Comments Thread For: Tyson Fury Free To Box After UKAD Ruling

[Robbie Barrett]

“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”
1 John 1:9 ESV https://t.co/fKvWP8P2Gc

— TYSON2FASTFURY (@Tyson_Fury) 12 December 2017

Fury fans that defended him should be feeling really stupid right now. kafkod

[skinnystev]

now the three chumps parkit birdlegs and biblical are literally crapping in their tidy whites they will have to fight a real world champion who earned it in the ring instead of these bum's they have been lining up. Tyson Fury "The Gypsy King" no man born of woman can beat him

[P4Pdunny]

Hopefully he sheds weight cos he can make things very interesting to say the least

[Dr.Cool]

So Fury was all roided up and beat Wlad. How was that allowed to happen and why is it not changed to a DQ win for Wlad??? A lot of people talk up Fury, but he has never once fought a decent opponent except Wlad, and he had to cheat for that.

Imagine if Wilder and AJ fought tomorrow and then it came out Wilder failed a test for steroids before the fight. Everyone knows Wilder would be stripped of his title. Heck, Povetkin and Ortiz both were not allowed to fight Wilder for the title for testing positive. Yet, Fury gets special treatment.

And how is it a suspension if it was a vacation?!? He was doing cocaine and getting fat, he wasn't even able to box.

[Boksfan]

Fury family is full of shyt.

[umop-ap!sdn]

Fury either had some great legal advice/representation or he had to "shed a few Pounds". Glad he gunna be back in the mix as the 4th Giant. Wilder AJ Fury Ortiz are gun a make for excellent matchups. Ill pass on Parker for now. Not convinced about that guy at all yet.

[robbyheartbaby]

Fury is a weirdo but hey he is pretty entertaining, I would love to see him box the likes of Joshua or Wilder in Las Vegas. I think he dancing rings around the two of them. Lose some weight you fat f*** and get on with it.

[kafkod]

1. Why is Fury making a deal if he's innocent.
2. How can they backdate the ban when both weren't banned. Tyson had his license taken because of his mental health and Hughie has been fighting.

Exactly, if he hasn't done anything wrong why take the deal??

Good question

Here's another good question - if UKAD had been able to prove that Tyson Hughie were using Nandrolone .. why would they offer them a deal?

I know the answer to that question - I think - because I just read it at the UKAD website.

But it's damned hard reading, which is why I'm still only half way through it after more than 2 hours of mental toture. I can't take any more of that shit tonight.

https://www.ukad.org.uk/assets/uploa...ughie_Fury.pdf

Here's part of it:

"UKAD accepts that Hughie Fury and Tyson Fury were not put on notice before they were charged with the Article 2.1 violations in June 2016 that they may have to account for the presence of the elevated levels of nandrolone metabolites in their February 2015 samples, and that as a result there is an argument that the normal rules on burden and standard of proving source should be varied, and Hughie Fury and Tyson Fury should be found to have proved source to the required standard, or else UKAD should be found not to have proved intentional ingestion to the required standard, and as a result the presumption arising under UK ADR Article 10.2 that Hughie Fury and Tyson Fury acted intentionally should be deemed rebutted."

"On the other hand, Hughie Fury and Tyson Fury accept that the normal rules on burden and standard of proof may be held applicable, in which case they may be found not to have proved source to the requisite standard, and as a result they may not be able to get the presumptive four year period of ineligibility reduced."

I think what that means is that UKAD can't prove that the Furys knowingly took nandrolone, and the Furys can't prove they ingested it from contaminated meat, because UKAD left it too long before charging them.

Here is something which isn't difficult to understand:

"The Refusal Proceedings are concluded on the basis that UKAD withdraws the allegation that Tyson Fury committed an anti-doping rule violation within the meaning of UK ADR Article 2.3 on 7 September 2016."

Refusal to provide a sample for testing carries a 4 year ban. Fury refused to provide a sample .. he isn't even trying to deny that. So why are UKAD letting him off the hook by withdrawing the allegation?

The answer is clear to me. They let him off the hook in return for Tyson and Hughie accepting technical liabilty for the test results instead of instructing their lawyers to sue UKAD.

[kafkod]

So Fury was all roided up and beat Wlad. How was that allowed to happen and why is it not changed to a DQ win for Wlad??? A lot of people talk up Fury, but he has never once fought a decent opponent except Wlad, and he had to cheat for that.

According to UKAD, they haven't disqualified Fury's win over Wlad is because they tested him 7 more times, on 11 May 2015, 16 July 2015, 8 October 2015, 17 October 2015, 11 November 2015, 13 July 2016, and 4 May 2017 and he came up clean every time.

Fury was also being tested by VADA while training for Wlad, and the only thing he was positive for was cocaine.

[Pigeons]

UKAD is at fault for not charging him. Hammer no contest but Wlad stays. UKAD say they will not answer any question related to this case, ever.

This is where we need some investigative journalism.

I have never seen a case in boxing where a positive test wasn't announced within 2-3 weeks. But in this case they didn't announce it for 16 months. That's 1 year and 4 months later. That's how long it took them to announce a positive drug test for an anabolic steroid. There has to be a reason. That reason likely lies in a cover-up. But no one will care to investigate and we'll never get to know the truth.