British Boxing Board statement on Tyson & Hughie Fury

[BoxingFan85]

But neither have been PROVEN guilty of anything.

From what I understand, the levels were so low, they could have been naturally occurring.

It's just like due process in a court of law - there's a HUGE difference between being arrested, then charged, and then actually being proven guilty.

AS of now, neither Fury is guilty of anything regarding PED usage.

And I expect both will be cleared by summer.

the bolded is Untrue.. They tested +ve only because the levels detected couldn't have been produced naturally..
They are alleged based on the +ve sample in 2015 but they are neither convicted nor acquitted.. The tribunal is scheduled in April is to evaluate & decide..

[BoxingFan85]

The Stone Roses album cover

Haven't heard them.. Will give it a hear..

[Cheek busting]

The tribunal is for the nandrolone accusation only. It's a separate issue from the coke and depression. What Smith is saying is that if Tyson applies to have his suspension lifted, the BBBoC will examine his situation and decide if he's fit to fight. If he's found guilty of using nandrolone by the tribunal doe, he'll be banned for that, for sure.

If by chance he is found guilty, I wonder if the suspension will be retroactive?

And they will consider his start date back whenever they first addressed the issue.

Hasn't that happened before with boxers being suspended?

So if they find him guilty, and give him a one-year suspension, if it actually will only be like a few months in reality, because they consider the suspension beginning back when it was first announced he was under investigation, or the date of the offense.

[kafkod]

It says Hughie had a provisional suspension, which probably just means he was suspended while they looked into the case. It seems they have no reason to be banned so Hughie's suspension was lifted.

As for Tyson, he's only suspended due to mental health issues and ******* use. They can't issue boxing licenses to those who are not cleared to fight due to mental health problems. Because ******* isn't a PED and because he has mental health issues, i'm assuming the tribunal is more to do with whether he's in the right frame of mind to fight, not because of doping.

Makes sense..

Remember, it was VADA who popped Tyson for being high on coke, not UKAD.

[Cheek busting]

the bolded is Untrue.. They tested +ve only because the levels detected couldn't have been produced naturally..
They are alleged based on the +ve sample in 2015 but they are neither convicted nor acquitted.. The tribunal is scheduled in April is to evaluate & decide..

I don't know, I thought I remember hearing something about the levels being extremely, unusually low. Do these tests have threshold/cutoffs levels like some drug tests do for recreational drugs?

I know when jobs and **** drug test you for street drugs, each drug has a nanogram/ML cutoff threshold - this is so excuses like "second hand inhalation," or "I ate poppy seeds" can't be used. Although I imagine if you ate a **** ton of poppy seeds u could still prolly test positive even above the cutoff threshold.

They are still not guilty of ANYTHING yet, though.

To say otherwise is wrong. Until they have completed the due process, and made a decision, they are innocent.

[deathofaclown]

Haven't heard them.. Will give it a hear..

The self titled debut album is good think it come out in 89 or 90. Way before my time really but seen as a classic album in the UK. Wouldn't bother much with the rest of their stuff apart from this song which isn't on the debut album (unless it's a reissue)....

- quite a familiar tune to some people, as other artists have sampled it.

[kafkod]

If by chance he is found guilty, I wonder if the suspension will be retroactive?

And they will consider his start date back whenever they first addressed the issue.

Hasn't that happened before with boxers being suspended?

So if they find him guilty, and give him a one-year suspension, if it actually will only be like a few months in reality, because they consider the suspension beginning back when it was first announced he was under investigation, or the date of the offense.

Sorry mate, I've no idea about those two questions. I've never heard of retroactive suspensions for PED abuse, but I've never heard of a testing agency taking 16 fucking months to charge somebody after a suspect test result, then another 9/10 months to get them in front of a tribunal either!

[Jewish-Reptile]

Haven't heard them.. Will give it a hear..

Well worth a listen, the front man is an absolute toilet head but the main man on guitar is lethal he ain't no Slash but very melodic, John Squires I believe. Ian Brown the vocalist I suspect he has something wrong with him mentally, we shouldn't be too critical as it's likely genetics, same with the Fluff Furry's, when your mother is also your aunt you've really come from a life of adversity.

The first two albums are real stand outs if memory serves.

[Cheek busting]

Sorry mate, I've no idea about those two questions. I've never heard of retroactive suspensions for PED abuse, but I've never heard of a testing agency taking 16 fucking months to charge somebody after a suspect test result, then another 9/10 months to get them in front of a tribunal either!

I remember when Chavez Jr. was suspended for diuretics (or maybe this was the time for weed?), he was given like a 9-month suspension.

But they retroactively applied the suspension date from the time of the failed test, so by the time they gave their ruling, he only had like three more months before he could fight again.

This happens all the time in USA with suspensions.

Not sure how it would apply with the BBBoC

[kafkod]

The Stone Roses album cover

Haven't heard them.. Will give it a hear..

Great band who kicked off the whole "Madchester" scene in the 1980's.

They were definitely on PED's doe, every one of them, every time they hit the stage or the recording studio.