Comments Thread For: Conor Benn: 'I?m tired of being angry'

[Smash]

which is not the same as

"Comfortably Unsatisfied"

This phrase implies a state of being completely and firmly unsatisfied, but you are at ease with that feeling.

[IronDanHamza]

Google AI agrees with you

"Not Comfortably Satisfied"

'This phrase implies that while you may be satisfied to some degree, you are not fully or completely so. There is a lingering unease or a desire for more'

It means what it says.

The NAPD ruled IN BENN’S FAVOUR by concluding they were not "comfortably satisfied" that UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) had proved he committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation.

It means, after presenting their cases, they’re not satisfied that an anti doping rule was violated by team Benn and was cleared to fight.

[Smash]

conor, u got busted twice for illegals, with the added info


'The principle of Strict Liability is a fundamental concept of the World Anti-Doping Code, which is implemented in the UK by UK Anti-Doping (UKAD). It means that athletes are solely responsible for any prohibited substance found in their bodily samples, regardless of how it got there or whether there was an intention to cheat'

the 'intention to cheat' has now become more relevant as strict liability it seems is not actually so strict after all, ask any athlete did u intend to cheat and they say No and it seems pretty much all orgs or bodies or whoever now believe them or are unable or unwilling to challenge them (financial reasons high here as actually admitted on a few occasions)

[IronDanHamza]

conor, u got busted twice for illegals, with the added info


'The principle of Strict Liability is a fundamental concept of the World Anti-Doping Code, which is implemented in the UK by UK Anti-Doping (UKAD). It means that athletes are solely responsible for any prohibited substance found in their bodily samples, regardless of how it got there or whether there was an intention to cheat'

the 'intention to cheat' has now become more relevant as strict liability it seems is not actually so strict after all, ask any athlete did u intend to cheat and they say No and it seems pretty much all orgs or bodies or whoever now believe them or are unable or unwilling to challenge them (financial reasons high here as actually admitted on a few occasions)

That’s what the hearings are for, to present your case and be judged accordingly.

The NAPD ruled in Benn’s favour as they were not satisfied he violated any doping violations.

How they got to that concision we don’t know, due to their confidentially rules. But they did (get to the conclusion).

[NihonJim]

Nepo baby
PED cheat
bullies 62 year old Duke McKenzie

So much to admire

Duke talks a lot of ****.

[Coverdale]

Duke talks a lot of ****.

Not as much as you.

[IronDanHamza]

Duke talks a lot of ****.

I actually agree here, he does.

Conor Benn is a total clown as far as I'm concerned. He's a privileged rich boy who likes to pretend he's an eastend gangster, he's fought nobody of note and has this self inflated opinion of his ability and accomplishments when in reality he has beaten zero ranked fighters in his weight class. I guess he's fought one in total as he's beaten Eubank who was Top 10 at 160.

That said, I totally understand his frustration on this topic. It's one thing when you've got people on the internet saying falsehood's in threads on the internet claiming that Benn didn't win his cases or some people even still saying that no case even occurred, there's a poster on here who really still does aggressively claim that, which to be honest I do also find baffling because it's not all that difficult to follow; Two hearings/cases - Benn won first one, lost the appeal, won the re-trial and was cleared to fight. The end. It's very simple.

But when the media also do it? It must be very aggravating. You've got people like Simon Jordan on TalkSport flat out making up that the case was won due to "jurisdiction" which is #1 totally unknown to be true and #2 turned out to be exactly that, made up. Which he later admitted he didn't know and was just "assuming" (I.e making it up).

Then you've got Duke McKenzie constantly saying on air and interviews etc that "he's not been cleared". HOW has he not been cleared? He has literally, by definition, been cleared. He had not one, but two hearings/cases, won, and was cleared and thus granted his license.

So 62 years old or not, I don't blame Conor Benn for confronting him on that scenario because it must be incredibly annoying.

[IronDanHamza]

i think he went down the usual contaminated something route if i remember right, i think he got busted twice so he must have been extremely extremely unlucky, in july and september 2022

i dont think he produced any evidence of anything contaminated tho unlike for example ryan garcia who sent in 2 open containers of some fuels, that didnt work for him tho

he had some dosier made up which im sure should be read for his full case

If contamination was the legitimate reason then there's no reason why it wouldn't show positive on two separate tests at two different times.

But that also applies if he were to be masking deliberate use of a banned substance.

[famicommander]

That’s what the hearings are for, to present your case and be judged accordingly.

The NAPD ruled in Benn’s favour as they were not satisfied he violated any doping violations.

How they got to that concision we don’t know, due to their confidentially rules. But they did (get to the conclusion).

It's the same thing Whyte did. Just lawyer up and bleed the opposition of funding for long enough that they give up and you can declare victory.

[IronDanHamza]

It's the same thing Whyte did. Just lawyer up and bleed the opposition of funding for long enough that they give up and you can declare victory.

It don't think it's a funding issue. The NAPD are the independent body who do the hearings/cases.

Dillian Whyte had a hearing/case via the NAPD in 2014 and lost and was banned, the second time, the NAPD weren't involved as UKAD resolved it internally and the 3rd one the NAPD had a hearing/case and Whyte won.= and was cleared to fight.

I don't think it's case of bleeding it out because if anything it's UKAD/BBBoC who tend to draw these things out for so long. IMO it's more of a tactic for the fighter to just cooperate instead.

Either way, Conor Benn (and Dillian Whyte in his 3rd situation) had hearings via the NAPD and won them and were cleared to fight. This doesn't mean they were actually clean, though.