should ped failures be DQs instead of no contests?

[margaret thatcher]

most fights where a guy wins or draws and fails a drug test are changed to no contests or no decisions. a rare exception is bute-jack, in which a draw was changed to a dq win for jack after booty boy failed a test

if a fighter cheats in the ring with headbutts, low blows , etc they are dq'd if they persist. should guys who cheat with drugs for a fight be dq'd too?

[olij999]

I think the non-PED user should win if the fight has taken place, not have it as a NC. But as only the ref can DQ a fighter, I think it needs to have another designation. What about "DTF" for "drug-test fail", as that would then show up more visibly on a fighter's record (as a DQ could be for any old thing) - so "L DTF" by a fight on a fighter's record would immediately jump out on viewing.

[jwfg]

Anyone who wants them all legal is advocating more brain damage.

[jameswilson]

Yes but when my favourite fighter pops hot then no.....

[wrighty]

I would go one further. If a fighter juices against the rules of the sport and the opponent is badly injured, they should be investigated criminally

[jwfg]

I would go one further. If a fighter juices against the rules of the sport and the opponent is badly injured, they should be investigated criminally

100% agree

[joshj909]

I would go one further. If a fighter juices against the rules of the sport and the opponent is badly injured, they should be investigated criminally

Surprised they don't press charges already, they'd probably have a good chance at winning. They should be requesting it in their contract at the very least that they don't consent to harm beyond the rules outlined in the sport/contract. Think that would be covered anyway but seems silly that nobody does.

[SeanBrennan]

I would go one further. If a fighter juices against the rules of the sport and the opponent is badly injured, they should be investigated criminally

I get the point but surely it would be hard to prove it was the PEDS?

My legal knowledge stopped at A Level law though so it's not an informed opinion

[joshj909]

I would go one further. If a fighter juices against the rules of the sport and the opponent is badly injured, they should be investigated criminally

I get the point but surely it would be hard to prove it was the PEDS?

My legal knowledge stopped at A Level law though so it's not an informed opinion

From memory you can use the defence of it being a sport if it's within the rules of the game. A broken leg from a bad challenge in football won't lead to anything but punching someone in the face during a rugby match has led to convictions. If someone can prove that the rules of boxing include following the rules regarding PED's, I think they could have a case. Would be better for it to be included in contracts though to make clear that they do no consent to receiving anything from someone using PEDs.

[SeanBrennan]

I would go one further. If a fighter juices against the rules of the sport and the opponent is badly injured, they should be investigated criminally

I get the point but surely it would be hard to prove it was the PEDS?

My legal knowledge stopped at A Level law though so it's not an informed opinion

From memory you can use the defence of it being a sport if it's within the rules of the game. A broken leg from a bad challenge in football won't lead to anything but punching someone in the face during a rugby match has led to convictions. If someone can prove that the rules of boxing include following the rules regarding PED's, I think they could have a case. Would be better for it to be included in contracts though to make clear that they do no consent to receiving anything from someone using PEDs.

thank you Josh, rather more informed than my "I reckon cos I did an A Level 20 years ago" approach.

[joshj909]

I get the point but surely it would be hard to prove it was the PEDS?

My legal knowledge stopped at A Level law though so it's not an informed opinion

From memory you can use the defence of it being a sport if it's within the rules of the game. A broken leg from a bad challenge in football won't lead to anything but punching someone in the face during a rugby match has led to convictions. If someone can prove that the rules of boxing include following the rules regarding PED's, I think they could have a case. Would be better for it to be included in contracts though to make clear that they do no consent to receiving anything from someone using PEDs.

thank you Josh, rather more informed than my "I reckon cos I did an A Level 20 years ago" approach.

Just found an article discussing it which is actually an interesting read:
https://theconversation.com/should-spor ... nal-194393

Doesn't answer the question, moreso highlights that we don't know yet until someone presses charges.

[gregregegg]

If the test was within a certain time of the fight (I don’t know what the ideal timeframe would be, week, month, 3 months…) it should be a dq win .

Although PEDs only. Not weed or coke or anything.

[Controversial]

I would go one further. If a fighter juices against the rules of the sport and the opponent is badly injured, they should be investigated criminally

Surprised they don't press charges already, they'd probably have a good chance at winning. They should be requesting it in their contract at the very least that they don't consent to harm beyond the rules outlined in the sport/contract. Think that would be covered anyway but seems silly that nobody does.

I doubt it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt, too many variables involved as there's no real way of knowing PEDS attributed to an injury or if the injured opponent was already suffering damage from previous fights/sparring etc. You could also argue some refs could be to blame if they let fighters take too many punches, or their corner is partly to blame for not throwing the towel in. Also some fighters could have a genetic reason why they end up injured. So although on the face of it its easy to blame the other fighter, in reality it isn't that easy to prove.

[joshj909]

I would go one further. If a fighter juices against the rules of the sport and the opponent is badly injured, they should be investigated criminally

Surprised they don't press charges already, they'd probably have a good chance at winning. They should be requesting it in their contract at the very least that they don't consent to harm beyond the rules outlined in the sport/contract. Think that would be covered anyway but seems silly that nobody does.

I doubt it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt, too many variables involved as there's no real way of knowing PEDS attributed to an injury or if the injured opponent was already suffering damage from previous fights/sparring etc. You could also argue some refs could be to blame if they let fighters take too many punches, or their corner is partly to blame for not throwing the towel in. Also some fighters could have a genetic reason why they end up injured. So although on the face of it its easy to blame the other fighter, in reality it isn't that easy to prove.

You wouldn't have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the PEDs led to the harm, the assault is there to see live on TV. If you withdraw consent based on the fact that the opponent is cheating then the entire fight is an assault, regardless as to how much damage is actually caused. If you can get convicted for loaded gloves then "loaded muscles" can't be too farfetched.

It's murky and untested which is why I said it should be expressed in a contract. They all consent, expressed or implied, to ignore the assault because it's a sport but the moment that one guy goes beyond the rules of the sport to commit harm then that could be an offence. That's where the argument would have to begin in my eyes. It's going to take someone taking it to court to find out.

Also, having a medical predisposition doesn't change anything, you can be charged for the full result of your actions. There's a legal rule for that (thin skull rule).

https://www.mmafighting.com/2023/9/26/2 ... ock-lesnar

In this case, Mark Hunt failed in suing the UFC for fraud and battery along other things for allowing Lesnar to fight him while they knew he was taking steroids. I haven't read up on the full details but I think the issue was that he could not prove it rather than because it happened. It is a civil suit and it does seem like he approached it pretty badly but I guess it's the closest example we have to any of this.

[Controversial]

Surprised they don't press charges already, they'd probably have a good chance at winning. They should be requesting it in their contract at the very least that they don't consent to harm beyond the rules outlined in the sport/contract. Think that would be covered anyway but seems silly that nobody does.

I doubt it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt, too many variables involved as there's no real way of knowing PEDS attributed to an injury or if the injured opponent was already suffering damage from previous fights/sparring etc. You could also argue some refs could be to blame if they let fighters take too many punches, or their corner is partly to blame for not throwing the towel in. Also some fighters could have a genetic reason why they end up injured. So although on the face of it its easy to blame the other fighter, in reality it isn't that easy to prove.

You wouldn't have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the PEDs led to the harm, the assault is there to see live on TV. If you withdraw consent based on the fact that the opponent is cheating then the entire fight is an assault, regardless as to how much damage is actually caused. If you can get convicted for loaded gloves then "loaded muscles" can't be too farfetched.

It's murky and untested which is why I said it should be expressed in a contract. They all consent, expressed or implied, to ignore the assault because it's a sport but the moment that one guy goes beyond the rules of the sport to commit harm then that could be an offence. That's where the argument would have to begin in my eyes. It's going to take someone taking it to court to find out.

Also, having a medical predisposition doesn't change anything, you can be charged for the full result of your actions. There's a legal rule for that (thin skull rule).

https://www.mmafighting.com/2023/9/26/2 ... ock-lesnar

In this case, Mark Hunt failed in suing the UFC for fraud and battery along other things for allowing Lesnar to fight him while they knew he was taking steroids. I haven't read up on the full details but I think the issue was that he could not prove it rather than because it happened. It is a civil suit and it does seem like he approached it pretty badly but I guess it's the closest example we have to any of this.

Isn't that the same thing, the MMA case lost because it couldn't be proved, you would have to prove PEDS were solely responsible for death or serious injury too. By definition boxing is a potentially life threatening combat sport between willing participants. I hear what you say about putting it in a contract that if you cheat you are committing a criminal offence but I still think for it to stick you would have to prove the PEDS alone were the ultimate damaging factor. Or would we say if you cheat and someone dies you are automatically guilty of murder, regardless on how microscopic the trace was or irrelevant what the substance was? If someone goes into a fight with an unknown bleed on the brain and their opponent tests positive for cocaine and the other guy ends up in a coma or dies is he 100% guilty of his injuries? It's a huge grey area and that would never happen as everyone is entitled to defend themselves at court. Ultimately solicitors will try and argue white is black if they are getting paid so nothing stopping any fighter trying to pursue criminal action but none seem to do it, or if they do aren't successful. What I mean by that are fighters who have competed against fighters caught of taking PEDS, I'm not aware of anyone seriously injured by someone who has tested positive. Also what’s to say the are damaged but don’t show signs and continue to box, how do you then prove it was the guy on PEDS that started the damage.