Conor Benn wins another hearing vs UKAD and his suspension is lifted…Again. UKAD have 21 days to appeal…Again. Will this ever end?

[IronDanHamza]

Well, they've said it's not a jurisdiction issue this time (the previous appeal was). This one was about the tests themselves.

Either he proved he didn't knowingly take the drugs or... something Sam Jones said sticks in my mind. He said Conor never failed any tests (???)...

...my thoughts are that they looked at the procedures that took place by VADA and found the tests were not taken to the standards they should have been. They've suggested this before, and Sam Jones' comments would line up to this.

I'm just speculating however. Maybe hes clean (lol). And in fairness, if the standards were poor, that does leave question marks.

At no point was it said it was a jurisdiction issue the first time and that they haven’t confirmed or denied it’s not that now either, or anything for that matter and they likely won’t because hearings in this country are confidential.

There also wasn’t a “previous appeal” that was the original hearing vs UKAD (that Benn won)

[IronDanHamza]

well i do remember something about 'jurisdiction'

i remember benn cackling online about it, he passed all ukad tests & they cant ban him based on the vada tests or something like that, i forget and too lazy to look it up

yeah basically a loophole and a big big one if that is the case

That is totally incorrect.

[IronDanHamza]

All this fuss over a guy whose best win was the ancient ghost of Chris Algieri.

Pull your tampon out sweetheart.

No one cares about your emotional outbursts.

[M312]

At no point was it said it was a jurisdiction issue the first time and that they haven’t confirmed or denied it’s not that now either, or anything for that matter and they likely won’t because hearings in this country are confidential.

There also wasn’t a “previous appeal” that was the original hearing vs UKAD (that Benn won)

You mean they never officially said that because they weren't able to.
But it pretty well known that the first one was due to jurisdiction.

Good on you though if you don't want to believe it. More power to you lol.

[IronDanHamza]

You mean they never officially said that because they weren't able to.
But it pretty well known that the first one was due to jurisdiction.

Good on you though if you don't want to believe it. More power to you lol.

No, it’s not. It’s not “pretty well known.” It is Infact the opposite of that. You’ve just flat out lied and said they have confirmed it’s not jurisdiction this time which is totally false, they haven’t confirmed that. At no point has any party even mentioned jurisdiction, on both hearings.

It’s nothing more than speculation, was never confirmed, likely never will be because again NADP hearings in this country are confidential.

You have no source to support that claim because it doesn’t exist.

Which will likely be the exact same scenario for this second hearing.