BoxRec

Did Fury have his license revoked because of mental illness or because of his UKAD charge?

magwitch wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

DazDiCanio wrote:

So you think it's a good idea that a fighter with known mental health and other issues, should be cleared to box.

Fury needs to get his head straight, sort out his addiction issues, and get into proper mental fighting shape before he returns to the ring.

Depression isn’t a block on getting the okay to box from the doctor.

He isn't suffering from clinical depression, it's Bipolar disorder, which is entirely different. Taking medication for Bipolar, if he was taking it, could be.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

mimmy123 wrote:Personally I dont think the BBBOC have the skill set to detect or diagnose mental illness. The BBBOC are stuck in the last century and is run by old duffers who have no boxing experience between them. I certainly would not have any faith in them regarding mental illnesses within their boxing licence holders. Mental illness is a complex science and I have never witnessed or heard anything from the BBBOC that they have invested in mental illness.

They wouldn't attempt to, they would look to the evidence of medical professionals. If, as his family claim, he has been diagnosed with bipolar, thgen it will be on his medical records.

But if you are a 'member' of a organisation and suffer from mental illness would that organisation have appointed medical personnel to help with any decision an unqualified person could not make? For example lets say they call Fury in for his interview regarding a renewal licence application. Konwing he has a mental illness would they appoint a professional practioner to sit on that interview panel so that a correct decision could be made. Or would that panel just have several old men who have no experience in boxing as a sport and no medical background of mental illness make the final decision whether to allow a person with a mental illness a licence, or make the final decision that he applicant even had capacity to make the the decision himself to even apply for a licence.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

magwitch wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
So you think it's a good idea that a fighter with known mental health and other issues, should be cleared to box.

Fury needs to get his head straight, sort out his addiction issues, and get into proper mental fighting shape before he returns to the ring.

Depression isn’t a block on getting the okay to box from the doctor.

He isn't suffering from clinical depression, it's Bipolar disorder, which is entirely different. Taking medication for Bipolar, if he was taking it, could be.

That's one of the reason's manic depression's clinical name changed to “bipolar disorder” many years ago, to more clearly distinguish it from regular depression. The difference is really quite simple, though. Manic depression — or bipolar disorder — includes clinical depression as a part of its diagnosis.

mimmy123 wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

mimmy123 wrote:Personally I dont think the BBBOC have the skill set to detect or diagnose mental illness. The BBBOC are stuck in the last century and is run by old duffers who have no boxing experience between them. I certainly would not have any faith in them regarding mental illnesses within their boxing licence holders. Mental illness is a complex science and I have never witnessed or heard anything from the BBBOC that they have invested in mental illness.

They wouldn't attempt to, they would look to the evidence of medical professionals. If, as his family claim, he has been diagnosed with bipolar, thgen it will be on his medical records.

But if you are a 'member' of a organisation and suffer from mental illness would that organisation have appointed medical personnel to help with any decision an unqualified person could not make? For example lets say they call Fury in for his interview regarding a renewal licence application. Konwing he has a mental illness would they appoint a professional practioner to sit on that interview panel so that a correct decision could be made. Or would that panel just have several old men who have no experience in boxing as a sport and no medical background of mental illness make the final decision whether to allow a person with a mental illness a licence, or make the final decision that he applicant even had capacity to make the the decision himself to even apply for a licence.

The final decision on whether to grant a licence comes down to the board, and so long as their grounds for doing so are considered reasonable, after advice from appropriate clinical staff, then they will not be at risk of being sued, which is their main concern.

There is a major difference between clinical depression and bipolar disorder, in the way the symptoms present - for that reason, many people with Bipolar require medication to stabilise them and prevent the periods of mania, during which time they will often exhibit very unpredictable, impulsive and risk taking behaviours. I've been out with two women who suffered from the condition, and I can tell you, it was fornicating scary at times.

But the point still remains , Has he actually been diagnosed with bi polar , clinical depresion , by a doctor and not his familly or mates , or someone on a internet forum

Also if he has , It could be argued that Ok he has bi polar BUT has long has he takes his medication he will be fine to box ,, Now the situation there is quite simple , has long has that medication does'nt have any illigal or banned substances , and is deeemed ok to take by the relevant authoroties ,, Then he is Ok to box , from a medical point of view ,

Its a bit like diabetics or people with blood pressure having to take a medical to get there driving liscence ,, It does'nt mean they cannot drive , it just means it has to be under control and signed by a doctor ,,, and the Board are not doctors ,, If they get one who works for a couple of quid under the table and a free ticket to the shows , says he's unfit , i'm sure he can c ome up with a 1000 quid an hous Harley st specelist who will disagree

coneye wrote:But the point still remains , Has he actually been diagnosed with bi polar , clinical depresion , by a doctor and not his familly or mates , or someone on a internet forum

Also if he has , It could be argued that Ok he has bi polar BUT has long has he takes his medication he will be fine to box ,, Now the situation there is quite simple , has long has that medication does'nt have any illigal or banned substances , and is deeemed ok to take by the relevant authoroties ,, Then he is Ok to box , from a medical point of view ,

Its a bit like diabetics or people with blood pressure having to take a medical to get there driving liscence ,, It does'nt mean they cannot drive , it just means it has to be under control and signed by a doctor ,,, and the Board are not doctors ,, If they get one who works for a couple of quid under the table and a free ticket to the shows , says he's unfit , i'm sure he can c ome up with a 1000 quid an hous Harley st specelist who will disagree

Not quite - there are medications that may make him deemed not fit to box, however, boxing being boxing, probably not.

I know at one point Tyson had a problem getting licenced to fight, because he was taking Zoloft. However, money talked. Things might be a little more rigorous here, as there's only one sanctioning body.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

coneye wrote:But the point still remains , Has he actually been diagnosed with bi polar , clinical depresion , by a doctor and not his familly or mates , or someone on a internet forum

Also if he has , It could be argued that Ok he has bi polar BUT has long has he takes his medication he will be fine to box ,, Now the situation there is quite simple , has long has that medication does'nt have any illigal or banned substances , and is deeemed ok to take by the relevant authoroties ,, Then he is Ok to box , from a medical point of view ,

Its a bit like diabetics or people with blood pressure having to take a medical to get there driving liscence ,, It does'nt mean they cannot drive , it just means it has to be under control and signed by a doctor ,,, and the Board are not doctors ,, If they get one who works for a couple of quid under the table and a free ticket to the shows , says he's unfit , i'm sure he can c ome up with a 1000 quid an hous Harley st specelist who will disagree

Not quite - there are medications that may make him deemed not fit to box, however, boxing being boxing, probably not.

I know at one point Tyson had a problem getting licenced to fight, because he was taking Zoloft. However, money talked. Things might be a little more rigorous here, as there's only one sanctioning body.

I hope he comes back , the big fella always amused me , Off course i would like to see him fit and healthy , but he's always going to have issues and problems , his dad probably being one of the biggest problems

Is this the same board who have sanctioned Ortiz-Allen and Briedis-Vallily in the last few months.
That's two of the biggest punchers of their divisions against fighters below British Level.

I have no doubt FW will sort it.

I also think the depression angle was a deflection from the PEDS. We like winners or a good loser in this country. We don't like cheats.

coneye wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

coneye wrote:But the point still remains , Has he actually been diagnosed with bi polar , clinical depresion , by a doctor and not his familly or mates , or someone on a internet forum

Also if he has , It could be argued that Ok he has bi polar BUT has long has he takes his medication he will be fine to box ,, Now the situation there is quite simple , has long has that medication does'nt have any illigal or banned substances , and is deeemed ok to take by the relevant authoroties ,, Then he is Ok to box , from a medical point of view ,

Its a bit like diabetics or people with blood pressure having to take a medical to get there driving liscence ,, It does'nt mean they cannot drive , it just means it has to be under control and signed by a doctor ,,, and the Board are not doctors ,, If they get one who works for a couple of quid under the table and a free ticket to the shows , says he's unfit , i'm sure he can c ome up with a 1000 quid an hous Harley st specelist who will disagree

Not quite - there are medications that may make him deemed not fit to box, however, boxing being boxing, probably not.

I know at one point Tyson had a problem getting licenced to fight, because he was taking Zoloft. However, money talked. Things might be a little more rigorous here, as there's only one sanctioning body.

I hope he comes back , the big fella always amused me , Off course i would like to see him fit and healthy , but he's always going to have issues and problems , his dad probably being one of the biggest problems

Yeah so long as he's fit, healthy and clean, why not? The division could do with it. It seems theres probably a bit of a streak of mental problems in the family.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

mimmy123 wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
They wouldn't attempt to, they would look to the evidence of medical professionals. If, as his family claim, he has been diagnosed with bipolar, thgen it will be on his medical records.

But if you are a 'member' of a organisation and suffer from mental illness would that organisation have appointed medical personnel to help with any decision an unqualified person could not make? For example lets say they call Fury in for his interview regarding a renewal licence application. Konwing he has a mental illness would they appoint a professional practioner to sit on that interview panel so that a correct decision could be made. Or would that panel just have several old men who have no experience in boxing as a sport and no medical background of mental illness make the final decision whether to allow a person with a mental illness a licence, or make the final decision that he applicant even had capacity to make the the decision himself to even apply for a licence.

The final decision on whether to grant a licence comes down to the board, and so long as their grounds for doing so are considered reasonable, after advice from appropriate clinical staff, then they will not be at risk of being sued, which is their main concern.

There is a major difference between clinical depression and bipolar disorder, in the way the symptoms present - for that reason, many people with Bipolar require medication to stabilise them and prevent the periods of mania, during which time they will often exhibit very unpredictable, impulsive and risk taking behaviours. I've been out with two women who suffered from the condition, and I can tell you, it was effing scary at times.

Who are these appropriate clinical staff within the board? If however there is none within the board, isnt it a responsibility that they should have such staff within the organisation? You cant tell me that when they interview possible sufferers from depression they suddenly find apprepriate clinic staff to be available to make a clinical decision at the time of an interview. Whats on paper and what comes out of a persons mouth are totally different.

They have Doctors and/or specialists attend every show in the UK, it stands to reason they would have access to other doctors/specialists should the need arise. The local shows to me always use the same doctor, he's from the local A&E dept, my mate knows him as he also works there.

What a Vaudeville clusterfvck.

orbtastic wrote:They have Doctors and/or specialists attend every show in the UK, it stands to reason they would have access to other doctors/specialists should the need arise. The local shows to me always use the same doctor, he's from the local A&E dept, my mate knows him as he also works there.

Every commisioning body has to supply this, its as standard.

It does not stand to reason at all.

They didnt have appropriate staff for Michael Watson many years ago. You cannot take anything for granted unless these people ar eon the members list within a board.

DazDiCanio wrote:Did Fury have his license revoked because of mental illness or because of his UKAD charge?

Neither. He had his licence suspended when he failed a test for cocaine in a VADA test. The UKAD charge is for nandrolone. The mental illness was what he said he was suffering from when he gave up the titles.

gobbles wrote:

DazDiCanio wrote:Did Fury have his license revoked because of mental illness or because of his UKAD charge?

Neither. He had his licence suspended when he failed a test for cocaine in a VADA test. The UKAD charge is for nandrolone. The mental illness was what he said he was suffering from when he gave up the titles.

If his licence is suspended for use of cocaine, does that mean he has had a hearing to conclude if he has done wrong (cocaine test blood sample positive) and must serve a ban under the BBBoC rules? Is there actually a rule with terms of fines etc within the BBBoC set out terms and conditions?

gobbles wrote:

DazDiCanio wrote:Did Fury have his license revoked because of mental illness or because of his UKAD charge?

Neither. He had his licence suspended when he failed a test for cocaine in a VADA test. The UKAD charge is for nandrolone. The mental illness was what he said he was suffering from when he gave up the titles.

So nothing to do with mental illness

mimmy123 wrote:

orbtastic wrote:They have Doctors and/or specialists attend every show in the UK, it stands to reason they would have access to other doctors/specialists should the need arise. The local shows to me always use the same doctor, he's from the local A&E dept, my mate knows him as he also works there.

Every commisioning body has to supply this, its as standard.

It does not stand to reason at all.

They didnt have appropriate staff for Michael Watson many years ago. You cannot take anything for granted unless these people ar eon the members list within a board.

The reason for your first statement arose directly out of the Watson case.

You don't think having NHS doctors on tap means they wouldn't have access to say, a psychologist, if they needed one on an ad-hoc basis?

orbtastic wrote:

mimmy123 wrote:

orbtastic wrote:They have Doctors and/or specialists attend every show in the UK, it stands to reason they would have access to other doctors/specialists should the need arise. The local shows to me always use the same doctor, he's from the local A&E dept, my mate knows him as he also works there.

Every commisioning body has to supply this, its as standard.

It does not stand to reason at all.

They didnt have appropriate staff for Michael Watson many years ago. You cannot take anything for granted unless these people ar eon the members list within a board.

The reason for your first statement arose directly out of the Watson case.

You don't think having NHS doctors on tap means they wouldn't have access to say, a psychologist, if they needed one on an ad-hoc basis?

Im sure they would but lets say there was a hearing regarding a boxer who is reapplying for his licence and at some point in his past history he had a bout of depression and anxiety. Do you honestly believe that at the request hearing there would be a psychologist present who is almost certainly to be a private practice at £200 per hour or more? With possibly the hearing lasting all day to get the correct judgement from the psychologist? I very much doubt it.

Ok, carry on erecting your straw men.

orbtastic wrote:Ok, carry on erecting your straw men.

People have a right to disect something if something is not right.

mimmy123 wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

mimmy123 wrote:
But if you are a 'member' of a organisation and suffer from mental illness would that organisation have appointed medical personnel to help with any decision an unqualified person could not make? For example lets say they call Fury in for his interview regarding a renewal licence application. Konwing he has a mental illness would they appoint a professional practioner to sit on that interview panel so that a correct decision could be made. Or would that panel just have several old men who have no experience in boxing as a sport and no medical background of mental illness make the final decision whether to allow a person with a mental illness a licence, or make the final decision that he applicant even had capacity to make the the decision himself to even apply for a licence.

The final decision on whether to grant a licence comes down to the board, and so long as their grounds for doing so are considered reasonable, after advice from appropriate clinical staff, then they will not be at risk of being sued, which is their main concern.

There is a major difference between clinical depression and bipolar disorder, in the way the symptoms present - for that reason, many people with Bipolar require medication to stabilise them and prevent the periods of mania, during which time they will often exhibit very unpredictable, impulsive and risk taking behaviours. I've been out with two women who suffered from the condition, and I can tell you, it was effing scary at times.

Who are these appropriate clinical staff within the board? If however there is none within the board, isnt it a responsibility that they should have such staff within the organisation? You cant tell me that when they interview possible sufferers from depression they suddenly find apprepriate clinic staff to be available to make a clinical decision at the time of an interview. Whats on paper and what comes out of a persons mouth are totally different.

You hire them in.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

mimmy123 wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

The final decision on whether to grant a licence comes down to the board, and so long as their grounds for doing so are considered reasonable, after advice from appropriate clinical staff, then they will not be at risk of being sued, which is their main concern.

There is a major difference between clinical depression and bipolar disorder, in the way the symptoms present - for that reason, many people with Bipolar require medication to stabilise them and prevent the periods of mania, during which time they will often exhibit very unpredictable, impulsive and risk taking behaviours. I've been out with two women who suffered from the condition, and I can tell you, it was effing scary at times.

Who are these appropriate clinical staff within the board? If however there is none within the board, isnt it a responsibility that they should have such staff within the organisation? You cant tell me that when they interview possible sufferers from depression they suddenly find apprepriate clinic staff to be available to make a clinical decision at the time of an interview. Whats on paper and what comes out of a persons mouth are totally different.

You hire them in.

If I was a top member of the board at BBBoC I would advise they employ sufficiant staff and give staff training on issues such as mental health, and brain injury symptoms, signs of steroid abuse (before blood and urine test to detect) and sexual orientation matters such as abuse and equality.

Its quite easy for a 'system' to move with the times but you have to want it.

DazDiCanio wrote:Did Fury have his license revoked because of mental illness or because of his UKAD charge?

It's all because of UKAD/VADA

1) failed drugs test for nandrolone in Feb 2015. Also applicable to Hughie Fury.

2) failed drugs test for cocaine by VADA in September 2016

And a possible 3) for refusing to take a drugs test which was mentioned in papers in September 2016 but not confirmed by either UKAD or VADA which the above two were.


No punishment ( for dropped charges) for any of the above has been made public by UKAD which proves they are not fit for purpose.

Team fury have also not said if he is serving a ban or been cleared.

it would make sense that he and Hughie are serving a ban but until UKAD upload the case file on their site no one can say they are 100%.

The entire situation is absolutely disgusting

I emailed MBC today regarding mental illness and what if any medical professionals they have that deal with such illnesses. Luckily I got a reply from Gianluca DiCaro this evening.

This is what I asked

'I was just wondering if MBC have a qualified medical person who is responsible for mental illness within MBC that deals with depression and Bi-polar etc'

This is the reply I received.


'Very much so Dr Mark Xuereb - plus we are undertaking a ten year research project with a uk university into concussion and brain injuries which will cover all aspects of dementia pugilistica and depression - all BIBA boxers will be part of this study, which will be led by the worlds leading sports forensic scientist with the field of head injuries in sport Professor Michael Graham, who is on our Medical Advisory Board - it's British & Irish Boxing Authority (BIBA) not mbc these days. Andrea Firth Clarke Shes the sport psychologist'