BoxRec

JamesPhilips wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 14:57

blanca wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 14:47

JamesPhilips wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 14:38 What’s the name of the U.K. boxer who got a huge, unfair ban for cocaine and effectively ended his career?

Liam Cameron. Bit of charlie in his system.

Yeah that’s it. How many years ban did he get? It’s like one rule for the names one rule for the commoners

4 years, a travesty

Conor apparently, and amazingly, not entirely happy with the WBC ruling and consulting his lawyers on that too

how to lose friends and alienate people

Don’t know if UKAD have stepped up the severity of their bans in recent years? Looking at the last 25 sanctions in the last 18 months or so, I think mostly they are all 3 or 4 years in length, just a handful of 2 years, and one was 8 years! No wonder Conor is acting out a bit! lol
https://www.ukad.org.uk/sanctions

polecateddy wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 16:29 Don’t know if UKAD have stepped up the severity of their bans in recent years? Looking at the last 25 sanctions in the last 18 months or so, I think mostly they are all 3 or 4 years in length, just a handful of 2 years, and one was 8 years! No wonder Conor is acting out a bit! lol
https://www.ukad.org.uk/sanctions

Just had a quick look, didn't realise that Philip Bowes the ex Commonwealth light welter champ got a 4 yr ban back in 2020

UKAD should be given free range to investigate this.

ewenhay wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:04 UKAD should be given free range to investigate this.

Who is going to pay for it?

Coco wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:12

ewenhay wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:04 UKAD should be given free range to investigate this.

Who is going to pay for it?

I think this went over your head mate

smiling assassin wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:27

Coco wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:12

ewenhay wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:04 UKAD should be given free range to investigate this.

Who is going to pay for it?

I think this went over your head mate

ewenhay wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:04 UKAD should be given free range to investigate this.

Coco wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:31

smiling assassin wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:27

Coco wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:12

Who is going to pay for it?

I think this went over your head mate

This news has left me shell shocked

This is the real reason we’ve been short on the flippin eggs.

Benn’s been having them all. Straight from the Hen’s ass.

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 18:15 This is the real reason we’ve been short on the flippin eggs.

Benn’s been having them all. Straight from the Hen’s ass.

Is he the Keith Lard of the hen world?

KiwiRider wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 04:42

gregregegg wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 04:00 You would think after ffailing the first test you would investigate everything, suspect eggs as a faint mabey and stop 40 eggs a week....

is it really only 40 eggs a week? everyones acting like its impossable, 40 a week is 6 a day, thats super doable... i probabbly ate 40 eggs a week when i was 11... mum use to think i was going to die of cholesterol... I was 30kgs doing 6 eggs of scramble per serve.

I thought it was more than that?
I was eating a lot of eggs when I had chickens, maybe 30 a week until the chickens sh*tting on my deck pissed me off enough to eat the chickens

rob h wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 17:49 This news has left me shell shocked

It's only my l'oeuf of the game that keeps me coming back

Hearn has got to defend Benn. He doesn't want a rival promoter poaching him.

Benedict's Slalom might interest Conor.

Conor benn wasn't going anywhere fast before and don't understand why anyone would entertain him now

He wasn't up too much before all this happened, lot different to his father, don't matter what his surname is, he's not doing nothing in the game I don't think

In today’s Mail that Benn is suing the BBBoC for loss of earnings and damage to his reputation amounting to £3.5m.

What an insufferable little prick.

On a side note, you’d need more than 3.5m to sort Benn’s reputation out

Barry will be in Eddie's ear telling him to get shut, he's damaged goods.

conor (and ed) coming across as total c@nts throughout this whole thing, what a twat

ashall2 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2023, 05:03 In today’s Mail that Benn is suing the BBBoC for loss of earnings and damage to his reputation amounting to £3.5m.

What an insufferable little prick.

On a side note, you’d need more than 3.5m to sort Benn’s reputation out

They did nothing wrong.

They reported a positive drugs test which was being hidden.

There’s still no B sample.

ashall2 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2023, 05:03 In today’s Mail that Benn is suing the BBBoC for loss of earnings and damage to his reputation amounting to £3.5m.

What an insufferable little prick.

On a side note, you’d need more than 3.5m to sort Benn’s reputation out

How is he going to do that, unless he can prove that the Board knew that he had justifications for two failed tests?

Maybe an intimidation tactic. The capitulation by the WBC has set an example/precedent they may have to follow.

ashall2 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2023, 05:03 In today’s Mail that Benn is suing the BBBoC for loss of earnings and damage to his reputation amounting to £3.5m.

What an insufferable little prick.

On a side note, you’d need more than 3.5m to sort Benn’s reputation out

Trying the Fury route but Fury was not as public as this with his situation so his reputation wasn't running for the casuals.

Benn's argument is ultimately going to be that VADA is nothing to do with BBBofC and he passed his UKAD tests. Issue with that is that he's given back his license before an investigation could happen, so all they did is not license a fight that they don't have to do after he's reported to have failed a tests which is true. If BBBofC can stand up against this financially then his 270 page document will get ruined in court by professionals, I just don't think they can afford to fight it.

joshj909 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2023, 06:12

ashall2 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2023, 05:03 In today’s Mail that Benn is suing the BBBoC for loss of earnings and damage to his reputation amounting to £3.5m.

What an insufferable little prick.

On a side note, you’d need more than 3.5m to sort Benn’s reputation out

Trying the Fury route but Fury was not as public as this with his situation so his reputation wasn't running for the casuals.

Benn's argument is ultimately going to be that VADA is nothing to do with BBBofC and he passed his UKAD tests. Issue with that is that he's given back his license before an investigation could happen, so all they did is not license a fight that they don't have to do after he's reported to have failed a tests which is true. If BBBofC can stand up against this financially then his 270 page document will get ruined in court by professionals, I just don't think they can afford to fight it.

It’s a complex situation which is hard to fully get across. In terms of a ban will UKAD adopt the VADA findings and say issue a 3 year ban? Or is the only sanction that The Board don’t issue him with a licence for a number of years, and perhaps put some extra conditions on any return? A bit like having to do an extended driving test re-test after say a drink drive ban.

An earlier news article reported; ‘Ukad is duty bound to investigate the case as it is a potential anti-doping violation by a boxer licensed by the British Boxing Board of Control, which is under its jurisdiction.‘

But it’s unclear to me if that would go as far as UKAD testing the B sample or if the B sample can even be tested without Benn’s consent. I kind of presume that UKAD might just endorse VADA’s testing and results as it is a partner agency.