The Massachusetts board of control had no grounds to deny Billy Joe Saunders a license. (IMPORTANT)

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by uppercut_to_the_body, Oct 18, 2018.


  1. uppercut_to_the_body

    uppercut_to_the_body Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,808
    2,384
    Sep 19, 2017
    So lets lay things out in simple terms because some people here have difficulty understanding.

    - Massachusetts board uses WADA testing
    - PRIVATE CONTRACT for this fight had VADA testing
    - Billy Joe did nothing wrong in WADA terms, but broke the contract in terms of VADA testing
    - So really, the Massachusetts board should have had no issue with the fight, it should be down to the Promoter to decide whether to allow this breach of contract or call off the fight.


    Think about it this way, say if you work for a company driving trucks. And in your contract with your employer it says that you can't use the trucks for your personal use on weekends. The State Laws don't forbid you to drive the trucks, only your employers contract. So if you do drive the truck on a weekend, its up to your employer whether to fire you or not. The Government isn't going to remove your license because you HAVENT BROKEN THEIR LAWS, ONLY BREACHED A PRIVATE CONTRACT

    @CST80 @IntentionalButt @CutThroatFade
     
    minemax, CST80 and CutThroatFade like this.
  2. thesmokingm

    thesmokingm Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,033
    4,323
    Nov 18, 2009
    Are you a BJS fanboy?
     
  3. Puroresu_Fan

    Puroresu_Fan Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,618
    6,476
    Apr 6, 2016
    What's the point of a contract if you can just break it?

    His a cheat just deal with it.
     
  4. IntentionalButt

    IntentionalButt Guy wants to name his çock 'macho' that's ok by me

    401,170
    83,058
    Nov 30, 2006
    Actually you're wrong about that.

    MSAC generally follows but isn't beholden to WADA's guidelines. In this case they adhered to WADA's guidelines insomuch as them listing oxilofrine under their banned substances list. Where they diverged from WADA is allowing an exception for this substance "outside competition" - which is a concept that exists for WADA but has zero precedence of existing for MSAC. Simply put, the state athletic board has never permitted someone to fail a test for a banned substance but still go through with competition on the basis of the failure being a certain number of days prior. They don't have any such "cushion zone", as WADA does...never have. This just happens to be, AFAIK, the first time a situation has arisen where somebody has been popped in MA for something on the list that WADA says is banned only when in-competition.

    Elsewhere, such as in the UK, the precedent would be to recognize this delineation of time-frames as does WADA, thus ignoring the positive test and granting a license. The MSAC opted not to set that precedent and instead reinforced their already existing precedent for zero tolerance, which is absolutely their right - and, one could argue, the right decision.

    That said, I (selfishly) really wish they had granted BJS a license because my birthday present was supposed to be ringside seats to watch him spark out Andrade, not to watch some random Namibian fella probably get boringly shut out.
     
    Tazz and CST80 like this.
  5. Sugar 88

    Sugar 88 Woke Moralist-In-Chief

    27,259
    18,341
    Feb 4, 2012
    You're right in the board didn't follow the proper protocol IMO as you'd think they follow the precedents of other WADA affiliated boxing boards of control but it doesn't stop BJS being a probable cheat. We're yet to be given a real detail about this nasal spray that supposedly caused the adverse finding.
     
  6. Puroresu_Fan

    Puroresu_Fan Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,618
    6,476
    Apr 6, 2016
    The sport would be a mockery if BJS was allowed to fight. If Andrade would have lost it would of caused all the kinds of problems. Andrade would of rightly argued BJS was cheating and have grounds for a rematch.
     
    greenhornet, Tazz and shadow111 like this.
  7. IntentionalButt

    IntentionalButt Guy wants to name his çock 'macho' that's ok by me

    401,170
    83,058
    Nov 30, 2006
    Why would they be beholden to other commissions' recognition of an "in vs. out of competition" period when they've never done that before and have expressed a zero tolerance policy in general?
     
    Tazz likes this.
  8. bandeedo

    bandeedo Loyal Member Full Member

    36,048
    24,026
    Feb 19, 2007
    now at least he has more time to spend with his prince of a son, trolling crackheads and instigating assaults on innocent people.
     
  9. IntentionalButt

    IntentionalButt Guy wants to name his çock 'macho' that's ok by me

    401,170
    83,058
    Nov 30, 2006
    Stephen Heath admitted that BJS knowingly used the nasal spray while in the voluntary testing period through VADA. Knowing that it was banned per VADA was on him & his team, regardless of whether or not the UKAD, WADA, or BBBofC are in the habit of regularly making allowances for oxilofrine when used long enough before fight night. He used it, he admitted it, per the contract VADA was used, thus he should've boned up on the precise letter of the rules with VADA, but didn't, thus failed, thus zero tolerance = no license.

    Simple.
     
    KiwiMan likes this.
  10. thesmokingm

    thesmokingm Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,033
    4,323
    Nov 18, 2009
    Ugh, they agreed to the VADA banned list. The dude was using a banned substance on a technicality under the crap WADA protocol. He should have checked the VADA rules or protocol since that is what they signed on for. Being a cheater and all its in his best practice to know, you know. The guy apparently knows when to stop using whilst under UKAD. This is not an accident lol.
     
    KiwiMan likes this.
  11. Sugar 88

    Sugar 88 Woke Moralist-In-Chief

    27,259
    18,341
    Feb 4, 2012
    If you look at legal systems around the world they often look at precedents set in other countries as non-binding guidelines when looking at a case in what for them is the first instance. It'd be weird if they didn't give any consideration to what their counterparts in other countries had decided in similar situations.

    And just because they had been zero tolerance in the past doesn't mean they have to be forever. Policy is allowed to change and if it did I'm sure they'd cite UKAD policy as an example.

    Anyway... they didn't and I don't care as I think BJS is on the balance of probabilities a cheat.
     
  12. Puroresu_Fan

    Puroresu_Fan Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,618
    6,476
    Apr 6, 2016
    I think the more important question is why was BJS using this in camp and how many fights as his been using this.
     
    shadow111 and Sugar 88 like this.
  13. CutThroatFade

    CutThroatFade Rangers FC Full Member

    18,022
    29,076
    May 25, 2015
    Bro don’t worry. Warren will take these frauds to the cleaners in the court. He’s going to make them pay and teach them a lesson they’ll never forget. I can just picture Frank in a beige double-breasted suit stepping out of a Rolls Royce outside the court leading a pack of Gypsy warriors featuring Billy Joe, Big John Fury and Young Stevie Saunders. The lot of them marching into the court and shaking these Massachusetts no mark dossers upside down and emptying their pockets for good.

    They’ll get their comeuppance in time. Then Billy Joe will deal with Andrade in the ring to claim his belt back and teach that slimy lanky streak of **** Hearn that he will never pickpocket a belt from a Gypsy warrior again.
     
    uppercut_to_the_body likes this.
  14. Puroresu_Fan

    Puroresu_Fan Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,618
    6,476
    Apr 6, 2016
    Cheats never prosper
     
  15. C.J.

    C.J. Boxings Living Legend revered & respected by all Full Member

    46,772
    15,889
    Apr 14, 2009
    YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS BUT AGREE QITH THW CSAC BANNING Antonio Margarito when the lab tests on his wraps were comparable to HUMAN SWEAT