Conor Benn could be banned for up to four years after the UK Anti-Doping Agency vowed to launch an investigation into his failed drugs test.
Benn tested positive for a banned substance two weeks before he was due to take on Chris Eubank Jr in a grudge fight which had reignited the feud between the families. The test was carried out by the Voluntary Ant-Doping Agency which has no authority to investigate Benn but which will, according to the Daily Mail, co-operate with UKAD.
Benn could ultimately be slapped with a ban if found guilty of wrongdoing having tested positive for clomifene, a drug used in fertility treatment for women but which can also boost testosterone production in men. Benn, 26, has insisted he is innocent but has offered no explanation as to how the drug entered his system.
Benn said in a statement on Thursday: "I am truly gutted that we are unable to make this fight happen on Saturday. And I am sorry for everyone that has been affected by the postponement. I am still completely shocked and surprised by this and it has been a tough couple of days. My team and I will consider the next options, including rescheduling the fight. But my immediate focus is on clearing my name because I am a clean athlete."
Co-promoters Matchroom and Wasserman Boxing conceded defeat in their attempts to stage the catchweight meeting at the O2 Arena in defiance of the British Boxing Board of Control, declaring it was “prohibited” and “not in the interests of boxing”. The BBBofC acted after it was revealed on Wednesday that trace amounts of fertility drug clomiphene, which elevates testosterone levels in men, had shown up in a recent test by the Voluntary Anti-Doping Association (VADA).
Should Conor Benn vs Chris Eubank Jr be rescheduled? Let us know in the comments section below
Hearn stressed that Benn has not been suspended for the doping violation and in a statement released in conjunction with Wasserman Boxing, blamed the sport’s governing body for the postponement. It is undeniable that the British Boxing Board of Control’s decision to withdraw their sanctioning was procedurally flawed and without due process,” the statement read.
“That remains a legal issue between the promoters and the Board which we intend to pursue. However, whilst there are legal routes to facilitate the fight taking place as planned, we do not believe that it is in the fighters’ interests for those to be pursued at such a late stage, or in the wider interests of the sport.
"As promoters, we take our obligations and duties very seriously, and a full investigation will now need to take place.” Wasserman Boxing’s Kalle Sauerland described the actions of the BBBofC as “totally inappropriate”.
