It would make sense. Otherwise why would Hearn put his head on the line so much for someone who has failed not 1 but 2 drugs tests and still hasn't got anywhere close to a reasonable excuse after many months and thousands spent on lawyers?
Now I've heard Conor Benn's conclusive evidence that "I don't even know what Clomid is" I think I am now on his side. He has to be innocent.
So some of the charges the board charged him with were "Not informing Eubank" and "Because we wanted the fight to go ahead". Both seem quite reasonable.
That's a good point in one of the tweets I posted earlier. Why doesnt he just do a hair follicle test? Clear all this up? Probably because he would have had a pharmacy worth of steroids in his system when the results come back.
Up and down the land today in UK courts ...... "I don't even know what GBH is .... so, I can go now, right ?"