Enzo Maccarinelli handed six month drugs ban

[Beanz]

SPOT THE DIFFERENCEBOXER 1

"I had to make money and the mind-frame I was in at the time dictated my actions....
In the past I saw idols of mine being found guilty of using performance enhancing drugs, the likes of Shane Mosley, Evander Holyfield and James Toney (twice) and upon seeing the punishments they were handed, I thought that I could do the same and be unlikely to get caught or receive the same punishment "

“Yes I had been doping for six years but for most of you guys to think my opponents were not because of their physiques is quite ridiculous. Although I will not mention any names the majority of the boxers you all love so dear are on the stuff, fact and this is from me talking to them, seeing them buy the stuff or talking to their training personnel. Cheating is when you are the only person doing something and since I know that I wasn’t the only person doing it, it can’t be defined as cheating.
“A large minority if not majority of boxers are doping and the naivety of the public to think that mine is an isolated case is staggering. Also I am surprised I get so much stick but the guys I look up to in the sport like Roy Jones, Shane Mosley and James Toney who have all been caught don’t get as much stick.”

BOXER 2

"I have been tested over 20 times in my career and have never failed any random or post-fight doping test, but on this occasion, due to my naivety, I have tested positive for a banned substance.I am very conscious of my reputation within the sport of boxing and even prior to the decision, that has been released, I promised to fully accept any punishment that was given as a result of this positive test,...Furthermore, I voluntarily vacated ......... to allow my opponent, ......., the opportunity to re-challenge for it whilst I serve my suspension, as I could not bear the thought of holding such a prestigious championship if anyone thought that I hadn't won it fairly."

[Memphis]

Whilst their attitudes pre and post are clearly polar opposites they both got caught taking something they shouldnt.

Whether they knew about it or not is a mute point as far as Im concerned.

Naivety isnt an excuse.

[Beanz]

Whilst their attitudes pre and post are clearly polar opposites they both got caught taking something they shouldnt.

Whether they knew about it or not is a mute point as far as Im concerned.

Naivety isnt an excuse.

You are quite correct it is no excuse. The fact remains though each case is clearly different and should be judged accordingly.

[Memphis]

In a way I see Enzo as being more stupid than Larry. Larry didnt give a shit, Enzo apparently did and still fucked up

If your job is dependant on you having a driving license and you a) Have a bottle of vodka on the go in your van/cab b) have a few pints the night before and get pinged in the morning your still just as much sacked.

[Althugz]

In a way I see Enzo as being more stupid than Larry. Larry didnt give a shit, Enzo apparently did and still fucked up

If your job is dependant on you having a driving license and you a) Have a bottle of vodka on the go in your van/cab b) have a few pints the night before and get pinged in the morning your still just as much sacked.

Exactly

I feel that people are missing the point here. I'm not comparing their attitudes on the matter. Yes, their attitudes are clearly different. It's totally obvious that Enzo was naive to the matter..I do actually believe him. Whether I'm right or wrong to do so..

BUT, you let Enzo off the hook, then you set the precedent. 6 Months? That punishment might be worth it to some boxers who now have a "cut and paste" naiveity excuse should they be caught on ANYTHING.

I'm dealing in facts here.

End of the day, BOTH fighters were on PED's against their opponent. I know that many of you feel that this endagers the opponent so why is Enzo's naiveity ok? Facts are, he took what he took and gained an "unfair" advantage. As Memphis said, naivety is no excuse. If his opponent had died and then he tested positive and cited that it was "an accident", I guarantee you'd be singing different tunes. (Not that I believe there is anymore risk of fatal injury by somebody being on something - Too many variables to make that assertion)

[Memphis]

6 months out wont disrupt Enzo's career one bit will it? Its almost pointless banning him.

For what its worth I also buy what Enzo is saying. Doesnt change anything though Im afraid.

[Althugz]

6 months out wont disrupt Enzo's career one bit will it? Its almost pointless banning him.

For what its worth I also buy what Enzo is saying. Doesnt change anything though Im afraid.

Totally - He'll be in training camp for the last 3-4 months of his ban and it's practically the amount of time off modern fighters take anyway.

[Beanz]

In a way I see Enzo as being more stupid than Larry. Larry didnt give a shit, Enzo apparently did and still fucked up

If your job is dependant on you having a driving license and you a) Have a bottle of vodka on the go in your van/cab b) have a few pints the night before and get pinged in the morning your still just as much sacked.

You haven't carried your analogy through to it's logical conclusion though. If the authorities (in this case the Police) caught you over the drink drive limit, the punishment (in this case the length of driving ban and possible imprisonment) handed out by the Magistrate would be entirely different dependent on the amount of alcohol consumed, whether you were aware of being over the limit,the amount of times you subsequently admitted to doing so, and many other extenuating circumstances. When it comes to driving, Alcohol is not a performance enhancing drug though, so the example does not really fit.

The two distinct punishments may seem entirely arbitrary until you take into account the fact that if Larry were to be given 6 months for each admitted breach he would soon tot up a sentence of 6 and a half years. Instead, despite the fact that he admitted cheating for 6 year,s he was only given a four year ban. With a BSc in Pharmaceutical chemistry he could hardly claim ignorance.

[Memphis]

In a way I see Enzo as being more stupid than Larry. Larry didnt give a shit, Enzo apparently did and still fucked up

If your job is dependant on you having a driving license and you a) Have a bottle of vodka on the go in your van/cab b) have a few pints the night before and get pinged in the morning your still just as much sacked.

You haven't carried your analogy through to it's logical conclusion though. If the authorities (in this case the Police) caught you over the drink drive limit, the punishment (in this case the length of driving ban and possible imprisonment) handed out by the Magistrate would be entirely different dependent on the amount of alcohol consumed, whether you were aware of being over the limit,the amount of times you subsequently admitted to doing so, and many other extenuating circumstances. When it comes to driving, Alcohol is not a performance enhancing drug though, so the example does not really fit.

The two distinct punishments may seem entirely arbitrary until you take into account the fact that if Larry were to be given 6 months for each admitted breach he would soon tot up a sentence of 6 and a half years. Instead, despite the fact that he admitted cheating for 6 year,s he was only given a four year ban. With a BSc in Pharmaceutical chemistry he could hardly claim ignorance.

Getting banned is the conclusion though mate isn't it. There's no legal proceedings following the punishment handed out by their professional body. If that were the case then of course, one would be handed a much harsher punishment.

Im not sure what you mean by it not being valid because booze isnt performance enhancing.?

[AdamGB]

I seriously don't know where to start with that rambling mess of a rant.

Firstly, I didn't think it was possible for your IQ to be lowered... But you seem intent on proving that a negative IQ could exist... that's one thing (the only thing) you've shown me to be wrong about.

At least you have the humility to admit that your posts are becoming stupider with each one you make.

You're right, I don't get to decide if EPO is stronger than Jack3D, or red bull, or beechams all in one, or the magic water michael jordan gave to the looney toons in space jam for that matter.

Do you know who does? The people who decided to ban enzo and poor, poor larry.

Like you seem so desperate for everybody to understand - they know it's a grey area. But you're the cretin who think such a complex issue requires black abd white punishment.

What's the agenda here? Enzo punished more or Larry less?

Lets face it, if your man crush larry hadn't been banned your opinion wouldn't be the contradictory one you hold.

You take a banned substance, you get a ban - but because everybody isn't as backwards as you the circumstances are judicated and the length of the ban decided.

And believe me, nobody wants to pick on Larry or take it easy on Enzo.

(remember you're the one with agenda)

[AdamGB]

In a way I see Enzo as being more stupid than Larry. Larry didnt give a shit, Enzo apparently did and still fucked up

If your job is dependant on you having a driving license and you a) Have a bottle of vodka on the go in your van/cab b) have a few pints the night before and get pinged in the morning your still just as much sacked.

You haven't carried your analogy through to it's logical conclusion though. If the authorities (in this case the Police) caught you over the drink drive limit, the punishment (in this case the length of driving ban and possible imprisonment) handed out by the Magistrate would be entirely different dependent on the amount of alcohol consumed, whether you were aware of being over the limit,the amount of times you subsequently admitted to doing so, and many other extenuating circumstances. When it comes to driving, Alcohol is not a performance enhancing drug though, so the example does not really fit.

The two distinct punishments may seem entirely arbitrary until you take into account the fact that if Larry were to be given 6 months for each admitted breach he would soon tot up a sentence of 6 and a half years. Instead, despite the fact that he admitted cheating for 6 year,s he was only given a four year ban. With a BSc in Pharmaceutical chemistry he could hardly claim ignorance.

Of course he couldn't. Last I checked you can get Jack3D in health food stores... Not too sure the same can be said about EPO

[Althugz]

In a way I see Enzo as being more stupid than Larry. Larry didnt give a shit, Enzo apparently did and still fucked up

If your job is dependant on you having a driving license and you a) Have a bottle of vodka on the go in your van/cab b) have a few pints the night before and get pinged in the morning your still just as much sacked.

You haven't carried your analogy through to it's logical conclusion though. If the authorities (in this case the Police) caught you over the drink drive limit, the punishment (in this case the length of driving ban and possible imprisonment) handed out by the Magistrate would be entirely different dependent on the amount of alcohol consumed, whether you were aware of being over the limit,the amount of times you subsequently admitted to doing so, and many other extenuating circumstances. When it comes to driving, Alcohol is not a performance enhancing drug though, so the example does not really fit.

The two distinct punishments may seem entirely arbitrary until you take into account the fact that if Larry were to be given 6 months for each admitted breach he would soon tot up a sentence of 6 and a half years. Instead, despite the fact that he admitted cheating for 6 year,s he was only given a four year ban. With a BSc in Pharmaceutical chemistry he could hardly claim ignorance.

Of course he couldn't. Last I checked you can get Jack3D in health food stores... Not too sure the same can be said about EPO

You simply can not read, can you you poor thing? We spoke about this earlier a few posts above, didn't we?

Pure comedy gold...

[Trecco bay]

Althugz still can't get it through his thick head , perhaps he is blinded by his infatuation with larry , that the two cases are different , that is why their bans are not the same .Larry case was part of an investigation into anobolic steriods and growth hormones that where being smuggled into the uk, and some of them could have got into gyms where young boxers could have been tempted into buying them . That is why the bbbofc reflected in their ban a longer sentence , if larry had been caught with just epo in his system he probably would have got a 6 mth ban

[Althugz]

Hey, I'm totally with you guys. I feel that Enzo took it without knowing. It was unfortunate. My point which Adam can't read either because of his immense emotional butthurt, or simple lack of reading skills is that accidental or not, he had that advantage on fight night according to the tests. You can't let him off with a 6 month ban because it sets a bad precedent. 6 months is the same as time off. Other boxers now have a blueprint to escape a true punishment.

SuperHeavy..you're correct 1-3 Dimethylanine isn't written expicitly on the banned list. However, it is another name for what he was caught for, which is on the list. That's why I suggested hiring an expert for anyone who is taking supplements in boxing. It's a shame it has to be like that but UKAD are making it that way.

[Trecco bay]

Bbc Wales . Enzo mac taken legal action against the company that makes the product also says he had email of uk doping saying that the amount in his system was so small it wouldn't have made a diffrence on fight night that's why he had 6 mth ban , he was told if it was higher he would have had a automatic 2 year ban. Hopefully with legal action company's wont advertise their products as ok for atheletes