Penn-Stevenson winner in the spring for the belt.

2

[quote]Djwlfpack wrote:
Credit www.mmaweekly.com
Following his July 7 Ultimate Fighting Championship welterweight title defense against Hermes Franca, Sean Sherk was suspended for one year and fined $2,500 for testing positive for Nandrolone, according to the California State Athletic Commission.

On Tuesday, he again went before the Commission. When all was said and done, Sherk�??s suspension was reduced to six months, while his fine was upheld at $2,500, MMAWeekly.com�??s Tom Hamlin reported.

An initial motion to uphold the one-year suspension failed. The second motion, to reduce Sherk�??s suspension, initially failed in a 3-3 deadlock, but upon further discussion, it was re-introduced and subsequently passed by a margin of 4-2.

�??You don�??t know what you�??re going to get until you get there,�?? said Sherk in the days leading up to the hearing. �??I�??m optimistic because we do have a lot of facts supporting my innocence.�??

But he was also leery of the process, saying, �??They don�??t really have rules and regulations that they have to follow. All I want is a fair trial. I just want an opportunity to present facts that we have, supporting my innocence that I did not take Nandrolone.�??

Apparently, Sherk believes that he wasn�??t given the fair trial that he wanted. Following the hearing, he stated, �??I�??m not happy at all with (a six-month suspension and fine). This is not over,�?? indicating that he would be discussing possible legal action with his attorneys.

As it stands, Sherk will be eligible to return to action in early January.

Thoughts? Will UFC strip Sherk of the title?

I really don’t get the whole reduction thing. Either he tested positive or he didn’t. If he did, then the suspension stands. If he didn’t test positive, then he’s a free man.

The reduction definitely helps Sherk’s pocketbook as he’ll likely get to fight sooner than later; but he still gets stuck with the rap of having used steroids.

I think UFC will strip him of the title, then maybe have him fight the Penn-Stevenson winner in the spring for the belt.[/quote]

        I agree, it could easily have been a false positive from a supplement of some type. I doubt he would be taking a long half life roid like nandrolone if he was going to be in a fight.

      They should do as you said bro, either suspend him fully, or clear his name fully, one or the other. Like you said he either had it in his system or he didn't. WTF.

                  ToneBone
3

The judicial process sounds a bit shonky.

That being said, since he’s suspended for 6 months, take the title from him in the best interests of the UFC. They can’t chance another Matt Serra.

4

CSAC is a circus of morons. I’ve corresponded with Armando Garcia before and came away less than impressed to say the least. Their process is an absolute joke.

5

From reading the write-up on Sherdog, it sounds like he had a legitimate case if there really were testing “irregularities”.

I (and neither does anyone here) know for sure if and/or what he used, but that doesn’t really matter.

If you have a testing system in place, it needs to be beyond question. If the system is questionable, then it is insufficient, especially since it leads to a presumption of guilt rather than a piece of evidence to be presented to determine guilt.

Bottom line, if you’re going to use a testing system, do it right.

From Sherk’s perspective, this is a tough call. Should he press ahead in court to clear his name or pay the fine and move on since the suspension is up next month.

6

I agree. It makes no sense whatsoever to reduce his suspension if they’re still upholding his guilty verdict.

I am admittedly no expert on the whole subject of drug testing, but it seems to me that if Sherk first tested positive with 6 times the allowable level of nandrolone in his system, then they did a second test (or a B sample test?) and that also tested positive . . . case closed. How many follow-up chances is a person supposed to be allowed before it’s concluded that he’s positive? Three? Five? Ten . . . .?

Again, being no expert, can someone who might know more than me tell me what the likelihood is of “tainted supplements” causing a person’s nandrolone levels to spike to 6 times acceptable levels? Maybe it is possible, I just don’t know. But it sounds awfully fishy to me.

From the UFC’s standpoint, I think they have no legitimate option at this point but to strip him of his belt. The CSAC ultimately ruled that the guy tested positive. Whether everyone believes that verdict or not, it is their official verdict, and the UFC doesn’t want to be seen as a sport/organization that allows drug users to compete.

7

It really doesn’t matter what the UFC does with his belt, the outcome is the same either way. The 6 month suspension frees him up in time to fight early next year against the winner of BJ/Stevenson for the LW title regardless of whether he is allowed to keep it for now or not. Hell, I hope they let him keep it and I hope he really did use nandrolone just to piss of the fuckwads in the California State Athletic Comission.

8

Just because the suspension runs out next month doesn’t mean the UFC wouldn’t or shouldn’t strip him of his belt, reason being that he won and/or defended the belt while under the influence of performance-enhancing drugs, according to the CSAC’s official ruling. So he essentially cheated during those matches (or at least his last match), during which he was defending a UFC championship belt, and the UFC, as it tried to gain more mainstream acceptance, does not want to be seen as an organization that allows steroid users to compete and hold belts. And I do believe Dana White has said that, if Sherk was ultimately found to be positive, they’d strip him of his belt.

[quote]Donut62 wrote:
It really doesn’t matter what the UFC does with his belt, the outcome is the same either way. The 6 month suspension frees him up in time to fight early next year against the winner of BJ/Stevenson for the LW title regardless of whether he is allowed to keep it for now or not. Hell, I hope they let him keep it and I hope he really did use nandrolone just to piss of the fuckwads in the California State Athletic Comission.[/quote]

9

[quote]Damici wrote:
Just because the suspension runs out next month doesn’t mean the UFC wouldn’t or shouldn’t strip him of his belt, reason being that he won and/or defended the belt while under the influence of performance-enhancing drugs, according to the CSAC’s official ruling. So he essentially cheated during those matches (or at least his last match), during which he was defending a UFC championship belt, and the UFC, as it tried to gain more mainstream acceptance, does not want to be seen as an organization that allows steroid users to compete and hold belts. And I do believe Dana White has said that, if Sherk was ultimately found to be positive, they’d strip him of his belt.
[/quote]

I agree here. It is either all or none. Either ban performance enhancing drugs altogether or don’t check at all.

10

[quote]Damici wrote:
Just because the suspension runs out next month doesn’t mean the UFC wouldn’t or shouldn’t strip him of his belt, reason being that he won and/or defended the belt while under the influence of performance-enhancing drugs, according to the CSAC’s official ruling. So he essentially cheated during those matches (or at least his last match), during which he was defending a UFC championship belt, and the UFC, as it tried to gain more mainstream acceptance, does not want to be seen as an organization that allows steroid users to compete and hold belts. And I do believe Dana White has said that, if Sherk was ultimately found to be positive, they’d strip him of his belt.[/quote]

That’s what I’m thinking as well. UFC will probably strip him of the title to show athletic commissions and the general public that they are taking a stance against performance-enhancing drugs.

But, as Donut said, it really doesn’t matter if they strip him or not of the belt because in all likelihood Sherk will get first shot at the Penn-Stevenson winner sometime this spring. So, he’ll either be defending his title, or trying to win it back.

CSAC is definitely proving to be difficult to comprehend. They also reduced Phil Baroni’s suspension to 6 months. I think we’ll see fewer MMA shows (not counting Strikeforce, which draws its biggest crowds in San Jose and won’t leave there b/c of Frank Shamrock) in California because of this.

11

I guess another positive of stripping Sherk is that in all likelihood you would have BJ Penn become your champion, who puts asses in seats and in front of TV’s whenever he is in the cage.

12

[quote]Donut62 wrote:
I guess another positive of stripping Sherk is that in all likelihood you would have BJ Penn become your champion, who puts asses in seats and in front of TV’s whenever he is in the cage.[/quote]

What? You mean Joe “Daddy” isn’t going to win? j/k

BJ is definitely a draw. Wonder how Dana convinced him to stay at 155? Knowing BJ, I wouldn’t be surprised if he wins the 155 belt, then moves back to 170.

13

[quote]Djwlfpack wrote:
Donut62 wrote:
I guess another positive of stripping Sherk is that in all likelihood you would have BJ Penn become your champion, who puts asses in seats and in front of TV’s whenever he is in the cage.

What? You mean Joe “Daddy” isn’t going to win? j/k

BJ is definitely a draw. Wonder how Dana convinced him to stay at 155? Knowing BJ, I wouldn’t be surprised if he wins the 155 belt, then moves back to 170.[/quote]

         In an interview I saw, it didn't look like Dana had to do any convincing Djwolf, BJ was saying he definitely wanted to just go ahead and win the belt, and then as you were saying he wants to take welterweight, and he even went on to say in this same interview and another difft one, that he was even seriously contemplating moving even further up the chain into middleweight and/or lightheavy..

           At any rate if and when, this should be an interesting endeavor for us to watch.

                  ToneBone
14

[quote]Djwlfpack wrote:
What? You mean Joe “Daddy” isn’t going to win? j/k

BJ is definitely a draw. Wonder how Dana convinced him to stay at 155? Knowing BJ, I wouldn’t be surprised if he wins the 155 belt, then moves back to 170.[/quote]

Stranger things have happened than Daddy beating BJ, but if BJ is 155 that means he has to be in somewhat decent shape which has been his only weakness. I see nothing but a thorough ass whipping for him. At least from what I have heard, BJ stayed at 155 because he wants Sherk, then wants to go up and fight Hughes and GSP again.

15

[quote]Djwlfpack wrote:
Donut62 wrote:
I guess another positive of stripping Sherk is that in all likelihood you would have BJ Penn become your champion, who puts asses in seats and in front of TV’s whenever he is in the cage.

What? You mean Joe “Daddy” isn’t going to win? j/k

Oops, double posted. updated now.

16

[quote]Djwlfpack wrote:
… UFC will probably strip him of the title to show athletic commissions and the general public that they are taking a stance against performance-enhancing drugs.

…

[/quote]

What will eventually prove very interesting will be when a fighter tests positive at a UK show where the UFC itself handled the testing.

I can’t imagine a fighter having much luck in challenging the UFC’s testing policy.

17

[quote]Ruggerlife wrote:
What will eventually prove very interesting will be when a fighter tests positive at a UK show where the UFC itself handled the testing.

I can’t imagine a fighter having much luck in challenging the UFC’s testing policy.

[/quote]

I highly doubt we would ever even hear about it.

18

[quote]Donut62 wrote:
Ruggerlife wrote:
What will eventually prove very interesting will be when a fighter tests positive at a UK show where the UFC itself handled the testing.

I can’t imagine a fighter having much luck in challenging the UFC’s testing policy.

I highly doubt we would ever even hear about it. [/quote]

I assume you mean all the athletes are above the use of performance enhancing agents and not that the UFC would dare cover up such a scandal! haha