Conor Benn’s grudge match against Chris Eubank Jr on Saturday has been postponed due to his positive drugs test.
Here the PA news agency examines the current situation.
What has happened?
Fight preparations were thrown into turmoil when it was revealed on Wednesday that a number of weeks ago Benn had retuned an adverse finding for the banned substance clomiphene in a test conducted by the Voluntary Anti-Doping Association (VADA). The British Boxing Board of Control (BBBofC) responded by declaring the fight “prohibited”, but co-promoters Matchroom and Wasserman Boxing have been lobbying behind the scenes to have the fight staged as scheduled. On Thursday afternoon they conceded defeat.
What is clomiphene?
A fertility drug, clomiphene has the capacity to significantly elevate testosterone levels in men. It is banned in and out of competition. Benn was 146.5lbs when he crushed Chris van Heerden in April and was due to fight Eubank at the catchweight of 157lbs.
Was postponing the right decision?
Having called off the fight, promoter Eddie Hearn said: “I hope you feel that the correct action has been taken.” It was the only course of action – the question is why did it take so long? While Matchroom and Wasserman Boxing attempted to salvage the contest, boxing’s battered reputation was being picked apart by the mere consideration of allowing a fighter who has tested positive to enter the ring.
What happens now?
An immediate refund has been promised to fans who have paid for tickets, pointing to the prospect of the fight being rescheduled overseas, possibly in Abu Dhabi or Germany. Hearn is determined for it to go ahead and both fighters want the pay day and the opportunity to continue their fathers’ rivalry from the early 1990s.
Could Benn be in trouble?
Benn is likely to face a disciplinary hearing at the BBBofC and possibly UK Anti-Doping, but legal action could delay that in time for him to fight elsewhere. The 26-year-old is not currently suspended, a point Hearn has repeatedly made.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here