Comments Thread For: Dillian Whyte: Wilder Is Injured; WBC Should Order Fury To Fight Me Next

[Oshio]

It is really not fair how Whyte has been treated by the WBC. I don't know how WBC can rationalize not giving their number 1 for 3 years a shot at world title... Looks like only IBF sticks to its rules

[Squ□redCircle34]

If that UFC fighter knocks him out, it’s all over!

[_Rexy_]

It is really not fair how Whyte has been treated by the WBC. I don't know how WBC can rationalize not giving their number 1 for 3 years a shot at world title... Looks like only IBF sticks to its rules

IBF has eliminators. Being ranked #1 doesn't make you #1 contender. Whyte turned down multiple eliminators with both the WBC and WBO.

Pulev was ranked #1 by the IBF for ages. He still had to fight Hughie in a final eliminator though to get the number 1 contender spot.


Whyte just likes to hear himself speak.

[ShoulderRoll]

Wow, Corbett was banned. I better not disagree with Shoulder Roll or his views.

Come on, dude. That's not what happened here at all.

And "my views" in this case are just facts. The following is a Thomas Hauser article about it:

Dillian Whyte Tested Positive For Two Dianabol Metabolites

https://www.boxingscene.com/dillian-whyte-tested-positive-two-dianabol-metabolites--141198

I am aware that UKAD came back later and exonerated Whyte. But they never explained how the Dianabol showed up in the first place.

Where am I wrong?

[Counterleft]

You can disagree with him or anyone else every day of the week, but to make baseless claims over and over that he works for the site, that we stand behind everything a poster says because we allow him (and everyone else) the freedom of speech, is not going to fly and he does this often.

None of his posts, debating topics or Whyte specifically, were removed. What was removed, was when he felt the need to change the narrative and direct the subject matter on our staff and our site, which he's done more than once, alleging that we must be backing whatever poster he disagrees with, because we don't ban them when "HE" says so.

Corbett has made these claims about other posters, claiming they must work for us, and curiously the majority of his posts and claims are always about Dillian Whyte. He has no issue with any other fighters like Fury, Joshua and Wilder getting slagged off in here daily.

He debates with people over Whyte, but behind the scenes is trying to get these same people banned during the debates.

I don't follow the site closely enough to know the background. It just seemed weird to me judging by some of the persistent trolls on here and I thought he was balancing it up a bit.

[daggum]

IBF has eliminators. Being ranked #1 doesn't make you #1 contender. Whyte turned down multiple eliminators with both the WBC and WBO.

Pulev was ranked #1 by the IBF for ages. He still had to fight Hughie in a final eliminator though to get the number 1 contender spot.


Whyte just likes to hear himself speak.

he tried to fight breazele who ws ranked below him and they simply chose to fight eric molina instead nd somehow that got made into the fight for the mandatory postion. its just corruption nothing else. both haymon guys so wilder could get another haymon opponent. i dont know why they even ranked whyte in the first place. wilder will never fight him. when wilder was making 1 million a fiht he turned down 5 to fight whyte so its just not happening no matter what

[ShoulderRoll]

he tried to fight breazele who ws ranked below him and they simply chose to fight eric molina instead nd somehow that got made into the fight for the mandatory postion. its just corruption nothing else. both haymon guys so wilder could get another haymon opponent. i dont know why they even ranked whyte in the first place. wilder will never fight him. when wilder was making 1 million a fiht he turned down 5 to fight whyte so its just not happening no matter what

Tyson Fury isn't an Al Haymon guy and he's not planning to defend against Whyte any time soon.

[daggum]

Come on, dude. That's not what happened here at all.

And "my views" in this case are just facts. The following is a Thomas Hauser article about it:

Dillian Whyte Tested Positive For Two Dianabol Metabolites

https://www.boxingscene.com/dillian-whyte-tested-positive-two-dianabol-metabolites--141198

I am aware that UKAD came back later and exonerated Whyte. But they never explained how the Dianabol showed up in the first place.

Where am I wrong?

why do you care about this and not floyd's tue? thomas hauser the same person you just cited revealed how it was a joke and covered up but now you are using him as a source hmmm ok

[daggum]

Tyson Fury isn't an Al Haymon guy and he's not planning to defend against Whyte any time soon.

thats true but fury was a name that wilder wanted. remember wilders own words "you were fat as a house on coke when i picked you" they obviously saw that as an easy win over a big name guy. whyte is not a big name guy and hes not on coke(he is fat as a house though so maybe the fight does happen)

[Counterleft]

Come on, dude. That's not what happened here at all.

And "my views" in this case are just facts. The following is a Thomas Hauser article about it:

Dillian Whyte Tested Positive For Two Dianabol Metabolites

https://www.boxingscene.com/dillian-whyte-tested-positive-two-dianabol-metabolites--141198

I am aware that UKAD came back later and exonerated Whyte. But they never explained how the Dianabol showed up in the first place.

Where am I wrong?

I am not getting into long debates about this stuff. You are relying on an article by Hauser that was no doubt written with infinitely less facts than were considered by UKAD after months of investigation yet you discount the findings and only believe the rumour. That is just weird especially as you concede that he was exonerated.

I suppose the old quote often misattributed to Mark Twain is true “a lie can travel around the world and back again while the truth is lacing up its boots.”

UKAD didn't charge Whyte because he was innocent of any wrongdoing and basically apologised to him. They would never have done this if there was even a tiny prospect of success.