Mixed Martial Arts Forum banner

Joe Rogan calls Nick Diaz suspension 'an irresponsible abuse of power'

6K views 113 replies 22 participants last post by  kantowrestler 
#1 ·
Rogan is upset

Joe Rogan ✔@joerogan
NSAC suspending Nick Diaz for 5 years for pot is an irresponsible abuse of power. It's callous, idiotic and sickening

Joe Rogan ✔@joerogan
Unless there's scientific proof that marijuana is a performance enhancing drug that gives an unfair advantage it should not be restricted.
 
#3 ·
If having small levels of THC in your blood is dangerous for the fighter, the dangers are going to be marginal at most. There are thousands of totally legal substances that a fighter could consume before a fight that would do him no favours. A silly but valid example: would it help a fighter to drink a pint of vinegar before a fight? At a guess, I would say feck no. They could eat 5kg of cheese. Drink an obscenely strong coffee. All totally legal. All very very bad ideas.

If it is the case that THC is actually pretty bad in some way when getting punched in the face, then I would like to see that paper.
 
#7 ·
This my reasoning for not understanding why someone would think weed is a PED

- Is weed increasing muscle, recovery, ability to lose weight but retain strength? It is altering your mind. So should we ban sport psychologists? What if a guy wants to be hypnotized? Is it performance enhancing? What about beer? Would it allow one to fall asleep faster with a messed up in pain body done with training? Where do we start defining a PED? A lot of things help fighters train. Different things for different people.

-Adderall is more if a PED than weed. I know this is all subjective because like I said different things work for people. But I would say it is pretty comfortable to say Adderall is more of a PED than weed.

I do understand you don't want a guy to come in stoned to a fight. That is pretty much why it isn't a PED. That would be hard to determine and test.

It isn't a PED. It should be legal in bigger but still small levels. Basically so a guy has to stop it a handful of days before to make sure he was under the more laX thresholds are. Which is reasonable and helps deter any sort of day of the fight use.

Nick was going to get in trouble even though he was under the thresholds. That's fine. But 5 years is just bullying because he didn't go up and be their puppet like Vitor. They want you to kiss their feet. If you don't they try to make you look like a fool. Has anyone seen the antics that go on during these things? They are like high school kids. Anyone who thinks 5 years is legit is out of their mind.
 
#9 ·
- Is weed increasing muscle, recovery, ability to lose weight but retain strength?
No, yes, unsure.

2 things it definitely is: bronchodilator and blocks pain receptors.

JASONJRF said:
The thing about pot is that you can smoke it a week to a month out from fight night and still test positive for it. That is the issue. If you drink a beer 3 days out from fight night you will not test positive for it. That is a huge issue and it is BS
I totally agree with that.
 
#10 ·
I think everyone forgets that weed is federally outlawed and this actually trumps any medical exceptions. Also according to any athletic commission rules you do not do weed outside of competition or inside of competition. It is banned across all types of possible testing times pure and simple.
 
#11 ·
So is coke, didn't bother them one bit.

Heck coke isn't even legal in any state with exemptions and the commissions still aren't even supposed to test for it or give any penalties. Dana made a point of how they "bungled up" testing for coke and the commissions have no right to impose a penalty for it. Yet weed is deserving of a lifetime ban because, you know, reefer madness.

It's an agenda, nothing else.
 
#21 ·
#22 ·
I might be a little out of touch with the news on this tbh as I haven't smoked in near a decade and haven't hung out with friends who do in a while either. Don't really need it at this stage in my life, but don't see much wrong with it when used responsibly.

I do remember hearing about such crackdowns from friends just a few years ago though. Maybe things are changing, but part of the change is because of people standing up to and disregarding the federal demonising.
 
#28 ·
As I've said before weed is illegal because it is a federally banned substance in the US. Technically anyone is Washington and Colorado can still be busted by the DEA. Also when someone submits an application for a licence to fight in a state commission they say you cannot test positive in competition or out of competition for a banned substance.
 
#29 ·
This is not the reason I have seen comissions typically give. State athletic commissions aren't really there to enforce federal law. The reasons I have seen commissions give is that it is a mind-altering substance and thus affects performance in the cage, for better or worse.

Definitely they would have a tougher time making the case if it were 100% legal, but that's definitely not a requirement as plenty of cough medications you can buy off the shelf etc are also banned, as is alcohol.
 
#30 ·
Well the justification for their reasoning is that someone on weed can't properly protect themselves. Also remember that once someone has smoked weed it is not only in their blood stream but also in their joints. A simple pop could release weed back into the blood stream and make it's way back into the brain causing a high.
 
#36 ·
My 2 cents on a few topics here:

1. Weed being banned.

First of all, weed is not banned outside of competition. Meaning, as long as the weed is out of your system fight night, a fighter is allowed to smoke as much weed as they like with no possible ramifications from the commission. It is only banned during competition, meaning 24 hours before and a few hours after the fight. It is controlled the EXACT same way that alcohol is.

Now the tricky part is that weed stays in the system for quite a while, many weeks longer than the THC affects the brain/body. The testing that is currently in use has no way of differentiating a fighter that is high from a fighter that WAS high 3 weeks ago.

My personal opinion is IF YOU WANT TO BE A FIGHTER, PUT THE JOINT DOWN FOR A MONTH.


2. The cocaine debate

Cocaine has the same restrictions as weed. It is not tested for out of competition and there are no COMMISSION penalties for using it out of competition. It IS banned on fight night, just like weed. That is why Jones was not penalized for it at all.

3. Nick Diaz Suspension

If Nick Diaz was clearly caught violating the substance abuse policy for a 3rd time, I have no problem with a 5 year ban. A 3rd strike is clearly saying "I have no respect for your rules and have no intention of ever following them"

BUT, the water gets QUITE muddy in this case. When there are 2 negative tests from a ADA approved testing facility and only 1 positive from a non-approved facility, there is no clear evidence of anything.

DUE PROCESS would allow Nick and his team to challenge the validity of the bad test (which any lawyer worth his salt could do easily), yet the NSAC did not allow this, completely disregarded the negative results and banned Nick based on what could easily be argued to be flawed evidence.

4. Good will come of this

I think that Nick and his team are going to take this to court and show how abusive the NSAC was in this case. I can see the courts coming down hard on the NSAC for not allowing due process and simply witch hunting Nick out of his chosen career.

5. Personal Thoughts
I think weed should be legal on a federal level. I think it should be regulated the exact same way a alcohol.

Even with that in mind I still dont think it should EVER be allowed in competition!
 
#39 ·
My 2 cents on a few topics here:

1. Weed being banned.

First of all, weed is not banned outside of competition. Meaning, as long as the weed is out of your system fight night, a fighter is allowed to smoke as much weed as they like with no possible ramifications from the commission. It is only banned during competition, meaning 24 hours before and a few hours after the fight. It is controlled the EXACT same way that alcohol is.

Now the tricky part is that weed stays in the system for quite a while, many weeks longer than the THC affects the brain/body. The testing that is currently in use has no way of differentiating a fighter that is high from a fighter that WAS high 3 weeks ago.

My personal opinion is IF YOU WANT TO BE A FIGHTER, PUT THE JOINT DOWN FOR A MONTH.
Alternately, the commission could use blood tests for cannbinoid detection. They are much more reasonable and reliable as indicators of when someone actually last smoked and whether it's still affecting them.
 
#41 ·
Ok the whole getting high thing is wrong on my part but as mentioned above Nick Diaz did violate the rules a third time. Also as mentioned above, he should've been smoking for at least a month before the fight. If he tests positive from an in competition test that means he broke the rules regardless of how far back he smoked weed, he broke the rules pure and simple.
 
#53 ·
Whether he's guilty or not still isn't established, it was just granted to him very subjectively.

first WADA test 9:30'ish: test score of 49; Pass

Second Quest test 10:30'ish: test score of 700; fail

third WADA test 11:30'ish: test score 50 something; Pass

So two passed tests by a superior entity and one failed, super out there number. Regardless whether we know Nick smokes in his daily life, whether he behaved properly and stopped in time for testing has more going for him then against him.

If you took out Nick's name and inserted Chris Weidman and tell people Chris passed 2 tests in a 3 hours period from a superior drug testing entity and failed 1 in hour 2 of the 3 tests and they busted him base on the failed test, it would be an uproar.
 
#44 ·
I pointed out that he passed two tests and failed one by a different lab, that should be concerning.

I look at this way, we have two tests telling us he was under the THC cap and one that says he's over.

Its not about what you or I think its about the fact that either one test is wrong or two tests are wrong.

So personally the fact that we know Nick smokes is irrelevant. The odds that the two tests are both wrong and the singe test is right are a lot less likely than the idea the one test was wrong.

Either way, I think they have a duty to figure it the fuk out before they hand out suspensions.
 
#47 ·
A lot of those questions were also ridiculous and rhetorical, serving no purpose other than to get words onto the transcribed record. Did he fight at UFC 183? derp. His lawyer explained that he wouldn't be answering anything.
 
#49 ·
Yes the question were rhetorical and answering them wouldn't have been a problem. Nick Diaz partially screwed himself over by not answering them. Pure and simple that's partially why he got what he did.
He screwed himself by using his constitutional rights¿ If not answering the questions, pleading to the 5th amendment, screws you in a legal process, then the jury is ANTI-CONSTITUTIONAL which is way worse than anything Diaz has ever done in his entire life. Ignoring constitutional rights is basically attacking the very fundamentals of the legal system of the nation.
 
#50 ·
For a bunch of law hating anarchists on this site you sure do preach the amendments quite a lot.

Probably up there in my favourite jokes of all time is Jim Jefferies when an American was pissed off at him after an anti-gun joke. The American said "You can't change the second amendment!" to which he replies "Yes you can....it's an amendment".
 
#52 · (Edited)
So what? If they know all the answers to those questions (certainly they have the application on file, right?) then they are pointless questions and there is even less reason to give him an unheard of punishment for pleading the fifth. Punishing someone for exercising their constitutional rights is ridiculous.

For a bunch of law hating anarchists on this site you sure do preach the amendments quite a lot.
It's a list of guaranteed freedoms for the people, not restrictions on them, so it doesn't really conflict with principles of social anarchism that I can see. But I am not an anarchist so I might be missing something.
 
#56 ·
I love all the guys over the last week saying "he knows the rules, too bad!".

Yet the commission doesnt even follow the rules they focking are allowed to make themselves.

So a brand new system of harsher punishments states 3rd offence for MJ is 3 years suspension. Yet they hand out 5.

But please all you knuckleheads lets hear about the rules and how we all need to follow them.

How about we start with the NAC themseleves.

ier 1: Sedatives, Muscle relaxants, Sleep aids, Anxiolytics, Opiates, Cannabis

1st offense: 18-month suspension, fine of 30-40% of fighter's purse
2nd offense: 24-month suspension, fine of 40-50% of fighter's purse
3rd offense: 36-month suspension, fine of 60-75% of fighter's purse
4th offense: Lifetime suspension, fine of 100% of fighter's purse
 
#57 ·
Like I said he ruffled some feathers by using the fifth on every question, most of which weren't incriminating. Also Quest is a reputable place and that's what the NSAC used before they used WADA labs. The fact of the matter is the state athletic commissions have to keep the rules for weed in place because they genuinely don't know if someone is dumb enough to smoke it and come in high or if someone smoked weed a few weeks before and simply had the antibodies in their system. If someone high they can't follow the rule of protect yourself at all times, pure and simple. Nick Diaz is being made an example and reminder, he's done this twice before.
 
#60 ·
It doesn't really matter if they were incriminating or not. Instead of consulting his team after every question they chose to just plead the 5th and leave no room for error. He is allowed to plead the 5th.

If the questions were there like Don said "just to put it and keep it on record for further use". Then how hard is it to write down plead the 5th ???x? If it is just for record then put the focking 5th down on record.

Do I think eased up levels of cannabis is the right way to regulate it and pretty much ensure no one is coming in high? Yes. It isn't that hard to ensure a guy isn't ripped going into the fight. He is popped for what is it called? THC metabolites? In other words traces of the stuff.

But it isn't and under the rules I expect there to be punishment.

But give the guy a fair shake instead of throwing 5 years at him. He apparently passed 2 of the 3 tests. There was apparently some of a case to be made on the collection and actual levels of the tests.

But either way how do you explain giving him 5 when in their own writing 3 offences for MJ gets 36 months. A system that was just put into place and spread out to the media and news outlets and a big story.

How is a guy with traces of THC albeit the 3rd offence, but how does he get 5 years when a repeat offender like Vitor get a slap on the wrist for roids/ridiculous levels of T turning him into a human highlight film...illuminated by his sudden frailty once apparently off his youth juice. Hiding in Brazil away from the NAC to boot......how is that logically possible? The repeat roider who ran to another commission on his rise back to the title gets NOTHING????

And I'm sure the heads of the NAC care a ton about these guys. I mean they display such respect at every hearing. If a guy went in stoned and got knocked the F out, they would make a joke of it..

I'd love for States to go against Nevada. Must be political reasons. A state like California should.

I'm not sitting here saying Diaz shouldn't get time according to the rule book. I'm saying I am shocked at how many people just dismiss an unfair "trial" "hearing". Like it is no big deal that the commission seems to make up penalties on the fly in accordance to how you rub them.

It is obvious the commission does not like Nick nor cared for the way he wanted to go about his case. The guy got 2 more years than in the rule book because he didn't do it how they wanted him too.
 
#58 ·
Who cares if he ruffled feathers? It's irrelevant. The courts, or whatever the NSAC get called in this case, don't get to make judgements on people based on their appearances. 2pac turned up to court wearing a football jersey and bandanna, got off, then swaggered out of the court to make fun of the system. Of course, a guy like him as kind of asking for a bit of hassle as a result but Diaz can show whatever disrespect he wants to these people. The law has never worked based on respect, it works on the rules. Obviously different in some situations but not in this. The important thing here is following the rules, and on face value it doesn't look like they did. We obviously only have limited knowledge of how these things work but we'll see how it plays out with some proper lawyers and everything.

The law doesn't get to make examples of people. They get to uphold the law. NSAC proved their lack of class with the Anderson Silva case, which actually still feel like HAD to be faked or something cause that's too strange, but they proved they aren't the kind of people who would let certain stuff happen without class or honour of the law.
 
#59 ·
With the rules as it is, a judge could maybe drop the suspension down to those three years and maybe drop the fine down a little but he's still going to have to serve time. It doesn't matter if weed is actually a PED or not the fact of the matter is it's a banned substance. He was not supposed to have ANY of it in his system come fight time. There's no excuse for testing positive for it three times no matter who does the test or not, he broke the rules pure and simple.
 
#61 ·
jonnyg4508;3392378 I'm not sitting here saying Diaz shouldn't get time according to the rule book. I'm saying I am shocked at how many people just dismiss an unfair "trial" "hearing". Like it is no big deal that the commission seems to make up penalties on the fly in accordance to how you rub them. It is obvious the commission does not like Nick nor cared for the way he wanted to go about his case. The guy got 2 more years than in the rule book because he didn't do it how they wanted him too.[/QUOTE said:
Your shocked that people have common sense? Turning up to a punishment hearing with a good attitude? What an uncool thing to do that is! What is Nick, an unruly 13 year old?
 
#62 ·
Do you have an example of what he did with a bad attitude? Pleading the 5th via his lawyers advice is a bad attitude?

What are you even talking about? You hear Matt Hughes call him a punk and you go by that? Helwani just bashed Hughes for calling Diaz a punk. Saying what are people talking about he acted like a punk? Yes Mr. UFC himself Ariel Helwani.

You don't even know what you are talking about. Just out your ass it comes. Have you read or watched anything on this?


Damn how much hog do you suck on a daily basis to assure your day goes smoothly?
 
#70 ·
You have to look at it context of the situation. Remember nick is guilty, he has not defended himself against the charges. Therefore they are not abusing his right at all. They are simply finding him guilty of charges based in the evidence in front of them
 
#71 ·
The question of guilt can be debated with those two tests Diaz has passed against the one test he failed from a lab with a somewhat dodgy past.

But even if he could be considered guilty and it were considered his 3rd offense, the penalty for cannabis would still just be a 2 years suspension. So apparently those 3 extra years stem either from complete incompetence or hurt egos and abuse of power. In both cases those people should be pulled from their positions and in the second case they even should be charged legally.
 
#72 ·
For the record....

For anyone who hasnt read the results.

Diaz tested neg at 7pm before the fight. WADA credited collectors. He then pissed hot at 10pm but for whatever reason fot a different collection company who is not credited by WADA. Then at 11 something pm he had to take yet another test which from what ive heard is unheard of. And it was neg....by the same company as the first.

So the outlier is the 2nd test not c4edited by WADA. Basically saying he somehow smoked tight around the fight....popped....then somehow got clean in an hour. That is not possible.

The 2nd test has a bunch of mishaps and flags o. How it was collected.

Yet NAC didnt care to look into this odd finding and decided oh who cares lets throw 5 at him. While one of the kunts mentioned a lifetime ban.

Doesnt get anymore corrupt-unprofessional than that.

The NAC should be investigated actually.
 
#73 · (Edited by Moderator)
It can be debated but he chose not to debate it remember? He did not provide a defense.

Also those written guidelines could have changed in the last 3 months. If I remember right Novitsky said something about 5 year bans on Rogans podcast a few weeks ago



Why didn't Diaz challenge those results?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top