Eddie Hearn hides twitter reply

Yeah why would you need a legal team to understand what adverse finding means.

Why not come out and say. "Yeah I took PEDS. I'm sorry for it. Il take my punishment and won't do it again".

All this fluff about "we're going to do a big massive investigation involving our legal team, into how this got into Saint Conman Benn's system, as we're dumbfounded because Conman is a clean athlete and he'd be the last person to do something like this", is embarassing, shameful and smacks of geeky PR wanker advice.

 

I just had a skip through the Kugan interview with Hearn and it really is as bad as everyone was saying. Hearn even trying to angle Benn as some sort of victim, like there's a witch hunt against him. Genuinely made me angry listening to him spout such shite.

How hard would it be to just ask Hearn this, if Benn is clean then why and how was clomid found in his sample? Especially when we all know what it is used for and isn't something you could accidentally consume in food or over the counter supplements and isn't something naturally produced in the body that could give a false positive for various reasons.

It just keeps getting more and more pathetic from everyone involved. In this case I hope Benn gets the book thrown at him and is banned for a long time.

 

It's standard industry jargon. I was reading the Fury UKAD statement the other day and all it said was 'adverse analytical finding'. It's just the drug testers using double speak because they know 'he's failed a drugs test' is a loaded statement. The way they're all playing dumb is a joke and to me pretty much confirms their guilt.

 

The only thing he said that wasn't shite, was his opinion of some commentators this week. It's been fascinating seeing the Sky folk like Company Nelson out in the media condemning the saga where it might actually have gone ahead; no doubt they were quite happy for Whyte to fight Rivas in similar circumstances. But then many of us have said Warren and co have been fairly quiet which says a lot about the trade generally.

 

With Hearn, the press / interviewers are only allowed to ask questions if they toe the Matchroom party line and just toss Hearn softball questions about unimportant issues. Hence why Kugan has access.

 

It's like the
"haven't had the B-sample tested yet" .... errr .. that'll be because you haven't requested it to be tested then, 'cos you know it'll return the same result. In the meantime ... can still be suspended.
and
"trace amounts" - yeah, we don't expect the p*ss to be 100% "banned substance". If it's one of those that there should be zero in the body, then any amount is a fail. And those that allow a certain amount in the body, don't fail you when you are below that level. I appreciate there's a Mexican beef argument in here, but not for all substances.

It's minimising language all designed to mislead the public and put pressure on the authorities.

Interviewers should pull them up on this crap, but ....

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/s...one-fighter-failed-drugs-test-sanctioned.html

• 30 per cent of all main event fights put up by Eddie Hearn have involved a fighter that has failed a drugs test

" Professional boxing’s tolerance of doping is under the spotlight in the wake of the controversy surrounding Conor Benn’s failed drugs test.

Now The Mail on Sunday can reveal 30 per cent of all main event fights staged by Benn’s promoter Eddie Hearn this year involved at least one fighter who has failed a doping test or been sanctioned for an anti-doping offence.

In 2019, on the undercard of Anthony Joshua’s rematch with Andy Ruiz Jnr in Saudi Arabia, promoted by Hearn’s Matchroom Boxing, no fewer than five boxers had tested positive for prohibited drugs during their careers.

That same year Hearn said he would never want to put one of his fighters in a ring against a doped opponent, after the American fighter Jarrell Miller tested positive for three different substances before his cancelled heavyweight title fight against Joshua."


Hearn getting some attention in the papers today.

 

Spot on. The amount of misinformation and flat out lies he has brazenly put out is alarming. He was cockily walking around telling everyone that BBofBC haven't even suspended him. Creating the impression there is a case to answer. Knowing full well they can't suspend him because their regulator didn't catch him. Not one of these YouTube 'journalists' pulled him up on it.

 

Couldn't happen to a nicer ****