Fury nearly bankrupted BBBoC?

[OnlytheTruth]

So generally speaking they simply do not nor were ever meant to have the sort of funding to be a real authority?

It's ****ing pig balls bud. I can see how that can be so expensive.

Yeah, its total BS, I agree. It basically means that any fighter with the cash and the desire to fight a case against them can essentially get away with it -- as long as there is a shred of doubt about the sample.

This is the easiest to read version that I could find:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/boxing/42965999

[Ray*]

UKAD are bankrolled by the UK government. You can't win a court case against a government funded quango by simply throwing money at barristers. You need both the funds and a strong case to have any chance at all.

The reason the case dragged on for as long as it did was that UKAD asked for the hearing to be postponed and objected to members of the independent legal panel who would have ruled on the outcome. They were also facing a lawsuit brought by Tyson and Hughie for slander and loss of earnings.

In a joint statement released by UKAD and Team Fury after a settlement was reached, UKAD admitted failing to adhere to their own rules by waiting too long to bring charges after taking samples from Tyson and Hughie - 15 months - making it impossible for them to defend the charges by referring to a source of possible contamination.

UKAD wouldn't have had a leg to stand on if they didn't have another charge against Tyson Fury ... refusing to provide a sample when requested and abusing the testing team members. Tyson didn't have a leg to stand on with that one, because he had openly admitted telling UKAD officials to **** off out of his gym and never come back when they tried to test him again after the initial nandralone charge had been made.

That charge would have got Tyson banned for 4 years. UKAD agreed to withdraw it in return for Team Fury withdrawing their counter suit and accepting 2 year back dated bans for Tyson and Hughie on the nandralone charges.

Not long after the settlement was reached, the Chairman of UKAD and his 3 top aides left the organisation.

According to Peter Fury, the uncastrasted wild boar meat was only one of several possible explanations for the nandrolone traces in Tyson and Hughie's urine samples. (No nandrolone was detected in their blood samples, which was apparently the reason why no charges were brought against them when the samples were first taken)

Yeah I don’t believe all of that am afraid. UKAD have an allocated budget. And Wild boar? Ok mate... not going down that route again.

['b']

Fury is a silver spoon boy

Doesn't matter when he could smack you and all the males in your bloodline up the head.

[Ray*]

Yeah, its total BS, I agree. It basically means that any fighter with the cash and the desire to fight a case against them can essentially get away with it -- as long as there is a shred of doubt about the sample.

This is the easiest to read version that I could find:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/boxing/42965999

Thank goodness for digging this out. Some would rather sleep and sweep things under the carpet. Fact is if you are Anthony Joshua for example and you test dirty and was charge, you can get an expensive solicitor and the longer you fight the better for you.

As UKAD would have to give up in the end, as nothing is 100% - they can ended up getting sued.

[Dr Rumack]

Orgs like UKAD are designed to be toothless.

None of the money interests in sport want big names brought down. But UKAD are designed to be even weaker than most anti-doping bodies. They're especially constrained when it comes to releasing information about on-going cases.

If you have deep pockets and good lawyers they are not that much of a threat. Unless you **** up the cover up too.

[Ray*]

I’m not sure the Whyte situation is similar at all. Fans on here may have made Whyte guilty (in hope, I’m not sure?) but his excuses etc weren’t the same. It certainly wasn’t a financial issue that made that conclusion

It’s definitely similar, Whyte is a high profile name. Got a high paid solicitor, UKAD backtrack and same thing, came to an agreement, issue a joint statement.

[Dr Rumack]

One of the most interesting things I read about UKAD is how 'mental competence' to cheat is necessary for them to even proceed with a case.

Luckily for Fury his doping case coincided with his much publicised 'struggle with depression'. Turns out he had a long history of mental illness which just never got mentioned until he got popped for nandro.

[Ray*]

Orgs like UKAD are designed to be toothless.

None of the money interests in sport want big names brought down. But UKAD are designed to be even weaker than most anti-doping bodies. They're especially constrained when it comes to releasing information about on-going cases.

If you have deep pockets and good lawyers they are not that much of a threat. Unless you **** up the cover up too.

They are definitely powerless against the bigger name. They should either just be a testing agency, and then report back to another organisation, then that organisation can handle the consequences of their report and dish out the punishments.

USADA were in the same boat. They don’t have enough power or money, they get donations from some of the same athletes that they are meant to be testing.

[QueensburyRules]

In vague I've heard about this loads. Nandrolin(spelling?) and so forth bull****. My question is how, the ****, does one investigation bankrupt a body?

What is it they can afford to do? What kind of cheating can they afford to catch and punish? How the hell does boar balls equate to such a massive expense it'd fold the whole org to try and sus out the truth?

Was it we can't figure out how to **** you cheaply or some such similar nonsense?

- -BBbc a giggle of jar jellies discovering they're long past their sell date and nobody wants them.

[Richard Hamilton]

Doesn't matter when he could smack you and all the males in your bloodline up the head.

No chance. He is too soft.