Fury's nandrolone reading was never revealed by UKAD

[Clegg]

The level was above zero though

[Citizen Koba]

Under any commissions rules and WADA's BJS did nothing wrong. Only VADA say he did. So many rules it's ridiculous. Should just follow WADA, if it's good enough for the Olympics it's good enough for boxing.

I've never been 100% clear on this, but don't VADA simply report the test results? I think it's down to either the relevant governing body or sanctioning body to rule on punitive action based on VADAs findings (or rather the findings of the WADA accredited labs that VADA send their samples to).

In the case of BJS best I can recall Massachussetts SAC were actually in the wrong to deny him a license (since their regs stipulate WADA standards -as do those of the NSAC for sure and most of the other state commissions I think), though Andrade may have had legitimate grounds to refuse to fight him and consequently the WBO grounds to strip him (for delaying / jeopardising the fight) under their regulations.

[kafkod]

I've never been 100% clear on this, but don't VADA simply report the test results? I think it's down to either the relevant governing body or sanctioning body to rule on punitive action based on VADAs findings (or rather the findings of the WADA accredited labs that VADA send their samples to).

In the case of BJS best I can recall Massachussetts SAC were actually in the wrong to deny him a license (since their regs stipulate WADA standards), though Andrade may have had legitimate grounds to refuse to fight him and consequently the WBO grounds to strip him (for delaying / jeopardising the fight) under their regulations.

As I understand it, MSAC refused to grant BJS a licence because they said he had failed to fulfill the terms of his fight contract, which required him to pass all VADA tests - even though MSAC themselves adhered to WADA, rather than VADA.

At the hearing the WBO sided with MSAC and would almost certainly have stripped BJS for failing to fulfill his mandatory obligations, if he hadn't relinquished the title himself.

[paulf]

What you have to remember is that Tyson and Hughie were never found guilty of PED abuse by a medical/legal tribunal after the evidence was presented and considered, because their cases were never heard by a tribunal.

UKAD got the tribunal hearings postponed multiple times before eventually offering Team Fury a deal which meant that the nandrolone accusations never went before the tribunal

In their statement, UKAD themselves admitted that waiting 15 months before acting on a test result made it impossible for the Furys to adequately defend themselves against accusations made on the basis of those test results.

This meant that the Furys would 100% have been acquitted by the tribunal, and could then have sued UKAD for defamation and loss of earnings.

Luckily for UKAD, the nandrolone charges weren't the only thing they had against the Furys. After being accused of cheating, Tyson verbally abused a UKAD team who came to the Fury gym to conduct more tests and refused to co-operate with them. UKAD then charged him with refusing to be tested, the penalty for which is an automatic 4 year ban.

The deal was that UKAD withdrew that charge in return for both cousins accepting a back-dated 2 year ban for the nandrolone charge without taking their cases to the tribunal.

That's a really good story, I like how at the end Fury accepts a ban for failing his drug test.

[kafkod]

That's a really good story, I like how at the end Fury accepts a ban for failing his drug test.

I dare say that's the only part of the "story" you are capable of understanding.

It's easy enough for most people of average intelligence to understand, which means that at least 50% of the people who post here won't be able to process it.

[Citizen Koba]

As I understand it, MSAC refused to grant BJS a licence because they said he had failed to fulfill the terms of his fight contract, which required him to pass all VADA tests - even though MSAC themselves adhered to WADA, rather than VADA.

At the hearing the WBO sided with MSAC and would almost certainly have stripped BJS for failing to fulfill his mandatory obligations, if he hadn't relinquished the title himself.

Mmm.

https://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/story/...iled-drug-test

Valcarcal basically says what you said:

"Once you sign a contract to fight you have to comply with the contract. He didn't comply with the rules and regulations and so he wasn't licensed,"

but I can't find anything specific in the MSAC regs that says you're required to abide by fighter contracts

https://www.mass.gov/files/documents...06/523cmr6.pdf

6.11: Grounds for Denial of Application for License The Commission may deny an application for licensure or renewal of a license if:

(1) it finds that the applicant has performed any act which would, if performed by a licensee, subject the licensee to discipline pursuant to 523 CMR 20.00: Prohibited Acts; Disciplinary Actions or 21.00: Disciplinary Proceedings;

(2) pursuant to M.G.L. c. 147, § 35, the Commission is not satisfied that the applicant possesses the ability to safely and competently compete or execute the duties of the position for which they have applied, including a lack of requisite skill for unarmed combatants;

(3) it is determined that false information was provided on the application;

(4) the applicant fails to disclose information known to them relative to the medical condition of an unarmed combatant, including themselves, as required by 523 CMR 6.02;

(5) (for an unarmed combatant) the applicant has suffered cerebral hemorrhage and has not been cleared by a medical practitioner after subsequent testing satisfactory to the Commission

Unless it's something in one of the bits I've bolded (either the application requires you to declare that you've adhered to the conditions of your fighter contract or there's something in CMR 20:00 - prohibited acts - about fighter contracts) which doesn't seem particularly likely, I can't see what reason MSAC would have to deny him - after all, he abided by their rules. Andrade, sure, depending on what was in the fighter contract, the WBO, sure - their regs allow 'em to strip a guy for creating a situation which prevents a defense from proceeding, but the SAC? I don't get it.

Odd...

[_Maxi]

The Fury's accepted they failed tests and a 2 year ban. They're guilty, get over it.

What did Canelo do? Aahhh you meant the fury's. Sorry.

[kafkod]

That's a really good story, I like how at the end Fury accepts a ban for failing his drug test.

Seriously man, he had 2 options .. accept a backdated 2 year ban, which left him free to fight again immediately, or refuse to make a deal, get a 4 year ban for refusing to be tested, and then spend a fortune and his athletic prime fighting UKAD in the courts instead of Wilder, AJ, etc, in the ring.

[kafkod]

Mmm.

https://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/story/...iled-drug-test

Valcarcal basically says what you said:



but I can't find anything specific in the MSAC regs that says you're required to abide by fighter contracts

https://www.mass.gov/files/documents...06/523cmr6.pdf





Unless it's something in one of the bits I've bolded (either the application requires you to declare that you've adhered to the conditions of your fighter contract or there's something in CMR 20:00 - prohibited acts - about fighter contracts) which doesn't seem particularly likely, I can't see what reason MSAC would have to deny him - after all, he abided by their rules. Andrade, sure, depending on what was in the fighter contract, the WBO, sure - their regs allow 'em to strip a guy for creating a situation which prevents a defense from proceeding, but the SAC? I don't get it.

Odd...

Both BJS, and Frank Warren - no doubt advised by his lawyers - were convinced that MSAC had no grounds for refusing BJS a licence.

But they and the WBO seemed to have treated the whole case in a very perfunctory manner. They didn't even allow BJS or Warren to say anything at the hearing, which took place via a conference call. It was like the MSAC viewed the granting of a boxing license as a privilege, not a right, which it was in their gift to extend or not, as they saw fit, and the WBO just went along with that.

[Citizen Koba]

Both BJS, and Frank Warren - no doubt advised by his lawyers - were convinced that MSAC had no grounds for refusing BJS a licence.

But they and the WBO seemed to have treated the whole case in a very perfunctory manner. They didn't even allow BJS or Warren to say anything at the hearing, which took place via a conference call. It was like the MSAC viewed the granting of a boxing license as a privilege, not a right, which it was in their gift to extend or not, as they saw fit, and the WBO just went along with that.

It's a funny one for sure, can't help thinking the MSAC went beyond their remit here though it's hard to be sure whether they were leaned on to do so, cos I can't think of any obvious reason they would deny him otherwise, especially on review - unless perhaps they thought the publicity created made it politically expedient to deny a license - specially in the light of the Canelo case... understandable, but not really acceptable from a governmental organisation.

It is a little amusing how some posters took the opportunity to declare how the US had the Gold Standard in testing as a result of this when in fact the majority of members of the ABC (those that have testing protocols at all) use the exact same WADA protocols as the BBBoC and everyone else involved in the sport.