Benn cleared to return to WBC rankings following 'eggs' explanation

Conor Benn cleared to return to WBC rankings after their inquest into his failed drugs tests before cancelled Chris Eubank Jr fight rules that his ‘highly-elevated consumption of EGGS’ may have been the cause

• Conor Benn failed two drugs tests prior to his fight with Chris Eubank Jr 
• He submitted a 270-page document to the WBC to try and clear his name
• The WBC feel that he provided a ‘reasonable explanation’ for the failed tests 

Conor Benn has been allowed to reclaim his place in the World Boxing Council rankings after the sanctioning body controversially ruled on Wednesday that his positive drugs tests may have been caused by eating too many eggs.

In a verdict that has raised eyebrows around the sport, the WBC accepted that the first of his failed tests for clomiphene, collected by the Voluntary Anti-Doping Association in July, could have been the consequence of a diet in which Benn was apparently eating up to 34 eggs a week.

The WBC found ‘there was no conclusive evidence that Mr Benn engaged in intentional or knowing ingestion of clomiphene’, but in a striking development they disclosed that contamination had not actually been the primary thrust of his defence, which favoured attacking VADA’s testing processes.

Indeed, having rejected those criticisms from Benn’s legal team of VADA, the WBC claimed in a statement on Wednesday it was only at the beginning of this month that the fighter’s lawyers provided a detailed breakdown of the fighter’s nutritional consumption, meaning the gap between the delivery of key evidence and the verdict of a complex case was barely three weeks. Prominent figures in boxing have privately queried the robustness of the WBC investigation.

The WBC ruling made no reference to Benn’s second positive for the same substance in September, which was first revealed by Sportsmail and led to the postponement of Benn’s October fight with Chris Eubank Jr.

The WBC believe Conor Benn provided a ‘reasonable explanation’ for his failed drugs tests

The WBC has also concluded Benn didn’t intentionally ingest the banned substance clomifene

Despite the WBC using their limited remit to clear Benn to return to their welterweight rankings, the 26-year-old, who has vociferously protested his innocence, is still not free to fight on a British Boxing Board of Control show in this country owing to the ongoing parallel investigation by UK Anti-Doping.

In a feisty statement on Wednesday night, the Board general secretary Robert Smith said: ‘The BBBoC has adopted the UK Anti-Doping rules, and those formed part of the rules to which Mr. Benn was bound. As such, the decision of the WBC does not affect the ongoing implementation of the BBBoC’s rules.

‘The UK Anti-Doping rules make clear what conduct constitutes an anti-doping rule violation as defined in those rules (and in the World Anti-Doping Code) and specifically set out the circumstances in which such violations can be committed by way of strict liability.’

The principle of strict liability is defined by UKAD as meaning an athlete is solely responsible for what appears in their system, regardless of how it got there. By contrast, the WBC were satisfied there was no intent from Benn to dope. UKAD have not commented.

Smith added: ‘The BBBoC has not been party to the review conducted by the WBC and has not been provided with sight of any evidence submitted on Mr Benn’s behalf.’

In its statement, the WBC said: ‘On August 23, 2022, the Voluntary Anti-Doping Association notified Mr Benn and the World Boxing Council that the urine A Sample collected from him on July 25, 2022, in connection with his participation in the WBC/VADA anti-doping testing program yielded an adverse analytical finding for Clomiphene and its hydroxymetabolites MI and M2.

‘Clomiphene is a metabolic modulator which promotes testosterone production and boost testosterone levels while burning fat.

‘On August 30, 2022, the WBC notified Mr Benn of the Adverse Finding and requested information and materials necessary to investigate the circumstances thereof. The WBC did not receive a substantive response until December of 2022.

‘Mr Benn denied at all times the intentional or knowingly ingestion of any banned substances. His defence against the Adverse Finding centered on allegations of potential laboratory analysis failures and irregularities in connection with the analysis of his samples and of the results of the samples’ testing. 

The WBC consulted several experts in anti-doping laboratory analysis, including an expert consultant with over 30 years of experience in WADA and IOC accredited laboratory settings. 

The WBC concluded that there was absolutely no fault attributable to the laboratory that analyzed Mr. Benn’s samples. Further, the WBC reaffirms the unquestionable integrity of VADA and the sample collection agencies and laboratories which services VADA.

Benn’s fight with Chris Eubank Jr was cancelled after the former failed two drugs tests

‘It was not until early January of 2023, that the WBC Results Management Unit was able to undertake the full, substantive analysis of Mr Benn`s arguments and defenses. On January 26, 2023, members of the WBC Results Management Unit held an inquiry session with Mr Benn and members of his legal team. In early February of 2023, Mr. Benn’s team for the first time provided a detailed breakdown of Mr. Benn’s diet and supplement consumption that could have directly affected the Adverse Finding.

‘The WBC availed itself of the services of an expert nutritionist. The WBC experts provided information about the characteristics of the substance at issue in this case and examples of similar adverse findings in several sports, under a diverse number of anti-doping programs.

‘The WBC Board of Governor’s ruling was based on: (1) the facts as known to the WBC at the time of the ruling; (2) any extenuating circumstances applicable to the specific case at hand; (3) WBC rulings in precedential anti-doping violation cases; (4) the unbiased, common-sensical and just analysis and recommendations of the WBC Results Management Unit; and (5) credible and reliable health-related and scientific literature.

‘The WBC found that: (1) there was no conclusive evidence that Mr Benn engaged in intentional or knowing ingestion of Clomiphene; (2) there were no failures in the procedures related to sample collection, sample analysis, or violations of Mr Benn’s B Sample rights that would justify questioning or invalidating the Adverse Finding; and (3) Mr Benn’s documented and highly-elevated consumption of eggs during the times relevant to the sample collection, raised a reasonable explanation for the Adverse Finding.’

Source: Read Full Article