2 Clemson players suspended for season; NCAA rejects appeal | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World Sports

2 Clemson players suspended for season; NCAA rejects appeal

Associated Press
Clemson’s Braden Galloway will miss next season after an NCAA panel rejected the school’s appeal of their drug suspension.

COLUMBIA, S.C. — Clemson tight end Braden Galloway and offensive lineman Zach Giella will miss next season after an NCAA panel rejected the school’s appeal of their drug suspension.

Clemson athletic spokesman Jeff Kallin said Friday the school learned of the NCAA decision on Wednesday. The school issued a statement that it is disappointed with the ruling and continues “to believe our student-athletes did not knowingly ingest any banned substances.”

However, Kallin said the school doesn’t plan further action.

Galloway, a sophomore, was expected to compete for a starting job this fall. He had five catches for 52 yards last season. Giella, a senior, is a reserve lineman.

The positive drug tests for Galloway, Giella and ex-Clemson defensive tackle Dexter Lawrence were announced in December while the Tigers were preparing to play Notre Dame in the Cotton Bowl. They were suspended and missed the College Football Playoff games, including the national championship game when the Tigers beat Alabama, 44-16.

All three players had denied knowingly taking the banned substance ostarine. Robert Ariail, the lawyer for Galloway and Giella, said in a statement Friday the NCAA’s decision was an “unfair denial of our appeal.”

Clemson coach Dabo Swinney wouldn’t elaborate on the NCAA decision, telling the Associated Press in a text message that “All been said.”

Lawrence was a junior who left early for the NFL draft and was taken 17th overall by the New York Giants. He also would’ve faced a yearlong ban had he remained with the Tigers.

The NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports upheld the suspensions.

The United States Anti-Doping Agency says ostarine is a substance that “might be effective at treating different health conditions without resulting in the negative side effects of steroids.”

Ariail said that Galloway and Giella took and passed polygraph examinations and had negative drug tests in April and October 2018 and in January and February.

Lawrence said during Clemson’s pro day in March that he truthfully answered questions about the drug test when asked by NFL teams.

Lawrence was a highly regarded NFL prospect and part of Clemson’s “Power Rangers’ defensive front that was among the best in college football last season. It was likely he would’ve gone pro even before the positive drug test.

Clemson said Friday that the athletic department had administered 329 tests for performance-enhancing drugs since 2014, and all came back negative except for the three last December. The department said all supplements are reviewed with its athletics nutrition and sports medicine staff and Clemson’s compliance office to ensure no banned substances are used.

Ariail said the players’ appeal included information from experts that the trace amounts of ostarine found indicated contamination from “legitimate products.”

“In this case, it is our strong belief that no violation occurred,” he said.

Categories: Sports | US-World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.