BoxRec

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 09:12**

keirw wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 08:55 This is all looking rather damning at the moment.

Shame, as I like Whyte and he looked as though he was even starting to win over his detractors.

I will reserve judgement until all the details come to light, though that may take a while.

If he is guilty, I wonder what punishment he will receive as it tends to vary massively in each situation.

For example: Canelo got 6 months for steroids and Sun (a Chinese swimmer with a previous PED ban to his name) was able to compete the other day despite being under investigation for allegedly tampering with a sample.

Yet I read in an article today that a British cross country runner got a 4 year ban for cocain. Which is f**king mental if you ask me.

Samir Nasri got an 18 month ban for using an IV drip

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 09:14**

i can see him getting away with it

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 09:18**

lefthook82 wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 09:14 i can see him getting away with it

Definitely

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 09:24**

Probably recently found out that he has asthma

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 09:58**

Hearn shows he's serious about drug use in the UK by signing another drug cheat

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 10:00**

knockout wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 08:38
Controversial wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 08:34

I guess it's no different to being arrested and a solicitor advising their client to say 'no comment' to everything regardless what the question is.
Normally the client is guilty in these situations and the lawyer doesn’t want anything said that may conflict with a better loop hole later in the investigation :)

Not always, the standard advice from a solicitor t is to say ‘no comment’ to everything

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 10:26**

danconnollyeire wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 08:29 They can't use the meat excuse this time

It'll be injured shoulder or knee or something and that's why he was a bit out of shape so doctor said take some BS injection and they didn't know it contained crack, heroin, steroids, EPO and rocket fuel

This.

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 11:30**

tobyh5 wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 08:26
danconnollyeire wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 08:20 Hearn: "I can't say anything wait for Whyte statement in the morning"

Whyte (in the afternoon): "I can't say anything"

If I was accused of robbing a bank, I wouldn't say "I can't say anything for legal reason"... I say I haven't robbed a bank
Absolutely spot on.

Perhaps there are aspects he cannot talk about for these supposed legal reasons, but he sure as sh1t can say "I did not use drugs/take PED's/am clean" etc

He did say “I won that fight fair and square.”

I really really hope that this is a mix up as I’ve really gotten onboard the Whyte train and wanted him to do well. Didn’t think he would beat the likes of Joshua or Wilder but would have liked to have seen him get a shot prior to this news.

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 11:39**

black panther wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 11:30
tobyh5 wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 08:26

Absolutely spot on.

Perhaps there are aspects he cannot talk about for these supposed legal reasons, but he sure as sh1t can say "I did not use drugs/take PED's/am clean" etc

He did say “I won that fight fair and square.” .

Fair and square to mean two men in the ring, with gloves, fighting potentially.

Could be using any sort of interpretations. Why make things ambiguous?

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 12:06**

All the bullsh1t posted on here and not a single poster knows the full story.

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 12:08**

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 12:19**

keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 12:06 All the bullsh1t posted on here and not a single poster knows the full story.

You have been here for 11 years. You still working out how it works around here bud?

You know this is what we do. It's fun to summise and speculate, which in fairness is all we can do when the involved parties have shut up shop.

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 12:20**

tobyh5 wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 12:19
keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 12:06 All the bullsh1t posted on here and not a single poster knows the full story.
You have been here for 11 years. You still working out how it works around here bud?

You know this is what we do. It's fun to summise and speculate, which in fairness is all we can do when the involved parties have shut up shop.

Seriously.

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 12:48**

black panther wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 11:30
tobyh5 wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 08:26

Absolutely spot on.

Perhaps there are aspects he cannot talk about for these supposed legal reasons, but he sure as sh1t can say "I did not use drugs/take PED's/am clean" etc

He did say “I won that fight fair and square.”

I really really hope that this is a mix up as I’ve really gotten onboard the Whyte train and wanted him to do well. Didn’t think he would beat the likes of Joshua or Wilder but would have liked to have seen him get a shot prior to this news.

Which already harms his case given the glove situation that Russ Anber spoke about

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 12:49**

G0mez wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 12:08

WWE wrestler Big E is the spitting image of Carlton on roids

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 13:01**

WHYTE SILENCE A DERILICTION OF DUTY – THE F W COLUMN

IT HAS BEEN a dreadful, tragic and desperately sad week for the sport of boxing.

The deaths of both Maxim Dadashev and Hugo Santillan provide a stark reminder, if any were needed, of the brutal landscape participants in this sport operate in. When tragedy occurs, soul-searching follows, before those involved in the game return to the genuinely held conviction that the positives of boxing heavily outweigh the mercifully rare negatives.

We then always speak of – and in most cases carry it out – continually striving to make the boxing ring as safe a place as it can be when blows are being traded.

This doesn’t appear to have been the uppermost concern when it came to the headline fight at a show that took place at the O2 in London last weekend that has resulted in a further doping scandal tarnishing the sport.

During fight week Dillian Whyte was informed of an adverse finding in a recent anti-doping test and nearly all concerned were made aware of this also. So Dillian knew, his promoter Eddie Hearn has admitted he knew and the British Boxing Board of Control and UKAD were obviously in the picture, as UKAD are exclusively appointed by the Board to handle all Anti-Doping matters under the World Anti-Doping Agency WADA protocol.

Normally, under these circumstances, a boxer is immediately suspended and is given seven days to respond. Of the two samples taken – A and B – the B sample is retained to be tested, at the request of the boxer at a later date if he refutes the findings in the A Sample.

In the meantime, press conferences continued with as if nothing had happened and they continued to sell the fight against Oscar Rivas to be broadcast on pay-per-view.

Strangely, most Athletes wait months to have a hearing, but on this occasion a hearing took place on the Saturday morning, which was kept secret, for reasons we don’t know. But, the one person this should not have been kept from is Oscar Rivas.

Everybody concerned had a duty of care to inform him of this situation. He was the one getting into the ring with someone who – nobody disputes this at the moment – had tested positive for a PED.

Ultimately, his life was on the line and questions needed to be asked, but neither he or his team were told. Had they been told they could have then made a decision over whether Rivas wanted to or should fight or not. If they required financial compensation, what the implications were if they withdrew from the fight and, most importantly, were the insurance policies in place and how were they affected? Were the insurance company informed? Would they cover a fighter who was taking PED’s or a fighter suffering injury or worse as a result?

Apparently, the WBC – who had their Interim title on the line – knew nothing about it, so why weren’t they informed as they go to great lengths to promote their own clean Boxing Program and would probably have pulled sanction.

I think it is outrageous that a fighter is allowed to step into the ring to take on someone with a doping cloud hanging over their head and be totally unaware of what is going on.

People might say I would say all this with being a rival promoter, but I have been in the sport a long time and this isn’t the first occasion where Matchroom have been guilty or been accused of dubious practice that could potentially put the safety of boxers at risk.

What we have got now is an about-turn from Hearn, in contrast to his reaction when Billy-Joe Saunders was deemed to have failed a VADA test for using a nasal decongestant whilst out-of-competition, which is permitted by UKAD. In the eyes of UKAD and the BBBofC Bill was an innocent party and had not broken any rule or violated the WADA code, but Hearn, when it suited him and his agenda, vocally supported the stance of the voluntary organisation and insisted everybody should know about it, resulting in Bill having to vacate his world title.

Now we have a cloak of secrecy thrown over the whole issue. Furthermore, what have the VADA tests come back with this time and why has it all been conducted in secret?

Two young men died this week so now, more than ever, there is the need for complete transparency. We need to know the results of the B sample as soon as possible for the integrity of sport. Throughout all this, nobody is saying there has not been a positive test here. That being the case what was he doing in the ring?

The man who was risking his life in opposition surely had the right to know all this and a duty of care has not been upheld. This is the essence of what boxing is about, the safety of boxers.

Regulation 9.8 of the BBBC’s regulations states… “The Board or Area Council shall have the power to prohibit any contest which in their opinion is not in the interests of boxing” irrespective of what happened at Saturday’s hearing how can they have allowed this fight to have gone ahead, it certainly wasn’t in the interests of boxing and more importantly it certainly wasn’t in Oscar Rivas’ health’s best interest.

There are so many questions that need to be asked and there may well be valid answers to them, but we need to know and a wall of silence is in the interests of nobody.

Whatever way you want to look at it, surely no-one can dispute the fact that Rivas had a right to know what was going on. And nobody saw fit to tell him and for me that is immoral.

Has a dangerous precedent been set where we see boxers fighting whilst waiting for allegations of cheating to be either established or exonerated? I hope not, as a repeat of this mockery would have serious implications due to the very nature of the sport and God forbid anyone getting injured in the interim.

There are more important things in this sport of ours than making more money and the people involved in this scandal should be called to account and soon.

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 13:42**

Managing Director of Klitschko Management Group and former Klitschko Manager Bernd Boente has reacted to the current drug testing saga involving Dillian Whyte in the United Kingdom.

Whyte is alleged to have tested positive for metabolites of a banned substance Dianabol. But even so, was allowed to fight and defeat Oscar Rivas at the O2 Arena in London. A hearing was hastily set-up to convene over events. Whyte was subsequently cleared by UKAD and the British Boxing Board of Control to enter the ring.

Uproar has since erupted in the UK given the nature of the way Whyte, his team and the authorities kept the information from Rivas and his promoter Yvon Michel.

Boente felt as though the situation was similar to the one Wladimir Klitschko experienced before losing his world heavyweight titles to Tyson Fury in Germany back in 2015.

“The Dillian Whyte scandal has reminded me how the BBBofC and UKAD treated us before Wladimir‘s fight versus Fury,” Boente exclusively told World Boxing News.

“Both organizations knew about Fury‘s doping test in the Hammer fight. Neither of them had told us or the involved governing bodies (WBA, WBO, IBF and IBO) anything before the fight.

“Had we known this before, we would have insisted on VADA testing in the weeks leading up to the fight.”

Asked his thoughts on Whyte, UKAD and the BBBofC’s actions, Boente added: “We need to find a reasonable and fast solution regarding the increasing number of doping cases in boxing.

“Our sport is facing a huge problem, especially with the added pressure from broadcasters covering our sport,” he concluded.

Once the ‘B’ sample comes to light and UKAD finally open their findings to the public, Rivas and the WBC, Whyte faces a further ban of between four and eight years. ‘The Body Snatcher’ was banned in 2012 for two years, and according to UKAD rules, should be given a far sterner punishment for another failure.

If you use this content, you legally agree to credit World Boxing News and backlink to our story EXCLUSIVE: Whyte-Rivas UKAD case similar to Klitschko-Fury – Boente | WBN - World Boxing News

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 13:48**

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 13:42 Managing Director of Klitschko Management Group and former Klitschko Manager Bernd Boente has reacted to the current drug testing saga involving Dillian Whyte in the United Kingdom.

Whyte is alleged to have tested positive for metabolites of a banned substance Dianabol. But even so, was allowed to fight and defeat Oscar Rivas at the O2 Arena in London. A hearing was hastily set-up to convene over events. Whyte was subsequently cleared by UKAD and the British Boxing Board of Control to enter the ring.

Uproar has since erupted in the UK given the nature of the way Whyte, his team and the authorities kept the information from Rivas and his promoter Yvon Michel.

Boente felt as though the situation was similar to the one Wladimir Klitschko experienced before losing his world heavyweight titles to Tyson Fury in Germany back in 2015.

“The Dillian Whyte scandal has reminded me how the BBBofC and UKAD treated us before Wladimir‘s fight versus Fury,” Boente exclusively told World Boxing News.

“Both organizations knew about Fury‘s doping test in the Hammer fight. Neither of them had told us or the involved governing bodies (WBA, WBO, IBF and IBO) anything before the fight.

“Had we known this before, we would have insisted on VADA testing in the weeks leading up to the fight.”

Asked his thoughts on Whyte, UKAD and the BBBofC’s actions, Boente added: “We need to find a reasonable and fast solution regarding the increasing number of doping cases in boxing.

“Our sport is facing a huge problem, especially with the added pressure from broadcasters covering our sport,” he concluded.

Once the ‘B’ sample comes to light and UKAD finally open their findings to the public, Rivas and the WBC, Whyte faces a further ban of between four and eight years. ‘The Body Snatcher’ was banned in 2012 for two years, and according to UKAD rules, should be given a far sterner punishment for another failure.

If you use this content, you legally agree to credit World Boxing News and backlink to our story EXCLUSIVE: Whyte-Rivas UKAD case similar to Klitschko-Fury – Boente | WBN - World Boxing News

I think that last paragraph means you’re in legal trouble Ruthless

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 13:58**

Controversial wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 10:00
knockout wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 08:38

Normally the client is guilty in these situations and the lawyer doesn’t want anything said that may conflict with a better loop hole later in the investigation :)
Not always, the standard advice from a solicitor t is to say ‘no comment’ to everything

You are partly correct.

Advising a suspect at the police station to give a ‘no comment’ interview doesn’t always mean that the client is guilty.

However, it is not “standard advice” for a solicitor to advise a client to give ‘no comment’ interview, that advice will be based on some rationale; whether a lack of disclosure from the police, lack of evidence or risk of the suspect implicating himself in other criminal activity for which the police do not have him under suspicion, etc.

If a suspect is advised to give a ‘no comment’ then he will be expected by his brief to answer all questions with a “no comment” response. A suspect should never answer some police questions and not others.

The risk of a ‘no comment’ police interview in the criminal justice system is that if the suspect is charged, the court can draw an adverse inference against the defendant if he then forwards a defence at trial. The general position is that a suspect not involved in an offence is reasonably expected to give his account to Police when interviewed under caution.

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 14:13**

Really good article from allegedly on his own website . About this situation. I agree with everything he said.

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 14:16**

If anyone is interested as to where I saw the transcript of what was alleged to have been said, it was reddit-

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 14:21**

Nondescript wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 14:16 If anyone is interested as to where I saw the transcript of what was alleged to have been said, it was reddit-

I saw it here...

https://metro.co.uk/2019/07/26/miracle- ... -10467560/

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 14:30**

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 14:21
Nondescript wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 14:16 If anyone is interested as to where I saw the transcript of what was alleged to have been said, it was reddit-

I saw it here...

https://metro.co.uk/2019/07/26/miracle- ... -10467560/

Yeah, they should have linked to where they saw it.

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 14:35**

Nondescript wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 14:16 If anyone is interested as to where I saw the transcript of what was alleged to have been said, it was reddit-

What are we thinking from the exchange?

I am taking it that Hearn had put together a statement for Whyte if they were refused permission to fight, then the brief contacted him to say they had pulled off whatever tactic they had attempted. But then, Whyte's comment makes me curious about the two tests in two days and then one in a million.

Or do others read this differently?

Posted: **26 Jul 2019, 14:39**

tobyh5 wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 14:35
Nondescript wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 14:16 If anyone is interested as to where I saw the transcript of what was alleged to have been said, it was reddit-

What are we thinking from the exchange?

I am taking it that Hearn had put together a statement for Whyte if they were refused permission to fight, then the brief contacted him to say they had pulled off whatever tactic they had attempted. But then, Whyte's comment makes me curious about the two tests in two days and then one in a million.

Or do others read this differently?

I have no idea. I caught some of what the transcript thought it heard, but my ears aren't good enough to catch most of that

You'd need a sound engineer, someone who knows how to correctly enhance things like that to have a correct reading of it. It sounded pretty accurate to me but yeah.

BoxRec

Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance

Re: Dillian Whyte Tests Positive For Banned Substance