If you watch these arguments for who changes what is said and takes evidence of occurrence to a sarcastic “all” to dismiss the witnessed evidence then you know who has a poor argument.

Fact is UKAD created a real issue for UK fighters in their policy. The only champions that will travel to the UK right now are those that are absolutely sure they are significantly better than their opponent or getting paid through the roof. Until they inform opponents of failed drug tests anyone will be justified in refusing to travel. Contract or not. Does anyone really believe if a fighter fights their contract in court with the argument “they are willing to put me in with a fighter they know is on PEDs without telling me” that said fighter will lose their case? Eddie wouldn’t even take it to court it’s so easy to see the outcome. So what about the commissions, does anyone think they are eager to side with UKAD not informing them?

But let’s say the commissions do strip Ruiz, has it hurt Fury? Can’t Fury get a big fight any time he wants? Don’t they call him the champion without a belt? So wouldn’t they call Ruiz a champion without belts? Who really gets hurt most if Ruiz is stripped? Ruiz, who could still have a PPV with Wilder or Joshua twice going around picking up another mans belts? Maybe you can pick up another mans belts once without a stigma but twice, I don’t know man. I think that puts him in a very bad light.