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)


Thanks:
Likes:
Dislikes: 


Reply With Quote
Bookmarks