This is how Dillian Whyte was "cleared" in record time by UKAD

[1hourRun]

Originally Posted by Ray*

I think that is actually quite good, it meant you cannot bribe everybody. You cannot bribe UKAD (USADA in america) then go on and look for the independent arbitrators to bribe.

This was why it was easier for Armstrong to be able to bribe USADA with fundings before the new head nailed him.

Yeah but, it also provides you with more people to bribe -- works both ways.

Originally Posted by kafkod

In the UK - that's England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland - there are only 2 organisations involved in clearing or cancelling fights. They are BBBoC/UKAD, who are affiliated and act as one entity, and the NAPD, who adjudicate and make a ruling if a boxer appeals against a UKAD charge.

How many panels can clear or cancel fights in the US?

Well, how many State Athletic Commissions do you have in your country?

So you can go through the NAPD, to overrule UKAD/BBBofC, OK. Sounds good for cheats, you get two chances to clear your name, Hearn is likely to have someone on the payroll in one them.

Here in America we got several Athletic Commissions, however in the case of doping, I don't think you can cross state-lines and appeal your case to another Athletic commission ; they usually honor the official ruling from the other states.

I tried to remember a incident when a commission went against the ruling of another, and the only one that I could remember was when Mike Tyson had lost his licence for biting Lennox Lewis ; Shelly Finkell got Tyson a boxing licence in Tennessee, despite Nevada suspending Tyson.

[Ray*]

Originally Posted by 1hourRun

Yeah but, it also provides you with more people to bribe -- works both ways.

Not really, thats mightily difficult. You have to make sure everyone is on board, you have to pay more money etc.. It works only one way

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

Most people would rather bribe one person and get it over with than having more people to bribe

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

[1hourRun]

Originally Posted by Ray*

Not really, thats mightily difficult. You have to make sure everyone is on board, you have to pay more money etc.. It works only one way

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

Most people would rather bribe one person and get it over with than having more people to bribe

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

When your back is up against a perma-ban, TRUST ME you will pay. If it was up to UKAD, Dillian's career would of probably been over considering his age and the lengthy ban that he was facing for his second offense.

I know Shyte is thankful that the NAPD was his last hope -- I wonder if Tyson Fury had this option, I remember he was going to bankrupt UKAD ; now that I know about the NAPD I'm surprised I never heard of it during the Fury steroids scandal.

[kafkod]

Originally Posted by 1hourRun

Yeah but, it also provides you with more people to bribe -- works both ways.


So you can go through the NAPD, to overrule UKAD/BBBofC, OK. Sounds good for cheats, you get two chances to clear your name, Hearn is likely to have someone on the payroll in one them.

Here in America we got several Athletic Commissions, however in the case of doping, I don't think you can cross state-lines and appeal your case to another Athletic commission ; they usually honor the official ruling from the other states.

I tried to remember a incident when a commission went against the ruling of another, and the only one that I could remember was when Mike Tyson had lost his licence for biting Lennox Lewis ; Shelly Finkell got Tyson a boxing licence in Tennessee, despite Nevada suspending Tyson.

Try bribing multiple Queen's Counsel barristers in the UK and see how long it takes for Her Majesty's Constabulary to come knocking on your door!

[kafkod]

Originally Posted by Ray*

Not really, thats mightily difficult. You have to make sure everyone is on board, you have to pay more money etc.. It works only one way

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

Most people would rather bribe one person and get it over with than having more people to bribe

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

Lol, yeah, and if even one of those people you try to bribe doesn't want come on board, your goose is cooked!

[Citizen Koba]

Originally Posted by kafkod

Those people won't accept that there is even a remote, theoretical possibility that Dillian wasn't deliberately cheating. They start with the assumption of guilt and work from there.

The BBBoC are the national governing body for boxing in the UK. They are affiliated with UKAD and effectively act as one entity in PED abuse cases.

According to Eddie Hearn, he was informed of Whyte's adverse test result but didn't attend the NADP hearing and had no part in the appeal process, which was handled by Dillian's legal representatives. I see no reason to doubt Eddie's word on that.

This forum would be a different place if more members took the same trouble as you to check facts before forming opinions and sounding off about them!

Yeah, if you look through the NDAPs rules document that I linked it does actually say that at the initial hearing only the athlete and testing agency representatives should be present, which tallies with Hearn's version of events, as do the rules about confidentiality and privacy. Unless Hearn had some pertinent evidence to add as a witness or was in some way qualified to act as Whyte's legal counsel - which he ain't - he would not have been invited.

8.Hearings

8.1

Save for good cause shown by any party, all hearings shall be conducted on a private and confidential basis, attended only by the parties to the proceedings (i.e., in the case of a first instance proceeding, the Anti-Doping Organisation and Respondent; in the case of an appeal, the Appellant and any other parties to the appeal) and their representatives and witnesses, as well as the representatives of any third party that is permitted under the Code or the Anti-Doping Rules to attend in order to participate in and/or to observe the proceedings.

[1hourRun]

Originally Posted by kafkod

Try bribing multiple Queen's Counsel barristers in the UK and see how long it takes for Her Majesty's Constabulary to come knocking on your door!

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

Originally Posted by kafkod

Lol, yeah, and if even one of those people you try to bribe doesn't want come on board, your goose is cooked!

Guys, I'm even more confused now : I went to UKAD's website and now I think that there are other channels of appeals besides the NADP.

Originally Posted by UKAD

Decisions made by the NADP or alternative hearing body may be appealed. Depending on the status of the athlete, the appeal may be heard by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) or the NADP Appeal Tribunal.

So you got UKAD/BBBofC, the Courts, and NADP.

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

[Citizen Koba]

Originally Posted by 1hourRun

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

Guys, I'm even more confused now : I went to UKAD's website and now I think that there are other channels of appeals besides the NADP.



So you got UKAD/BBBofC, the Courts, and NADP.

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

Ok... I think, best I understand it, the initial call on a doping violation is made by UKAD who organise and conduct all sports testing in the UK, any disagreement or appeal is dealt with by NADP and any challenge to the national body can be taken to the highest supranational / international body directly related to sports which is the CAS. Possibly legal sporting disputes involving parties from more than one country may go directly to the CAS , bypassing the national body, but I ain't sure about that.

[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]


[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]

[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]


[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]

[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]

[1hourRun]

Originally Posted by Koba-Grozny

Ok... I think, best I understand it, the initial call on a doping violation is made by UKAD any disagreement or appeal is dealt with by NADP and any challenge to the national body can be taken to the highest supranational / international body directly related to sports which is the CAS. Possibly legal sporting disputes invilving parties from more than one country may go directly to the CAS , bypassing the national body, but I ain't sure about that.


[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]

[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]

WTF?! And this is suppose to be better than Nevada?! Who did Canelo appeal to?

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

[Citizen Koba]

Originally Posted by 1hourRun

WTF?! And this is suppose to be better than Nevada?! Who did Canelo appeal to?

Image View Removed. Please Click Here.

IDK if it's better but I would hope that NAC has an appeals process and independent bodies to appeal to. The UK system seems to have more checks and boundaries and more opportunity for appeal, but the downside is that that ish can drag on for months or even years. Since boxing in the US is not directly overseen by WADA (or it's US affiliate in USADA) then it's kinda pecemeal I think. There's different rules in different states I believe and as far as I know no unified testing system or oversight. Possibly the relevent State athletics commision or governing body is the highest authority and the only other recourse is to take it through the legal system, I don't know but I'm sure it should be easy enough to find out.

Problem with Canelo's situation - although I believe he was actually suspended for reasons of political expedience (read PR) - is that it was impossible to prove with any degree of certainty from his test results whether he had cheated or not, though contamination had a good likelihood due to the prevalence of meat contamination in Mexico.

In the Whyte case, at least according to UKADs statement, the evidence involved was consistent with (and here UKAD use the same terminoligy as was used for the Canelo case) an isolated contamination incident and (and this is the caveat that could not be included with Canelo's) were not suggestive of doping, despite many of us - myself included - being sceptical of the possibility of Dianabol contamination.

[Link View Has Been Removed. Click Here To Unlock This Content.]