Fury Doping Investigation

Post Reply
jizzle
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 392
Joined: 26 Apr 2009, 13:05

Fury Doping Investigation

Post by jizzle »

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?
CiganoBoxer
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1302
Joined: 11 Jun 2010, 14:57

Re: Fury Doping Investigation

Post by CiganoBoxer »

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?
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
moogie101
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 406
Joined: 15 Nov 2008, 14:11

Re: Fury Doping Investigation

Post by moogie101 »

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?
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?
bripez
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4877
Joined: 11 Feb 2010, 18:07

Re: Fury Doping Investigation

Post by bripez »

CiganoBoxer wrote:
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?
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
You have ignored the fact that the Furys have asked for certain evidence to be excluded - although nobody knows what this is.

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
Heavyweight
Posts: 1302
Joined: 11 Jun 2010, 14:57

Re: Fury Doping Investigation

Post by CiganoBoxer »

bripez wrote:
CiganoBoxer wrote:
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?
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
You have ignored the fact that the Furys have asked for certain evidence to be excluded - although nobody knows what this is.

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.
Where did i ignore it !?
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 !? :roll:
Last edited by CiganoBoxer on 26 Sep 2017, 07:53, edited 1 time in total.
Counter-puncher
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 39141
Joined: 20 May 2008, 11:41

Re: Fury Doping Investigation

Post by Counter-puncher »

I sense the involvement of MI5 and other Deep State apparatuses
bripez
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4877
Joined: 11 Feb 2010, 18:07

Re: Fury Doping Investigation

Post by bripez »

CiganoBoxer wrote:
bripez wrote:
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
You have ignored the fact that the Furys have asked for certain evidence to be excluded - although nobody knows what this is.

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.
Where did i ignore it !?
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 ?
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?

At the moment UKAD appear to be incompetent and Tyson / Hughie appear guilty of a doping offence - both could be true, who knows?
Oiky
Super Welterweight
Posts: 7277
Joined: 16 Feb 2015, 09:22

Re: Fury Doping Investigation

Post by Oiky »

UKAD are a bunch of rank divs
lefty
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 19821
Joined: 04 Feb 2012, 11:33

Re: Fury Doping Investigation

Post by lefty »

Counter-puncher wrote:I sense the involvement of MI5 and other Deep State apparatuses
Meh, I heard it was Jay Z and the all seeing eye.
Jackson328
Middleweight
Posts: 411
Joined: 14 Nov 2013, 14:51

Re: Fury Doping Investigation

Post by Jackson328 »

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
Post Reply