What on earth gives you that impression, or is it more eager anticipation?



All parties involved, who had already seen all the evidience that the shi[it[/iehawk behind sportingintelligence (as if?), has managed to scrape out of bins, has now published. They found that there was nothing to be gained from taking anything further.



Nothing's changed

I am having trouble with my weight and my Doctor put me on

Slimming tablets that have the same substance in it ..It burns off

the fat that in your food .If you eat a meal and that meal has to much fat in it

the tablet makes you go to the loo and the fat go through your body quicker,

You can see the difference in your poo (sorry if people are having tea)

But there are side effects one is Kidney/back even fatigue .and anxiety

It even say usage in sport permitted the date is stated 24/1/2012

Good job my sporting days are over

www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... story.html WOW

www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... story.html WOW

Its not about hull fc in my eyes,its this wow www.sportingintelligence.com/201 ... up-010207/

Its not about hull fc in my eyes,its this wow www.sportingintelligence.com/201 ... up-010207/

Quote PAC="PAC"Its not about hull fc in my eyes,its this wow www.sportingintelligence.com/201 ... up-010207/'" It's pure muck-racking designed to drive traffic to his site. There is no case whatsoever for UK Sport to review it's funding since UKAD has cleared the RFL of any wrongdoing. This guy is sailing close to the wind TBH.

Quote PAC="PAC"Its not about hull fc in my eyes,its this wow www.sportingintelligence.com/201 ... up-010207/'" It's pure muck-racking designed to drive traffic to his site. There is no case whatsoever for UK Sport to review it's funding since UKAD has cleared the RFL of any wrongdoing. This guy is sailing close to the wind TBH.

There is EVERY reason for Sport England to review the funding if the RFL were covering things up.

Did you miss the bit about UKAD investigating that and not pursuing any action?

No, I didn't, just because UKAD didn't decide to take action doesn't mean Sport England shouldn't revisit their decision to fund the sport with many millions of pounds of tax payers money. One minute you're bleating about someone quite rightly getting their bonus (and turning it down), the next you are happy for the state to be funding an organisation that indulged in a cover up of activities outwith the rules.

And now you're sailing close to the wind.



UKAD investigated the possibility of a deliberate cover-up by the RFL. They decided not to pursue any punitive action on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence of any such thing. The RFL are, therefore, innocent of a cover-up until somebody proves otherwise.



Sport England delegates enforcement of it's anti-doping policy to UKAD. Without any action by UKAD they have no grounds to review funding as there is insufficient evidence of any wrongdoing. Of course they could decide to overrule UKAD and their specialist legal advice to launch a doubtless costly investigation of their own, but what are the chances of them coming up with different findings when they would very likely be relying on the same legal advice that UKAD already has?



I like your straw man, BTW. You seem to be growing increasingly fond of them.

Kosh did you miss the bit about a lack of funds finishing the case?

6 figure sum spent already and not a bottomless pit unfortunatly,anyone can see why the small cover up led to a more serious one that the rfl cant admit,£28 million funding at risk,wow.

RFL is shocking in lots of things im afraid,this is just the biggest in my opinion.

Speculation intended to raise controversy where none exists. UKAD themselves tell us that it was legal advice that 'finished the case'. Apparently they are not to be trusted either.

When and is it known that Ben Westwood had failed a drugs test as well, can't recall said incident, cover up?