Comments Thread For: UKAD And BBBC Reportedly Win Appeal To Lift Benn's Suspension

[Marchegiano]

I don’t know man Maybe it’s just my brain struggling to cope with people talking nonsense. I can’t cope with people talking about something they’re misinformed on. I do struggle with things that don’t make sense in general.

So if someone says “look at this red painting” when I can clearly see it’s blue I have to get to the bottom of why you’re saying non sensical crap.

Kind of applies here with this Conor Benn stuff surrounding the hearing he had. People keep saying he didn’t have a hearing, when….He did, objectively, I can’t no correct it

I don’t much care. It’s been overturned now. And now Benn is f ucked

**** that's fair enough my dude. I do it too.

[thack]

He already did that. Can you not read?

What decision do you think they appealed? The one they lost in a hearing.

You are wrong again, he actually went to the WBC who are a sanctioning body and nothing else. The board have requested his 'evidence' that he compiled but he gave to the WBC , they came back with an excuse that Benn himself did't like ......is English your second Tongue ? , I can't help you any further!

[Beercules]

Woah BBC? Cancel it and everything involved.

[Smash]

poor eggie, he tried to make himself out as some sort of victim when in fact he brought this completely on himself, accept responsibility or else claim contamination like everyone else does, take a ban if it comes your way or threaten legal action privately to spook them, which works & then volunteer to do vada365 for a bit (like canelo i think did for a while maybe) and move on

[Clegg]

Something went wrong with the edit so I'll just post again:


I didn't mean to imply those disagreeing with Iron are wrong or dumb****s, I was speaking from a position of sharing his perspective and not understanding why he feels like he need to defend it.

I am an Irish-Puerto Rican American. I really don't know much of **** about regional british drugs officiating of any kind. Last I knew UKAD was too under funded to matter so I just stopped paying attention to them. So I'm just watching and learning from y'all. I didn't mean to make a comment on which side I agree with, if you took something I said as agreeing or disagreeing with you about Benn and PEDS and ****, my bad, I didn't mean it that way.


No dog in this race homies, just curious why Iron Dan's going all Iron on your asses.

You probably know as much about the British process as the rest of us tbh. Even coming from the UK a lot of the details are difficult to be sure of because a lot of things are kept confidential even when it seems they should be out in the open.

The process seems to work the same in a lot of walks of life though: those with money and influence get less punishment than the rest. Dillian Whyte is the classic example. Tested positive early in his career. Claimed contamination, and imo had a legitimate case because the company involved were found to be putting banned substances in their supplements and then lying about the ingredients. But because Whyte was a low-level nobody, he was given a 2 year ban. Fast forward a decade and Whyte is now a bigger name with a big promoter. He tests positive, claims contamination and gets away with it in a secret hearing. Same fighter, same offence, same excuse. But completely different process and punishment based on how much money/influence he had behind him.

[Boro]

Why would I do that? #1 I dislike Benn so I’m not “caping” for him in any capacity. I’m merely following the process of what’s actually happened.

UKAD/BBBoC won the appeal. That’s all there is to it. It’s now ban time more than likely.

You literally were on every post relating to him defending him, saying he shouldn't be judged, "he's already been proven innocent under the NADP" and the BBBofC appeal was all but irrelevant and as I said to you previously this was part of said "process", you tried to seperate them out due to biases...

When literally everything points to him being a cheater, If that doesn't constitute caping i don't know what does...

[IronDanHamza]

You literally were on every post relating to him defending him, saying he shouldn't be judged, "he's already been proven innocent under the NADP" and the BBBofC appeal was all but irrelevant and as I said to you previously this was part of said "process", you tried to seperate them out due to biases...

When literally everything points to him being a cheater, If that doesn't constitute caping i don't know what does...

Haven’t defended him a single time. All I’ve done is speak on what’s happened and when someone says something incorrect on it then correct it.

He was proven innocent, but that’s now been overturned so no longer stands. That’s his problem.

I never once said the appeal was irrelevant. I may have said it was irrelevant to the fact he won the hearing in regards to that specific hearing and his suspension being currently (at the time) lifted but the appeal is very relevant because they won it.

I have never said Benn isn’t a cheater.

Well, in that case if you don’t know what constitutes to caping then you might want to consider more revision.

[IronDanHamza]

You are wrong again, he actually went to the WBC who are a sanctioning body and nothing else. The board have requested his 'evidence' that he compiled but he gave to the WBC , they came back with an excuse that Benn himself did't like ......is English your second Tongue ? , I can't help you any further!

Good grief Do you not read the posts you’re quoted on on here? I genuinely wonder if you don’t.

I have literally explained and broke this down to you numerous times now.

He had a hearing with UKAD/BBBoC via the NAPD. A totally seperate hearing to the one he had with the WBC. Two totally different hearings.

In said NAPD hearing, Conor Benn presented his evidence and won and UKAD/BBBoC lost to which his suspension was lifted. To which they appealed, and they have now won the appeal hearing and had that decision overturned.

You see where it says “UKAD/BBBoC wins appeal”, what appeal do you think they won? What do you think they were appealing?

What part of any of this are you not following or understanding?

[IronDanHamza]

You probably know as much about the British process as the rest of us tbh. Even coming from the UK a lot of the details are difficult to be sure of because a lot of things are kept confidential even when it seems they should be out in the open.

The process seems to work the same in a lot of walks of life though: those with money and influence get less punishment than the rest. Dillian Whyte is the classic example. Tested positive early in his career. Claimed contamination, and imo had a legitimate case because the company involved were found to be putting banned substances in their supplements and then lying about the ingredients. But because Whyte was a low-level nobody, he was given a 2 year ban. Fast forward a decade and Whyte is now a bigger name with a big promoter. He tests positive, claims contamination and gets away with it in a secret hearing. Same fighter, same offence, same excuse. But completely different process and punishment based on how much money/influence he had behind him.

Dillian Whyte hasn’t been licensed in the UK for like 5 years now so his issue has a lot of grey areas.

His hearing was in Texas. I don’t know if that’s who he’s licensed by or whatever.

[SugarDeanC*ntly]

Haven’t defended him a single time. All I’ve done is speak on what’s happened and when someone says something incorrect on it then correct it.

He was proven innocent, but that’s now been overturned so no longer stands. That’s his problem.

I never once said the appeal was irrelevant. I may have said it was irrelevant to the fact he won the hearing in regards to that specific hearing and his suspension being currently (at the time) lifted but the appeal is very relevant because they won it.

I have never said Benn isn’t a cheater.

Well, in that case if you don’t know what constitutes to caping then you might want to consider more revision.

Was he proven innocent? I thought (happy to be corrected) that the case was about whether the tests from an agency other than ukad were okay for the bbbc to use, rather than a clearing of his name