Matt Christie writes: The light at the end of the tunnel is a shortcut for both Benn and British boxing.
CONOR BENN, to his credit, chose not to be silent about the damning evidence against him. He admitted that an illegal substance – clomiphene, an estrogen blocker – was present in his system on July 25 and again on September 1. He claimed the contamination was reason. What was contaminated – samples, supplements or food – he would not disclose.
What we know so far is:
On January 19, it was announced that Benn had been dropped from the WBC rankings after failing to participate in the sanctioning agency’s Clean Boxing Program with the Voluntary Anti-Doping Association (VADA). On January 24, Benn said his team had been instructed to begin the enrollment process. A day earlier, on TalkSport, Benn called the situation a ‘disruption’ and confirmed he would return to the WBC rankings – where he was previously ranked 5th in the welterweight division – next month.
While still officially underrated by the WBC, Benn stopped Chris van Heerden for four rounds on April 16 and was then reinstated in 5th place in May. Soon after, talks about a potential domestic confrontation with Chris Eubank Jnr are said to have begun.
An official announcement was expected on July 19 but due to ongoing discussions on the terms of weight loss and rehydration, it has been postponed. A press conference was then scheduled for July 28. Three days earlier, as part of the WBC Clean Boxing Program, Benn had been inspected by VADA. The press conference did not take place – although there is no suggestion that this was due to a randomized trial.
On an unspecified date in August, Benn announced he began working with Dr Usman Sajjad, a man known for his expertise in testosterone treatments, so he could guarantee any Any supplements used are legal.
On August 9, the competition between Eubank Jnr and Benn was confirmed on October 3 in the 157lbs weight class. The terms of the rehydration clause were not disclosed – that is, we are told, it is a private agreement between the boxers. Three days later, a press conference took place to promote the event.
On an unspecified date in late August, Benn and his team were informed that clomiphene had been detected in the randomized trial he had conducted on July 25. confirmed at the time of testing so Team Eubank did not. notification of results. Board of Directors, however.
When speaking to journalists Matt Lawton and Wally Downes on October 27, Benn promised that too low a trace “has no performance benefit.” He thought it was “a faulty test.” He guided his team to solve it. He did not ask for a sample B test.
On September 1, Benn was re-examined by VADA. On September 23, the results of that test – revealed to Team Benn, Team Eubank and BBBofC – again proved that clomiphene was in Benn’s system. On September 29, Benn invited members of the media to his gym to promote his fight with Eubank. The next morning, a week after both were informed of their latest positive, the rivals appeared together on Good Morning Britain.
On the evening of October 4, the BBBofC ruled that they would ‘ban’ the fight. The parties involved were notified the next morning before the Daily Mail reported on the failed test. That afternoon, following a double statement from promoters Wasserman and Matchroom that said the fight would be for three days regardless, open exercises were held. We told the boxers we wanted to fight. Another separate arrangement in a sport should simply not allow boxers to make their own rules. No sample B is required to be tested this time.
On the afternoon of October 6, after the legal action against the Board of Directors was reviewed, advocates announced that the fight had been dropped.
On October 21, Benn will have to appear at a BBBofC hearing on an allegation of misconduct. He did not attend and gave up his license. The hearing, in which Benn was legally represented, ruled that the allegation of misconduct was upheld. That charge relates to allegations that information from the initial audit was withheld. Benn argued that it was a VADA test, under the jurisdiction of the WBC, not the Board.
Meanwhile, promoters Eddie Hearn and Kalle Sauerland insisted they were unable to pull the event due to contractual reasons. However, it is understood that the Council has fallen into a legal battle trying to find the necessary evidence. A power struggle between a governing body and the people it has the power to manage.
We do not know or why this substance found its way into Benn’s system in two separate tests 38 days apart. The warrior claims his innocence will be proven by a team of “the best scientists” he has paid to investigate. How to interpret contamination, especially considering the interval between two trials, is the crux of Benn’s case.
