- Joined
- Jan 24, 2015
- Messages
- 18,796
- Reaction score
- 1,430
"There were two other main takeaways from the hearing. Executive officer Andy Foster came out today and said no longer CSAC wants to defer to USADA in cases involving anti-doping. USADA is the UFCs partner and Foster said that he does not want CSAC to defer to them as far as jurisdiction any longer. He wants CSAC to be the sole arbiter of doping cases in this state, and he does not want USADA involved in deciding sanctions. We spoke to Foster and he was adamant that he no longer wants USADA to adjudicate cases involving fighters licensing in california, so a fight that may take place like the upcoming one may be affected. It will be interesting to see where things go from here because USADA has not yet commented on this new development."
"Now, i mean, its a good thing, you heard me say. The UFC has done many great things by cleaning up the sport, by hiring USADA... But the penalties, in my view, they are not always consistent, and if anything, it causes more burden for the fighter. They have to adjudicate with the comission AND they have to adjudicate with USADA. Sometimes those are the same, sometimes they are not. I say that because the process needs to be fixed. This doesnt need to keep going. Jon Jones should not had to be here twice. He should not have been through this USADA process in my view. He should have got his 15 or 18 months(...) because the substance was in his system, hes getting in trouble for it(...) But this process is not about Mr. Jones, is about any of these athletes. If you have money to fight the case, you are able to prove certain things. Here in california, we just need the results. Then we'll take it from here."
Is this the beginning of the end for USADA?
Im not so sure about the full ramifications of these events, so i hope more knowledgeable user in this forum can fill in.
Last edited: