When comparing some of these other offenders and the sentences they received, let's not forget something that sets Benn apart. He didn't test positive once, he tested positive twice.
I think if that was a likely outcome it would have happened a long time ago for Conor.
The UKAD case is only being heard this week.
Khan, from what I read, offered no real excuse for his drug test failure.
Enzo Maccarinelli got 6 months I think for his failure as he was clearly able to justify it. I think, regardless of what we think of it, this will be similar and he’ll get something like 6 months.
You might be right. Is the hearing actually this week? I just wonder with Clomifene whether it will attract that much leniency. If UKAD don’t want it much weight on the elaborate egg theory, historically in other sports Clomifene - the well-known masking agent - is usually associated with 3-4 year bans. But I guess we’ll find out soon-ish now if Benn has engineered a soft sentence or not.
Apparently the hearing was or started yesterday.
UKAD aren’t massively well funded and won’t want a lengthy or costly legal case so I can see something happening that will appease both sides hence why I’m thinking a short ban with a statement of them thinking that there’s no evidence that Benn knowingly cheated will come out.
Khan, from what I read, offered no real excuse for his drug test failure.
Enzo Maccarinelli got 6 months I think for his failure as he was clearly able to justify it. I think, regardless of what we think of it, this will be similar and he’ll get something like 6 months.
You might be right. Is the hearing actually this week? I just wonder with Clomifene whether it will attract that much leniency. If UKAD don’t want it much weight on the elaborate egg theory, historically in other sports Clomifene - the well-known masking agent - is usually associated with 3-4 year bans. But I guess we’ll find out soon-ish now if Benn has engineered a soft sentence or not.
Apparently the hearing was or started yesterday.
UKAD aren’t massively well funded and won’t want a lengthy or costly legal case so I can see something happening that will appease both sides hence why I’m thinking a short ban with a statement of them thinking that there’s no evidence that Benn knowingly cheated will come out.
Hopefully not long to find out either way.
What is your source for Benn's hearing having started yesterday? I hope you are right but I can't find anything to support that theory.
You might be right. Is the hearing actually this week? I just wonder with Clomifene whether it will attract that much leniency. If UKAD don’t want it much weight on the elaborate egg theory, historically in other sports Clomifene - the well-known masking agent - is usually associated with 3-4 year bans. But I guess we’ll find out soon-ish now if Benn has engineered a soft sentence or not.
Apparently the hearing was or started yesterday.
UKAD aren’t massively well funded and won’t want a lengthy or costly legal case so I can see something happening that will appease both sides hence why I’m thinking a short ban with a statement of them thinking that there’s no evidence that Benn knowingly cheated will come out.
Hopefully not long to find out either way.
What is your source for Benn's hearing having started yesterday? I hope you are right but I can't find anything to support that theory.
Eddie said it in several interviews and Tony Sims mentioned that the case was being heard this week.
UKAD aren’t massively well funded and won’t want a lengthy or costly legal case so I can see something happening that will appease both sides hence why I’m thinking a short ban with a statement of them thinking that there’s no evidence that Benn knowingly cheated will come out.
Hopefully not long to find out either way.
What is your source for Benn's hearing having started yesterday? I hope you are right but I can't find anything to support that theory.
Eddie said it in several interviews and Tony Sims mentioned that the case was being heard this week.
:TU:
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 11 Jul 2023, 07:35
by MasterG
Just been listening to Eddie on FB saying if Benn is cleared he will fight Eubank September 23rd at Wembley stadium, Joyce fights same night at the arena so I'm guessing he means that location as I can't see 2 fights happening in wembley same night
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 11 Jul 2023, 07:53
by joshj909
MasterG wrote: ↑11 Jul 2023, 07:35
Just been listening to Eddie on FB saying if Benn is cleared he will fight Eubank September 23rd at Wembley stadium, Joyce fights same night at the arena so I'm guessing he means that location as I can't see 2 fights happening in wembley same night
Don't think that has a hope in hell at filling out Wembley stadium. Might have to stick to an arena. Unless he knows there's no chance he's cleared and is just talking it up.
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 11 Jul 2023, 07:54
by maverick23
MasterG wrote: ↑11 Jul 2023, 07:35
Just been listening to Eddie on FB saying if Benn is cleared he will fight Eubank September 23rd at Wembley stadium, Joyce fights same night at the arena so I'm guessing he means that location as I can't see 2 fights happening in wembley same night
If it happens in the U.K. then it will be at Spurs’ stadium.
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 11 Jul 2023, 07:59
by My T Sharp
The doping rules are not great. A ban can be escaped if you have the right team behind you to establish how the drugs got into your system. If Conor can show no significant fault or negligence, the maximum he can get is two years. However, failing the second test doesn't help a negligence defence.
Contaminated Products
In cases involving a Prohibited Substance that is not a Substance
of Abuse, where the Athlete or other Person can establish both that
they bear No Significant Fault or Negligence for the violation and
that the Prohibited Substance came from a Contaminated Product, the period of Ineligibility shall be, at a minimum, a reprimand and
no period of Ineligibility,and at a maximum, two (2) years
Ineligibility, depending on the Athlete’s or other Person's degree
of Fault.
No Significant Fault or Negligence: The Athlete or other Person’s establishing that any
Fault or negligence, when viewed in the totality of the circumstances and taking into
account the criteria for No Fault or Negligence, was not significant in relation to the AntiDoping Rule Violation. Except in the case of a Protected Person or Recreational Athlete, for
any violation of Article 2.1, the Athlete must also establish how the Prohibited Substance
entered Athlete's system.
I suppose the BBBofC could still look to keep Conor banned under an interpretation of what gross misconduct is.
Benn-Eubank is going to be a much bigger fight (freak show) because of this whole saga.
2 years means no fighting till the end of 2024, which is a while away yet. Eubank will be an ancient, creaky/rusty veteran if he stays inactive till then. 35 years old in September 2024.
Benn-Eubank is going to be a much bigger fight (freak show) because of this whole saga.
2 years means no fighting till the end of 2024, which is a while away yet. Eubank will be an ancient, creaky/rusty veteran if he stays inactive till then. 35 years old in September 2024.
Benn-Eubank is going to be a much bigger fight (freak show) because of this whole saga.
2 years means no fighting till the end of 2024, which is a while away yet. Eubank will be an ancient, creaky/rusty veteran if he stays inactive till then. 35 years old in September 2024.
Benn has got a good record against rusty veterans, and it will be a huge payday, win win
Benn-Eubank is going to be a much bigger fight (freak show) because of this whole saga.
2 years means no fighting till the end of 2024, which is a while away yet. Eubank will be an ancient, creaky/rusty veteran if he stays inactive till then. 35 years old in September 2024.
Benn has got a good record against rusty veterans, and it will be a huge payday, win win
Probably would resemble Steve Collins/Nigel Benn, with Eubank Jr cast in the Benn role ironically.
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 13 Jul 2023, 11:16
by garethhop
Interesting update is that Monday's update was to consider legal argument of whether UKAD can actually rule against Benn given he gave up his BBBoC license in October, and whether the VADA samples are admissible.
Should get a ruling on that by tomorrow. If VADA continue with the hearing., then that is when Benn's camp will chuck in the egg stuff.
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 13 Jul 2023, 16:12
by maverick23
Not a great look if he gets off on a technicality.
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 13 Jul 2023, 16:49
by Redback Rasta
maverick23 wrote: ↑13 Jul 2023, 16:12
Not a great look if he gets off on a technicality.
Not a great look whether he gets off or not and that extends to Hearn as well, who's approach has been how do we get around the rules from the moment Benn tested positive.
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 13 Jul 2023, 17:27
by garethhop
Someone at some point will compile an essay of everything Hearn has said about Benn over the last 10 months.
It will make incredible reading.
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 13 Jul 2023, 18:03
by polecateddy
garethhop wrote: ↑13 Jul 2023, 11:16
Interesting update is that Monday's update was to consider legal argument of whether UKAD can actually rule against Benn given he gave up his BBBoC license in October, and whether the VADA samples are admissible.
Should get a ruling on that by tomorrow. If VADA continue with the hearing., then that is when Benn's camp will chuck in the egg stuff.
So basically once the hail mary shot of having the VADA tests excluded fails, the tribunal will get a long adjournment for further investigation. So it could still go all summer.
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 13 Jul 2023, 18:47
by Frostieballs
maverick23 wrote: ↑13 Jul 2023, 16:12
Not a great look if he gets off on a technicality.
He can only get off on a technicality.
Whether it’s this or some newly found scientific evidence - what difference.
It’s all BS.
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 13 Jul 2023, 21:07
by Redback Rasta
garethhop wrote: ↑13 Jul 2023, 17:27
Someone at some point will compile an essay of everything Hearn has said about Benn over the last 10 months.
It will make incredible reading.
'Oh, go on then.'
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 14 Jul 2023, 05:42
by Redback Rasta
It looks like the Smith-Eubank rematch is going ahead next and despite what Hearn has been saying, Sauerland has confirmed the Benn fight 'isn't even on the table.'
Hearn just looking worse and worse as he continues to lie for drug cheat Benn.
Re: Conor Benn - What Next?
Posted: 14 Jul 2023, 08:15
by maverick23
I wonder if Eubank has heard the first part of the Benn UKAD case, over jurisdiction, has failed so the case will rumble on.