SMH P. MALIGNAGGI going at it with me on twitter

[SplitSecond]

NSAC said they could not do that type of testing at the time. No one other than USADA could do it at that time. NSAC brought along their own advanced random drug testing years later after the fact.

why not?

and correction: arum suggested the olympic orginzation(IOC?), break that down for me if you can

[IronDanHamza]

he said it was kinda their fault.

definition of kinda=to some extent.

It's embarrassing you are latching on to that term.

He admitted quite clearly that they were at fault the first time. Latching onto the word "kinda" as if that changes what he's saying is pathetic.

In the statment he doesn't even say it's Floyd's fault, he doesn't even imply against but they were at fault the first time. In future negotiations he does, but not in the first one.

[daggum]

Are you actually trying to claim that Roach isn't saying that it was ther fault the first time?

That is clearly what he is saying. About the first one.

he said it was kind of their fault. kind of means to some extent. comprehension. a lost skill.

[JustinFloyd]

alright...man up...which one of you f@gs is this

he sounds ******ed, so it most probably Feta or Reloaded! lol

[IronDanHamza]

he said it was kind of their fault. kind of means to some extent. comprehension. a lost skill.

I.e, it was their fault.

No where in the quote does he imply it was anything but their fault the first time round.

Embarrassing you're latching onto that word

[daggum]

It's embarrassing you are latching on to that term.

He admitted quite clearly that they were at fault the first time. Latching onto the word "kinda" as if that changes what he's saying is pathetic.

In the statment he doesn't even say it's Floyd's fault, he doesn't even imply against but they were at fault the first time. In future negotiations he does, but not in the first one.

yes using certain words can change the meaning of what you are saying. i know its so much easier to pretend you know what someone is saying by omitting certain things but that wouldn't be honest now would it?

[daggum]

I.e, it was their fault.

No where in the quote does he imply it was anything but their fault the first time round.

Embarrassing you're latching onto that word

kind of inherently implies others are at fault. there's no need to be redundant and say it was kind of our fault and kind of floyds since everyone knows who the other party already was. this is often done in language to save time. whats not done often is throwing in words like kind of because kind of inherently changes the nature and meaning of your sentence. if he wanted to add new information he would have said it was kind of our fault and kind of daggum's fault(daggum being the new information). but since we already know he's talking about floyd there's no need to be redundant. Linguistics study it!

[IronDanHamza]

yes using certain words can change the meaning of what you are saying. i know its so much easier to pretend you know what someone is saying by omitting certain things but that wouldn't be honest now would it?

So what is he saying then?

He is clearly saying it was their fault the first time Clearly.

When he says "it was kinda out fault the first time. But it was Floyd's fault later. So it's both guys" (paraphrased)

How is that not saying it was their fault the first time?

[bigjavi973]

manny declined the first drug test and said ok to the ones after that.
All that means is he COULD have been doping back then then stopped. Once again, theres no proof, only possibilities.

I like the poster above knows that and doesn't blindly just say well he said no to drug test. According to Vada, manny is clean right now. Back then, manny was clean according to nobody except nsac and we know they were not enough.

after the whole 50/50 debacle with 30, 24, then 14 days, was the pac actually AGREED to testing. Just not the specific dates, testing up until weight in for example.

[IronDanHamza]

kind of inherently implies others are at fault. there's no need to be redundant and say it was kind of our fault and kind of floyds since everyone knows who the other party already was. this is often done in language to save time. whats not done often is throwing in words like kind of because kind of inherently changes the nature and meaning of your sentence.

oh of course, no need to be redundant

He's clearly saying it was that fault the first time. You can pretend it's not if that makes you feel better.