Comments Thread For: Manny Pacquiao Working Out Ahead Of Possible Conor Benn Bout

[Corelone]

It got confusing a while back. Eddy was appealing to the BBBBs findings, then he found a commission that cleared Benn, so apparently, the BBBBs appealed that position, so now we have contradicting appeals, but Eddy was talking about the first one. I think.

[IronDanHamza]

Not according to the article you are commenting on, retard. Did you even read it?


“There’s also the observation of Ramadan through April 9, and Benn promoter Eddie Hearn saying he’s waiting on an appeal to the British Boxing Board of Control to see if Benn will be cleared to fight in the U.K. following two positive tests for the banned substance clomiphene before his scrapped bout against Chris Eubank Jr., which was to happen at London’s O2 Arena Oct. 5, 2022.

Hearn didn’t immediately return messages from BoxingScene Saturday but he recently told IFLTV this: “Listen, we all want that fight, and obviously Manny flew in for talks and to watch the show in Saudi Arabia, so that’s what we’d like to do,” Hearn said. “We’re waiting for the … announcement from the appeal. We were told it was going to be in two weeks, and it’s now nearly four weeks, so we’ll be hearing about that appeal any day.

“It’s not in our hands, it’s in the hands of the Board and their decision will determine where Conor Benn’s next fight will be because, quite frankly, we could do Conor Benn versus Pacquiao in a stadium in London.”

Oh my life You cannot be this dumb.

To the points you bolded;

First one -

Yes, they are waiting on the appeal by the BBBoC to be resolved. Which ISN'T done by them it's done by the independent party who held the appeal hearing.

Second one -

Yes yeah they are waiting from the announcement from the appeal..Which ISN'T done by them it's done by the independent party who held the appeal hearing.


Third one -

Yes, it's in the hands of the BBBoC...to LICENSE him. After the appeal process is completed. Not to "answer the appeal". As,it isn't done by them it's done by the independent party who held the appeal hearing.


Use your head and ask yourself, how, the BBBoC can LOSE a legal hearing, APPEAL the hearing, and then make the decision on the outcome of that hearing. Does that make any kind of sense in your head, you ****** cunt? How can the party who LOST the case be the one's who make the decision on the appeal of the case? If that was the case then the appeal process could have been over on day 1. "BBBoC loses hearing, they appeal hearing, they decide that really they should have won the hearing therefore it's overturned"

To make it clear for you since you need it, it's the NAPD who will answers the appeal. It was them who carried out hearing, the BBBoc lost, they appealed that loss, they've had their appeal hearing, and the NAPD will answer that imminently.

You are one real ****** bastard

[IronDanHamza]

It got confusing a while back. Eddy was appealing to the BBBBs findings, then he found a commission that cleared Benn, so apparently, the BBBBs appealed that position, so now we have contradicting appeals, but Eddy was talking about the first one. I think.

Totally incorrect. Staggeringly far from correct actually.

At no point did Eddie "appeal the BBBoC's" findings. First and foremost the BBBoC didn't find anything as they aren't a drug testing company.

Secondly, he didn't "find a commission" that cleared Benn. Benn failed a drug test, he then underwent a hearing WITH UKAD/BBBoC and he won that hearing and his suspension was lifted and he was clear to fight.

Then, UKAD/BBBoC decided to appeal that decision (that they lost) and now we are waiting for that appeal process to be completed. The hearing has already happened, and the result will be imminent.

So that is the appeal that Hearn is referring to (the only one)

[IronDanHamza]

yeah he has but i dont think hes made many if any friends there with his shenanigans & seems to me (could be wrong of course) that hes only been cleared on that jurisdiction thing, which is embarrassing by itself if its true

You have no way of knowing that as the contents of the hearing are confidential. That's nothing but hearsay.

No one who's failed a drug test should be expected to make friends but none of it changes the fact he went though every channel asked of him, presented his evidence and won them and his suspension was lifted.

There is no more the guy can do.

[Smash]

You have no way of knowing that as the contents of the hearing are confidential. That's nothing but hearsay.
.

there is always going to be an egg in the room with this one

if i was eggie & i won my case based on something else i think i would like that known

[IronDanHamza]

there is always going to be an egg in the room with this one

if i was eggie & i won my case based on something else i think i would like that known

Well, it's not his choice because it's confidential.

All we know for certain is he had a hearing, he presented his evidence and he won the hearing.

Everything else is speculation up to the point of if or when it's released which is likely never because they never are in these hearings.

[Smash]

Well, it's not his choice because it's confidential.

All we know for certain is he had a hearing, he presented his evidence and he won the hearing.

Everything else is speculation up to the point of if or when it's released which is likely never because they never are in these hearings.

bring back strict liability i say, if it ever existed in the first place in more than words

if u think its supplements causing all these issues then its your responsibility to keep samples of what u are taking and only take approved supplements with a history of non contamination

[IronDanHamza]

bring back strict liability i say, if it ever existed in the first place in more than words

if u think its supplements causing all these issues then its your responsibility to keep samples of what u are taking and only take approved supplements with a history of non contamination

It is strict liability.

Maybe he did? We don't know. All we can go off is the fact that he presented his evidence, whatever that may be, and he won the hearing.

We have to be fair on things like this. Benn did everything asked of him, and, he won his hearing.

[Liondw]

Pacquiao had a great career, love him. It's tough though, at age 45, to fight at a high level.

It may be alright if you're a heavyweight, but at welterweight, tough, even though Benn is not the best welterweight.

[Smash]

It is strict liability.

Maybe he did? We don't know. All we can go off is the fact that he presented his evidence, whatever that may be, and he won the hearing.

We have to be fair on things like this. Benn did everything asked of him, and, he won his hearing.

my view of strict liability is u get caught with illegals auto ban for X time based on clear rules that are implemented in every country all the time

we seem to have the opposite of that to me anyway