By Chris Iorfida, CBA Sports
Blood thicker than bull?
It's pretty sad how many "Manny Pacquiao refusing to comply with drug testing" variants currently abound on the web and sports TV in the wake of Tuesday's announcement that a superfight with Floyd Mayweather is in jeopardy.
To sum up as shortly as possible, there is word the fight will not happen if Pacquiao doesn't agree to blood and urine testing standards similar to those followed by the World Anti-Doping Agency, and that he is apparently not interested in doing so.
Even though reliable AP fight writer Tim Dahlberg clearly explained what was happening, with the indications that this is a full-court press from the Mayweather camp, extrapolating and discerning are, like, really big words.
Pacquiao promoter Bob Arum did speak to Steve Kim of Maxboxing.com, indicating that drawing blood even several weeks away from a big competition is hazardous to an athlete's health.
Arum just turned 78. He's the same age as George Steinbrenner.
I'm pretty sure if I dug a little bit I could find quotes from Bob in 1998 predicting that the Internet was a big threat to boxing's survival. There's also probably one about a decade earlier where he espouses the way to grow the sport is to make people pay for nearly every fight they watch, and whet their appetite for the main event with really crappy undercard bouts.
Arum's not even the principal negotiator for the fight, his stepson Todd duBoef, president of Top Rank, is. So talk any statement he makes to the media in that light.
Folks, there's a good chance that Manny Pacquiao hasn't even heard all of the particulars of this demand. Given his all-encompassing status in the Philippines, he could be shooting a new movie, recording a new album, endorsing one of 185 products and services - not unlike the old Tiger Woods, who often thought Manny's brand was strained by the weight of all its unlikely extensions - having an affair (ahem), or running for office (he's got you there, Tiger).
Pacquiao has done all of these things (so 'they' say), in addition to being the most exciting big-name fighter since Mike Tyson.
Those who are adamant that there's no possible way Pacquiao has ever used PEDs are fools. We simply don't know and we've seen too many athletes from too many sports run afoul of the rules.
But let's be clear about two things: 1. Pacquiao is an extraordinary, freakish talent, and that has nothing to do with any substance; and, 2. We could say the same about dozens of fighters because boxing's testing policy has been fairly toothless.
Shane Mosley was found out not from testing but from the BALCO grand jury testimony, with the allegations he unknowingly took the clear and the cream.
Fernando Vargas was caught by state commission urine testing, but while a terrifically entertaining character, he's also someone who thought the best strategy against Tito Trinidad was to stand flatfooted and directly in front of the Puerto Rican punching machine.
Exhibiting terrible judgment, rising star Andre Ward of Oakland is one of a handful of athletes currently being consulted by former BALCO chief Victor Conte.
Boxing should definitely strengthen its ability to test fighters, and look at any safety issue that can jeopardize a fighter. Obviously, it's a brutal sport.
Enforcement, in the long run, is another issue. What happens if a fighter doesn't give a blood sample?
There's no other sport where an entire event, encompassing millions of dollars in promotion, betting, tourism and on and on, rests on the participation of just two individuals. We'll still have a Super Bowl if Peyton Manning gets injured or finally loses a game.
We saw it just four months ago in a different vein when the honourable Mayweather decided he didn't give a damn about a catch weight obligation in the contract of his fight with Juan Manuel Marquez.
What were the choices when he weighed over the agreed limit? What real choice is it to hold your nose and go ahead with the bout while fining the fighter, or to cancel it, causing financial pain all around the board and putting another blight on the sterling reputation of the sport.
I don't think I could say it any better than a reader who commented on the original story on CBCSports.ca, Al Kumonyu:
"Though I do believe that in the long term having pre-fight blood testing will be good for the integrity of the sport, I do not believe that Mayweather has boxing's integrity in mind when he made this request."
Please don't apply for my job, Al.
This fight has to happen. Not for boxing's sake, but for Mayweather's. It may not be in March, and there's a sliver of a chance not even in the next calendar year (we've seen bigger delays in boxing).
Heck, you may even read just minutes after printing out and laminating this column that the fight's been cancelled. It may very well get "cancelled" four or five times.
Mayweather may seem to be holding the hammer now. But if he nixes a fight with Pacquiao and his plan B doesn't include Mosley (presuming he beats Andre Berto in January) no one in boxing will care how high-minded his principles sound.
Source: cbc.ca
No comments:
Post a Comment