PGAT & Random Drug Testing

Hawkeye77 · April 2

10 hours ago, bobfoster said:

Well, I mean, I'm not going to try to convince you of anything (dumb to do so when people's minds are clearly made up). If you don't want to agree, don't agree. But maybe you are making too much of this? It isn't like this guy had state secrets that could cause WWIII (hope not, I'm totally not ready for WWIII - heck, I just got done taking down my Covid decorations 😂).

To get specific, NDAs follow contractual workstreams. The leagues (MLB, NFL, etc.) sign contracts with teams - they have NDAs. And they choose an independent third party to administer drug tests. And they have NDAs. And the teams (or in our case, the PGAT) signs contracts with their players that require them to take those tests. They have NDAs. Specific NDAs are in place between all those complex relationships: League > teams, Teams > players, Leagues and teams > testing company. Each knows who they can talk to, and about what, and who they can't. It is articulated in precise legal language.

So then we wind up with this somewhat bizarre (though actually quite common) conundrum. My new friend was perfectly free to give me the information he gave me - about general trends, high level details about individual sports. So long as he never mentioned the results from any individual team, or player. According to contracts, the company doing the testing could mention what leagues they are testing for. In fact, if you want to know the company, the MLB, NFL, and PGAT all publicly state what company they have hired to administer their drug testing programs. You can look it up.

That company itself however, and its employees (my new friend), are bound by strict NDAs, and cannot release any specific testing results. But the leagues, and teams, are not only not bound by such restrictions, but in fact often make them public. You commonly hear an NFL team announcing that player X got a three game suspension for drugs. In fact, last year the PGAT publicly announced that Byeong Hun An got a three month suspension (for testing positive for a named, restricted drug that also - accidentally - turned out to be in a cough medicine sold OTC in Korea).

So here's the weird, convoluted thing about NDA contractual flowdowns. My buddy could (and did) talk to me in general terms about the PGAT - as I mentioned in my initial post. Told me that for the most part, golfers rarely tried to get around drug testing, but most often popped positive accidentally and inadvertently (as was exactly the case here). But - and here's the weird thing - he would not have been able to talk to me (and didn't) about that specific case, even though it had already been made public by the PGAT, due to his NDA. The contract the players have with the PGAT allows the PGAT to talk about test results - and discuss any penalties that result from infractions - if it wishes to. But the contract my friend's firm has with the PGAT does not permit them or their employees to talk about any specific results at all (even if the PGAT does). And he didn't.

You might "feel" like he broke some spirit of the law (as it were). But when it comes to NDA language, there is no spirit of the law. There is merely contractual language (the NDAs I commonly sign with my clients and employees are multiple pages long, and full of dense legalize). I had a fascinating, interesting conversation (part of which I shared here), but my friend not only didn't cross the line, he didn't come anywhere close to it. He was very careful about not doing it, and I was very careful to not even ask him to do it.

I think few people get the nuances of this unless they have had to deal with it. I have federal government clearances, have been background checked and fingerprinted and vetted to within an inch of my life. My firm works in the retirement industry. I'll commonly do conference calls with two or three different firms that I'll consult with, that vigorously compete with each other. All of whom give me inside information, that I have to be very careful to keep compartmentalized. Makes me almost dizzy sometimes.

I think people like @dubbelbogey (and anyone else that has had to wrestle with "what you know, and who and how much you can talk about it) gets this. But you may not.

My friend told me some very interesting things, but he stayed well within his contractual lines. You can accept that or not. Just trying to paint a full picture here. Even though I have probably bored the living bejesus out of everyone at this point 🤣.

I made it pretty clear I hadn't seen the NDA so suggesting my mind is made up isn't accurate. Might want to read what I posted a little more carefully.

Don't need "War and Peace" for you to simply say you have seen the NDA, or take his word for what it says, and nothing he said was out of line.

Government clearances or not, lol, plenty of us have a lot of experiences dealing with confidences - not a complex concept.

golfheaven69 · April 3

Think LIV is drug testing? 😂😂

bobfoster · April 3

13 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

I made it pretty clear I hadn't seen the NDA so suggesting my mind is made up isn't accurate. Might want to read what I posted a little more carefully.

Don't need "War and Peace" for you to simply say you have seen the NDA, or take his word for what it says, and nothing he said was out of line.

Government clearances or not, lol, plenty of us have a lot of experiences dealing with confidences - not a complex concept.

Sorry dude, you're in the wrong here (and I actually don't want to argue with you - I usually like you and greatly appreciate most of your posts - you are one of my WRX buddies). You might want to read what I posted a little more carefully.

I had a great conversation with a new friend. Thought it might be interesting to share. You (incorrectly) assumed he was humble bragging to impress and telling tales out of school (or at least that is what you clearly implied). Breaching confidentiality. You totally misread the situation. I explained, at some length, why that wasn't the case. You came back and again asserted he had crossed a line (regardless of what I said). So I (feeling the need to defend him) explained at great length the nuances of NDAs (that you might understand, but that many reading this may not), and why he not only crossed no lines, but went out of his way to cross no lines.

Part of it was written for you, but part because I actually told him about WRX, and think there's an off chance he might wind up actually reading this thread. And - here's the thing - because of the very issues you raise, he probably wouldn't be able to identify and defend himself. So I did. I felt a responsibility to do so.

You misinterpreted the context (partially my fault, as I didn't explain in my initial post that confidentiality was an undertone to our whole conversation - because it wasn't relevant to the main ideas about drug testing), and pretty much accused the dude of saying things he shouldn't have because of his ego. I have had people do this, but that wasn't the scenario here. This was two older guys (i.e., at the point in life where we no longer give a flying crap about impressing anyone) having a very interesting conversation, but both fully aware of what NDAs are, and respecting confidentiality without even needing to explicitly say it.

I wrote War and Peace to defend him (and set the record straight), because he probably could not do it himself. And I felt obligated, since I started the thread.

No antagonism here - merely trying to correct a false impression. Simple as that. Largely because I respect you. As I also respect this guy - who I exchanged business cards with, and may be playing with now and then this coming season (a lot of friends get made playing golf).

Hope this make sense.

Edited April 3 by bobfoster

Hawkeye77 · April 3

8 hours ago, bobfoster said:

Sorry dude, you're in the wrong here (and I actually don't want to argue with you - I usually like you and greatly appreciate most of your posts - you are one of my WRX buddies). You might want to read what I posted a little more carefully.

I had a great conversation with a new friend. Thought it might be interesting to share. You (incorrectly) assumed he was humble bragging to impress and telling tales out of school (or at least that is what you clearly implied). Breaching confidentiality. You totally misread the situation. I explained, at some length, why that wasn't the case. You came back and again asserted he had crossed a line (regardless of what I said). So I (feeling the need to defend him) explained at great length the nuances of NDAs (that you might understand, but that many reading this may not), and why he not only crossed no lines, but went out of his way to cross no lines.

Part of it was written for you, but part because I actually told him about WRX, and think there's an off chance he might wind up actually reading this thread. And - here's the thing - because of the very issues you raise, he probably wouldn't be able to identify and defend himself. So I did. I felt a responsibility to do so.

You misinterpreted the context (partially my fault, as I didn't explain in my initial post that confidentiality was an undertone to our whole conversation - because it wasn't relevant to the main ideas about drug testing), and pretty much accused the dude of saying things he shouldn't have because of his ego. I have had people do this, but that wasn't the scenario here. This was two older guys (i.e., at the point in life where we no longer give a flying crap about impressing anyone) having a very interesting conversation, but both fully aware of what NDAs are, and respecting confidentiality without even needing to explicitly say it.

I wrote War and Peace to defend him (and set the record straight), because he probably could not do it himself. And I felt obligated, since I started the thread.

No antagonism here - merely trying to correct a false impression. Simple as that. Largely because I respect you. As I also respect this guy - who I exchanged business cards with, and may be playing with now and then this coming season (a lot of friends get made playing golf).

Hope this make sense.