Comments Thread For: Hearn Backs Whyte, But Admits He Should Be Banned if Guilty
Collapse
-
You do not know that he appealed, only that he requested a hearing, I'm not sure that's the same thing. We do not know anything about the 'B' sample and whether it's even being tested. We are only waiting on UKAD or Whyte to let us know what happened.
He is not currently suspended. He was cleared to fight. He could fight next week if he wanted. What is he appealing against exactly if they aren't suspending him?
I'm a little fuzzy on their protocols at this stage. Hopefully they've learnt from the Fury saga and resolve this quickly because allowing a fighter to compete whilst there is an investigation going on isn't a good look and is definitely a flawed system.
- If the A sample comes back positive, then the athlete is notified of the finding (i.e., the adverse result) and told of the potential punishment and is provisionally suspended.
- The athlete then has 2 choices: either accept the finding and the punishment or dispute the finding and/or the punishment to be imposed.
- In order to dispute the adverse finding, the athlete has to request that the B sample be tested. In order to appeal the provisional suspension or the potential punishment, a hearing must be requested.
https://www.ukad.org.uk/violations/results-management
Hearn has repeatedly confirmed that a hearing was held and that the B sample is being tested. The only way the hearing happens is if the athlete is appealing the provisional suspension - and we know Whyte did this because they decided to let him fight. And the only way a B sample gets tested is when the A test is positive and the athlete appeals and requests a B sample test.Comment
-
What are you talking about I hate Eddie Hearn and I hate British boxing. I'm Irish ffs. Both Andy Ruiz and Oscar Rivas were top rated and reasonably well known fighters with elite amateur pedigree. You're simply clueless, nobody here is drinking kool aid. That's how you spell kool aid by the way dumb dumb. If you're going to use references and phrases get them right.Comment
-
Well to my eyes his footwork is ****ing awful. I find it physically difficult to watch him, he's the polar opposite of 'easy on the eye'. Just an uncoordinated clumsy donkey lumbering around the ring lol.Comment
-
What are you talking about I hate Eddie Hearn and I hate British boxing. I'm Irish ffs. Both Andy Ruiz and Oscar Rivas were top rated and reasonably well known fighters with elite amateur pedigree. You're simply clueless, nobody here is drinking kool aid. That's how you spell kool aid by the way dumb dumb. If you're going to use references and phrases get them right.
I have said it before on this forum. The easeist way to get into the top 10 is a loss to AJ. Just look at brezeale, he was no one until he lost to AJ, then suddenly he is top 10 after losing to AJ, to make AJ's record look better.
Simply situation with Dillian Whyte. Get matched with ***** Whyte, and your suddenly a top 10.Comment
-
Top rated, like top 50 maybe.
I have said it before on this forum. The easeist way to get into the top 10 is a loss to AJ. Just look at brezeale, he was no one until he lost to AJ, then suddenly he is top 10 after losing to AJ, to make AJ's record look better.
Simply situation with Dillian Whyte. Get matched with ***** Whyte, and your suddenly a top 10.Comment
-
He passed VADA before and after the fight so there are only a few options to explain that:
VADA is wrong
UKAD is wrong (contamination)
Tests are too far apart to compare and both are correct.
Until we know if the results and data from UKAD say otherwise, Dillian Whyte has been passed as drug free
by the voluntary anti doping agency.Comment
-
-
Joseph Parker, Anthony Joshua, Lucas Browne, Oscar Rivas.
Chisora is a tougher fight than Breazeale, so Wilder has Fury (powder puff punches) and Old Father Time the 40-50 y/o (depending who you ask) Ortiz.
Wilder has fought a showboating dancer and an old unhealthy man at world level.
He is the easiest, most mollycoddled, protected heavyweight ever.Comment
-
To be honest, the night before I wrote that I'd been watching a documentary where the Police were hunting a pair of serial arsonists both of whose DNA were present at the scenes of 5-6 serious (deadly) fires in a local area.
They caught one of the arsonists through DNA and fingerprint records, but he denied having an accomplice.
The second DNA samples were not stored on the criminal database, so they launched a large scale hunt for the second killer arsonist.
In the end they discovered it was the DNA of one of the workers at the cotton bud (cuetips) factory whose paper buds were accidentally ordered instead of the normal plastic ones.
I think that may have slightly influenced my thinking the following day.Comment
Comment