Benn fails drug test

But he is fully cleared and innocent.

 

More ifs & buts

 

My points relate to the full disciplinary procedure/hearings with Whyte/Benn and BBBoC/UKAD, not the scramble immediately after a +ve drug test close to a fight.

Also UKAD mentioned nothing about a "lab error" in their statement,

https://www.ukad.org.uk/news/ukad-and-mr-dillian-whyte-issue-joint-statement

but simply that it "was not caused by any fault, negligence or wrongdoing on Mr Whyte’s part"
and according to this article, a contaminated supplement ...

https://www.dazn.com/en-US/news/box...anti-doping-agency/19kvqm4po0mg314ewyjbrsr2w4

I'd be interested if you can find any link/article to a lab error though ...

PS ... my points were

Whyte failed UKAD test, but passed similar time VADA tests ....
Whyte/matchroom wants UKAD to consider VADA tests.

Benn failed VADA test, dunno if/when tested by UKAD ....
Benn/matchroom says UKAD not OK to consider VADA tests.

 

The UKAD statement aligns more with contamination within the laboratory than that of a contaminated supplement. If the isolated contamination event occurred before entering Whyte's system, it would be logical that the results would show up across the various tests (by the different labs) that were mentioned in the UKAD statement, rather than just one.

The Guardian used the wording "Errant sample consistent with contamination, say UKAD", which again is consistent with lab contamination.
Dillian Whyte cleared after UK Anti-Doping withdraws steroid charge | Boxing | The Guardian

However, if DAZN's writer says contaminated supplement, that's fine I guess.

PS ... on your final point, I agree with you in part, but:

Regarding Whyte, from the UKAD statement, UKAD considered the findings of multiple tests they themselves did, and the tests by VADA. I can see why Dillian Whyte would be more than happy for UKAD to be presented with findings from VADA.

Regarding Benn, like you, I also don't know if UKAD tested Benn. I haven't really followed the Benn situation as closely as I did Whyte's. From my understanding, this is a case of VADA finding something; then him being cleared by the American side. I don't know what information was shared by Benn's team. Did they eventually share the VADA test results? I don't know. I also suspect UKAD is not going to make a statement on this. But again, that is just an assumption on my part.

But I also don't know why both these cases were made public. But I have my suspicions.

 

You could almost forget that Clomifeme main PED use is as a masking agent. I think it is quite brilliant how they've focused on the woman's fertility aspect. Sure you take a few jokes about being pregnant, but once you've heard one you've heard them all.

BBBofC and UKAD need to be careful about letting this drag on. Far as i'm concerned, perception wise, it is already getting a bit late for lodging an appeal. Yes they have 21 days but best believe Hearn will announce a fight for him before then and if they appeal after that it looks like a witchhunt

 

Clomifenes main boost and reason for taking it is to return testosterone back to levels pre ped rather than a masking agent like say a s5 diuretic.

If only there were other clear signs that benn had issues with low testosterone like say low beard growth and depression......

The blokes a drugs cheat, nothing can convince me that he isn't. He failed 2 tests months apart because they thought the clomi would be out of his system. But its not the fact he's a cheat it's the way matchroom and their associates have conducted themselves.

If he had tested positive, pulled out the fight, took a ban and claimed that he had accidentally ingested them in eggs whilst in the US or dubai no one would have batted an eyelid and just accepted it or if he'd said he had low test and wa prescriped it by a Dr not realising it was banned again no problem...hell he could have turned round and said his Mrs is on it and he accidentally ingested it by mixing up tablets or oral sex and everyone would have said nothing.....

I hope he never steps foot in a ring again

 

Well put.

Funny how a bloke with dreadlocks and a beard transplant worth thousands suddenly shaved them both off. It’s almost as if they were worried about it being detected in hair follicles.

 

That’s why Britney Spears shaved her head bald and blamed mental health, she was going through a custody battle and hair samples were required as it was claimed her drug use made her an unfit mother

 

I think it's important to consider that the Fury incident was what, 8 years ago? People may not really remember how they felt about it.

Also, criticism of Benn doesn't necessarily equal giving Fury a pass.

 

Unfortunately nobody can put this to Hearn as the only 2 journalists he lets get close to him are Koogz and Parsons who have a combined brain age of 17 and spend the whole interview calling him Edward and having top banter.

 

I’ve not seen an IFL interview in ages it’s painful to watch, grown men getting giddy just at being in the presence of matchroom guys.

 

Saw the opening 20 seconds of one yesterday.

Parsons: "Edwardo, you look a bit smug!"

Hearn: "you cheeky little facker!!!'

 

And this is ultimately why promoters can get away with all the spin and false narratives, absolutely zero scrutiny and a failure to ask the obvious questions. They just sit there and swallow it with no follow up.

I used to quite enjoy the YouTube interviews, I liked the hints at upcoming fight announcements and they are a frequent source of content, but the lack of real questions and the repetitiveness of it all, even other clip is titled "brutally honest" "raw".

I don't really blame them, they are getting a cracking lifestyle for just being a lapdog, why risk it all for daring to ask a pressing question.

 

"The moment you take the corporate dollar you lose all credibility"

Few more accurate sayings

 

The pally nature of much of the boxing media is a genuine issue. But it isn't the issue here.

"Eddie, isn't it true that Conor's shaved his head and beard so he can't have his hair tested by the drug testers?" isn't a good question. That question would be defamatory, and would give a journalist - at best - an outright denial.

At worst, it'd lead to the interview being terminated, threats of legal action from Matchroom and Benn, and probably being disinvited from all Matchroom shows indefinitely. The only viable outcome would be an apology and retraction.

It'd be a boneheaded question to ask without direct supporting evidence.

A good journalist will focus on the stuff they can either back up with hard evidence, or where it can be reasonably assumed to be true.

Donald McRae's superb recent story showed how it can be done.