Comments Thread For: Frank Warren Reacts To Saunders Denied License, MSAC Lawsuit

[champion4ever]

Lol, again read the article, they did not quote the WBO they are saying the WBO has said, which again is based on what Hearn told them. I just dont understand why you dont get this. It's beyond me why your not getting this fact. Both Articles are not quoting the WBO, show me a quote directly from the WBO that does not include the Hearn interview.

You are in deep denial my friend. Why does it always have to be about what Eddie Hearn has told them? Why couldn't it have come from the interviewer himself?

Now you are the one doing the conjecturing. True, they did interview Hearn but their is no concrete evidence or proof that Hearn told them that the WBO would strip Saunders of its title if he wasn't licensed by the state of Massachusetts.

You are relying solely on intellect rather than any empirical evidence. However, all the empirical evidence show that Saunders is no longer champion and the title that he once held is now vacant. In addition, he is about to be suspended for six months. These are facts that can be actually proven with no conjecture involved.

[KnickTillDeaTh]

You are in deep denial my friend. Why does it always have to be about what Eddie Hearn has told them? Why couldn't it have come from the interviewer himself?

Now you are the one doing the conjecturing. True, they did interview Hearn but their is no concrete evidence or proof that Hearn told them that the WBO would strip Saunders of its title if he wasn't licensed by the state of Massachusetts.

You are relying solely on intellect rather than any empirical evidence. However, all the empirical evidence reveal that Saunders is no longer champion and the title that he once held is now a vacant. In addition, he is about to be suspended for six months. These are facts that can be actually proven with no conjecture.

You obviously don't know how a quote works. If there is no quotation, it is not a quote. And yes the original comment that the WBO said came from Hearn. The two reports you put up were using Hearns assertion in their report. If you dont see quotations then it is not a quote. I reported boxing for 3 different publications and either you don't know what you're reading, or you dont understand how a 3rd party report works. You cannot provide me a direct quote from the WBO because it doesn't exist. The first time the assertion that the WBO would strip Saunders is reported, it's reported through Hearns quote. It has never been said or reported directly from the WBO. I'm pretty done with you on this. You had an agenda from your first group of lies and it really doesn't matter where we go from here. So have a good evening.

[champion4ever]

You obviously don't know how a quote works. If there is no quotation, it is not a quote. And yes the original comment that the WBO said came from Hearn. The two reports you put up were using Hearns assertion in their report. If you dont see quotations then it is not a quote. I reported boxing for 3 different publications and either you don't know what you're reading, or you dont understand how a 3rd party report works. You cannot provide me a direct quote from the WBO because it doesn't exist. The first time the assertion that the WBO would strip Saunders is reported, it's reported through Hearns quote. It has never been said or reported directly from the WBO. I'm pretty done with you on this. You had an agenda from your first group of lies and it really doesn't matter where we go from here. So have a good evening.

Do you really need a report? Look at all the evidence. After all, Eddie Hearn was right wasn't he? Billy Joe Saunders was indeed stripped of his WBO title and now it's vacant.

Not only BJS is title less, and yet he also is in the process of losing his largest purse ever, he's without an opponent for October 20 and in addition, is about to be suspended by the WBO for six months. What more evidence do you need?

Where we disagree is that you buy into Frank Warren's propaganda machine where as I don't. I believe that the WBO is doing all of this for Frank Warren because he bought them off.

He paid them in order to spare him an embarrassment. It was inevitable and a foregone conclusion that Saunders was getting suspended and stripped of his WBO title anyway.

Therefore in order to help lessen the blow they tried to make this seem like it was all Billy Joe Saunders idea which it wasn't.

[Sickmerch1990]

Maybe they were just sick of Warren stable winning the wbo title then avoiding all top ten boxer's and draining the life out the belt

[kafkod]

Do you really need a report? Look at all the evidence. After all, Eddie Hearn was right wasn't he? Billy Joe Saunders was indeed stripped of his WBO title and now it's vacant.

Not only BJS is title less, and yet he also is in the process of losing his largest purse ever, he's without an opponent for October 20 and in addition, is about to be suspended by the WBO for six months. What more evidence do you need?

Where we disagree is that you buy into Frank Warren's propaganda machine where as I don't. I believe that the WBO is doing all of this for Frank Warren because he bought them off.

He paid them in order to spare him an embarrassment. It was inevitable and a foregone conclusion that Saunders was getting suspended and stripped of his WBO title anyway.

Therefore in order to help lessen the blow they tried to make this seem like it was all Billy Joe Saunders idea which it wasn't.

BJS has not been stripped of his title. He vacated it. Alphabet org suspensions are meaningless. The WBO can't suspend BJS's licence or ban him from fighting.

If they ban him for 6 months that just means he can't fight for their title for 6 months. Like I said, it's meaningless.

[.!WAR MIKEY!.]

Remember when saunders and Warren said that if you fail any drug test then you are a drug cheater forever no excuses and that you should be banned for life? I sure do LMAO

shit turned on them faster than a motherfucker lol

[kafkod]

Lol...listen to this guy admit his fighter was busted but insisting that the technicality should let him get away with it.

Such a bad look. Better to back off gracefully rather than push the issue.

It's more than a technicality. Boxing Commissions adhere to WADA rules, and BJS hasn't broken any WADA rules.

If UKAD, USADA, or any other accredited testing agency - except VADA - had detected oxilofrine in a boxer's urine sample outside competition, it wouldn't even have been reported.

And as the VADA report stated that the oxilofrene they detected "could have resulted from" a legal dose of ephedrine, I'm failing to see just what BJS has done to deserve losing his title.

If he used something which he knew to contain oxilofrene, then that's another matter, but they didn't even give him an opportunity to answer that question.

[PunchyPotorff]

warren salty as **** theyve got no chance of overturning it, team saunders signed up for vada and their rules and they failed. theres no point having vada if the authorities just disregard their tests.

Just maybe you didn't read the article?

"The WADA list distinguishes between substances prohibited “at all times” and substances prohibited “in competition”. The chemical detected in the test supplied by Billy-Joe – ingested via a nasal spray – is on the list of substances prohibited “in competition”. Therefore, it is not a prohibited substance for the purpose of the WADA list and therefore the application of the MSAC rules at the time the offending test was carried out."

If what Warren says is correct, your theory just flew out the window, spun back, did a fly-by, shiiiiii on your face, squawked and laughed loudly at you, spun around for another fly-by... this time shiiiiii in your mouth as you stood there in disbelief, mouth wide open... laughed and squawked hysterically as he flew off into the sunset.

I'm no fan of Saunders recent distasteful antics outside the ring, and he does tend to run his mouth too much... but this here is a scam and needs to be unraveled soon as possible. And in the meantime, let the man fight and defend his belt. And FNO, he should just stay in England for his fights.

[cally93]

I was joking. But these two have a history of avoiding tough competition.

Apologies bro, but you’re absolutely right about that too, especially BJS.

[KnickTillDeaTh]

It's more than a technicality. Boxing Commissions adhere to WADA rules, and BJS hasn't broken any WADA rules.

If UKAD, USADA, or any other accredited testing agency - except VADA - had detected oxilofrine in a boxer's urine sample outside competition, it wouldn't even have been reported.

And as the VADA report stated that the oxilofrene they detected "could have resulted from" a legal dose of ephedrine, I'm failing to see just what BJS has done to deserve losing his title.

If he used something which he knew to contain oxilofrene, then that's another matter, but they didn't even give him an opportunity to answer that question.

I am actually with you on that point. I think Warren and BJS have a leg to stand on and a legit argument. The only thing which hasn't been explained, and I've been insanely searching for the last couple of days with no success, is what are the MSAC rules once a contract has been signed that explicitly defers testing to a different company other then WADA. If the MSAC have by laws that say the boxers will be held to the standard of the contract, then Warren and BJS will lose. However, if there is nothing to that effect, then I put them winning an appeal as very likely. As I said before though, I don't understand why they want to go all the way to the state Supreme Court as a first move. The Association of Boxing Commissions would likely have overruled MSAC allowing BJS to be licensed in another state. I find the Supreme Court move to be weird. I also find the speed with which the WBO attempted to end this matter questionable. It was a smart move of BJS to relinquish the title, because it did look like the WBO wanted to strip him regardless of what would be found in their investigation.