Everyone seems to be pointing the finger at UKAD for the delay in a resolution but their latest press release concerning the situation cites the NADP. Another article states that the reason the NADP are dragging their feet is that the Fury team are pushing for certain evidence to be excluded.
So ultimately, the Fury team are the main reason for the delay...
The question is, what type of evidence would you want excluded if you were a non-doping athlete?
Fury Doping Investigation
-
CiganoBoxer
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1302
- Joined: 11 Jun 2010, 14:57
Re: Fury Doping Investigation
Would it be the same evidence they have already been spoken to over an adjudicated for ?jizzle wrote:Everyone seems to be pointing the finger at UKAD for the delay in a resolution but their latest press release concerning the situation cites the NADP. Another article states that the reason the NADP are dragging their feet is that the Fury team are pushing for certain evidence to be excluded.
So ultimately, the Fury team are the main reason for the delay...
The question is, what type of evidence would you want excluded if you were a non-doping athlete?
They only found traces in sample A but as far as i know it wasn't below the tolerance threshold ,2nd B sample was clear so they sat them down told them to steer clear of certain foods and set them on their way .
Something stinks with all this TBF , how can UKAD adjudicate for the same thing twice? , let them go then decide to change their mind after they have let them fight for honors !?
I can't remember anything like this happening before with two other athletes ,i mean HF fought for the world title at the weekend lol
Re: Fury Doping Investigation
I'm no big fan of the Furys but of course they'd want evidence excluded if it might look them bad, the issue here is that UKAD have allowed this farce to drag on for so long. If they don't have the power to push along issues like this then what is the point of them?jizzle wrote:Everyone seems to be pointing the finger at UKAD for the delay in a resolution but their latest press release concerning the situation cites the NADP. Another article states that the reason the NADP are dragging their feet is that the Fury team are pushing for certain evidence to be excluded.
So ultimately, the Fury team are the main reason for the delay...
The question is, what type of evidence would you want excluded if you were a non-doping athlete?
Re: Fury Doping Investigation
You have ignored the fact that the Furys have asked for certain evidence to be excluded - although nobody knows what this is.CiganoBoxer wrote:Would it be the same evidence they have already been spoken to over an adjudicated for ?jizzle wrote:Everyone seems to be pointing the finger at UKAD for the delay in a resolution but their latest press release concerning the situation cites the NADP. Another article states that the reason the NADP are dragging their feet is that the Fury team are pushing for certain evidence to be excluded.
So ultimately, the Fury team are the main reason for the delay...
The question is, what type of evidence would you want excluded if you were a non-doping athlete?
They only found traces in sample A but as far as i know it wasn't below the tolerance threshold ,2nd B sample was clear so they sat them down told them to steer clear of certain foods and set them on their way .
Something stinks with all this TBF , how can UKAD adjudicate for the same thing twice? , let them go then decide to change their mind after they have let them fight for honors !?
I can't remember anything like this happening before with two other athletes ,i mean HF fought for the world title at the weekend lol
A bit like the previous delay when there was a conflict of interest or something on the panel - anybody know what this conflict was or who it involved?
It sounds like a load of smoke and mirrors and appeals based on procedure rather than proving that they are innocent.
-
CiganoBoxer
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1302
- Joined: 11 Jun 2010, 14:57
Re: Fury Doping Investigation
Where did i ignore it !?bripez wrote:You have ignored the fact that the Furys have asked for certain evidence to be excluded - although nobody knows what this is.CiganoBoxer wrote:Would it be the same evidence they have already been spoken to over an adjudicated for ?jizzle wrote:Everyone seems to be pointing the finger at UKAD for the delay in a resolution but their latest press release concerning the situation cites the NADP. Another article states that the reason the NADP are dragging their feet is that the Fury team are pushing for certain evidence to be excluded.
So ultimately, the Fury team are the main reason for the delay...
The question is, what type of evidence would you want excluded if you were a non-doping athlete?
They only found traces in sample A but as far as i know it wasn't below the tolerance threshold ,2nd B sample was clear so they sat them down told them to steer clear of certain foods and set them on their way .
Something stinks with all this TBF , how can UKAD adjudicate for the same thing twice? , let them go then decide to change their mind after they have let them fight for honors !?
I can't remember anything like this happening before with two other athletes ,i mean HF fought for the world title at the weekend lol
A bit like the previous delay when there was a conflict of interest or something on the panel - anybody know what this conflict was or who it involved?
It sounds like a load of smoke and mirrors and appeals based on procedure rather than proving that they are innocent.
I said might it be the same evidence they were already adjudicated for ?
If so their argument would be they have nothing to answer for etc
Like most on here i am no lawyer ,but how can UKADA find someone guilty a 2nd time for something they have already adjudicated them for !?
How could that be considered fair ?
On top of the scandal of it being leaked , how would that look for UKADA !?
Why change a ruling 2 years after ?
You say it sounds like a load of smoke and mirrors and appeals based on procedure rather than proving that they are innocent....what makes you think he wants to be out of the ring longer than they have to !?
Last edited by CiganoBoxer on 26 Sep 2017, 07:53, edited 1 time in total.
-
Counter-puncher
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 39141
- Joined: 20 May 2008, 11:41
Re: Fury Doping Investigation
I sense the involvement of MI5 and other Deep State apparatuses
Re: Fury Doping Investigation
There is a lack of detail from all parties - apart from those directly involved (who are all keeping very quiet) does anybody know what is actually going on?CiganoBoxer wrote:Where did i ignore it !?bripez wrote:You have ignored the fact that the Furys have asked for certain evidence to be excluded - although nobody knows what this is.CiganoBoxer wrote: Would it be the same evidence they have already been spoken to over an adjudicated for ?
They only found traces in sample A but as far as i know it wasn't below the tolerance threshold ,2nd B sample was clear so they sat them down told them to steer clear of certain foods and set them on their way .
Something stinks with all this TBF , how can UKAD adjudicate for the same thing twice? , let them go then decide to change their mind after they have let them fight for honors !?
I can't remember anything like this happening before with two other athletes ,i mean HF fought for the world title at the weekend lol
A bit like the previous delay when there was a conflict of interest or something on the panel - anybody know what this conflict was or who it involved?
It sounds like a load of smoke and mirrors and appeals based on procedure rather than proving that they are innocent.
I said might it be the same evidence they were already adjudicated for ?
If so their argument would be they have nothing to answer for etc
Like most on here i am no lawyer ,but how can UKADA find someone guilty a 2nd time for something they have already adjudicated them for !?
How could that be considered fair ?
On top of the scandal of it being leaked , how would that look for UKADA !?
Why change a ruling 2 years after ?
At the moment UKAD appear to be incompetent and Tyson / Hughie appear guilty of a doping offence - both could be true, who knows?
Re: Fury Doping Investigation
UKAD are a bunch of rank divs
Re: Fury Doping Investigation
Meh, I heard it was Jay Z and the all seeing eye.Counter-puncher wrote:I sense the involvement of MI5 and other Deep State apparatuses
-
Jackson328
- Middleweight
- Posts: 411
- Joined: 14 Nov 2013, 14:51
Re: Fury Doping Investigation
Its clear that no-one really gives much credence to UKAD or this would have been sorted a long time ago. An anti-doping agency is only as good as the powers it has, if the UK government and the BBBoC want to be taken seriously about anti-doping then they need to empower a relevant agency to carry out their will. The agency would have to be outwardly transparent and technically competent for such a serious task so that probably rules out UKAD. If this was any other sport I can't see it being dragged out for so long; football, rugby and especially cycling seem to be light years ahead of boxing on this. I don't understand how both Fury's can have fought for world titles if they are under investigation for drugs offences. I know he gets a lot of stick on here and often deserves it but I refuse to believe that Eddie Hearn would let this happen to one of his fighters, he would be all over UKAD for a speedy resolution