Who said anything about proof?The picture proves nothing - The two pics are taken from different angles, while in the first pic his biceps are covered then the second pic he is wearing a sleeveless jersey - His legs are more clearly visible in both pics and there is liitle difference in his legs - Nothing that could be considered earth shattering.
Murphy was not named at the time due to the FA's policy of not naming players who've failed drug tests. He served his ban in secret and did not play for Forest for a two month span between 6 October and 8 December 2018."Firstly, I would like to stress that the taking of recreational drugs is something that I don't condone whatsoever," Murphy said. "I served a suspension at the beginning of last season for making a bad decision while on a night out. This was an isolated incident which happened out of competition when we had no game. I immediately regretted it. I am not proud of what I did but it’s something I have put behind me as I want to concentrate on my football career."
2.10 In the event of an Anti-Doping Rule Violation being determined by a final decision in disciplinary proceedings, including any appeal proceedings, The Association shall make Public Disclosure by publishing on its website the details of the decision, including the Anti-Doping Rule Violation, the name of the Participant who committed the violation, the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method involved (where applicable), and the penalty imposed. Where the final decision is that no Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been committed, the decision may only be Publicly Disclosed, whether in its entirety or in redacted form, with the consent of the Participant. The Association shall use reasonable efforts to obtain such consent. Public Disclosure on The Association’s website of any decision pursuant to this paragraph 2.10 shall be for the longer of either one month or the duration of any suspension imposed on the Participant.
2.11 The mandatory requirement to make Public Disclosure of decisions contained in paragraph 2.10 shall not apply where the Participant who has committed an Anti-Doping Rule Violation is a Minor, or in the case of decisions finding Misconduct contrary to any of Regulations 14-17. Any publication by The Association in relation to such cases will be entirely at its discretion.
2.12 Notwithstanding paragraph 2.10, the Regulatory Commission or Appeal Board may order that some or all of the text of any decision it reaches in an anti-doping case may not be published, where there are compelling reasons not to publish. In such cases, only the outcome may be published.
36. In disciplinary proceedings brought pursuant to these Regulations, if it is found that an Anti-Doping Rule Violation has been committed, a penalty shall be imposed in accordance with Parts Six and Seven of these Regulations. Unless the Participant establishes that there are grounds to eliminate or reduce such penalty in accordance with any applicable provision of Part Eight, the Regulatory Commission or Appeal Board shall have no discretion to reduce those penalties. Subject only to paragraph 2.11 of Schedule 1 to these Anti-Doping Regulations, a mandatory element of each penalty for an Anti-Doping Rule Violation is the Public Disclosure of that penalty.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|Was there ever any doubt? (British Cycling's eSports National Champion caught weight doping with a bot!)||The Clinic||15|
|Vuelta Dope Bust!!||The Clinic||11|
|D||The funny way Impey avoided a doping ban||The Clinic||5|
|F||Doping in the Enduro World Series||The Clinic||3|
|Doping in Austria||The Clinic||147|