Finchem Takes One For The Team: Undergoes Drug Test, Results Not Pending

Helen Ross provides the overview of the big day, while you can read the spellbinding Finchem transcript here.

Let's go to the script...

Q. Is it important for you to go first?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: No, I don't think it's important to go first. I think it's important for me and certain of our executives who are involved with the program to understand exactly what the procedure is, because by doing that, you can kind of see what player reaction will be, what players questions will be, and it's just a good, healthy learning experience. I don't view it as anything meaningful from a symbolism standpoint, but just I think it's important that we understand it in the detail of it.

Q. Did it go as efficiently as you thought it would?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: It did. I was very pleased with the way it went, and I think that we have every reason to be optimistic that we're not going to have logistical problems; that it's not going to be a big disruption and it's not going to take much time.

The people that are doing it are quite professional, well organized, buttoned up, and that also conveys a sense of integrity to the process; because as we all know in this area, the integrity of the process is very, very important.

I'm glad they're buttoned up. That could cause problems if they weren't.

Q. Do you know how long it took you?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Nine and a half minutes. And I asked some questions.

Questions? You mean like, "Have you ever seen..." oh I better stop.

Q. Yesterday or today?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Let's just say I've been through it. I don't know that it's necessary to get really specific.

Yeah, TMI could get ugly here, especially if you had asparagus for lunch.

Q. Secondly on drug testing, do you think that when this is up and running for a year, that if there are no positive tests, as it relates to performance-enhancing that this will take care of any naysayers?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Any naysayers? That's impossible. I think the thing in the whole world of drug testing and anti-doping is that if you're not getting positive tests, somebody is going to write a blog that says your testing is screwed up: How can that be?

Write a blog? Such hostility to the blogosphere Commish. We're hurt. It's also possible someone will write a column, or an essay, or even a Haiku wondering why everyone is so clean and yet, throwing so many more clubs than they did prior to July 1.

You have a testing program; you must have had a problem to begin with or you wouldn't have done it. There's going to be naysayers regardless of what happens.

But on balance, among people who follow the sport and know these athletes, I think a rigorous testing program will add credibility to the general notion, which I think we all recognize, there are not that many people who believe that there is any significant issue here prior to this rule going into effect. Credibility requires that we have the program.

Thatta boy, that's a better answer! And hey, how about a comment that you're doing this testing stuff for the kids? Big family values Q rating points in that.