EXCLUSIVE: ‘Canelo should have been given minimum two-year ban’, says former opponent Ryan Rhodes
Canelo recently tested negative for Clenbuterol in a hair follicle test at the request of Nevada State Athletic Commission but former foe Ryan Rhodes believed the ban chosen wasn’t quite enough of a punishment.
The Mexican is coming closer to proving his innocence following an alibi of contaminated meat after testing positive for Clenbuterol back in February.
In an exclusive interview, Ryan Rhodes gave his view on the ban given to Canelo by the NSAC.
“It just goes to show that money talks, he got a six-month ban so that means he could be fighting in September and I just think its a joke,” Rhodes exclusively told World Boxing News.
Rhodes who fought Canelo in 2011, described the suspension as a ‘slap on the wrist’ and the handling of a fighter in the UK testing positive for PEDs would have a different outcome.
“When people get caught over here with a banned or illegal substance in the system it’s a year to 18 months or two-year ban, minimum,” he pointed out.
“It’s a big fine, I don’t think the fine is going to make any difference to Canelo, he’s a multi-millionaire but a six month ban is a slap on the wrist, nothing more and nothing less.”
The brutality of the sport of boxing is something remembered by the former fighter and now trainer.
Scott Westgarth who passed away after his fight in February was mentioned by Rhodes when talking about the use of PED’s.
“I just find it that people at that level are taking illegal substances and as dangerous as boxing is, it was only a couple of months ago that Scott Westgarth passed away, that’s how dangerous it is.
“When fighters are taking these drugs to enhance their performance its criminal.”
Many people agreed with Rhodes’s view on the ban and speculation grew that Canelo failing a test was a chance to show how serious it was by penalising him.
Rhodes responded to this questioning by saying: “They could have made an example of him.
“They’ve got to make examples out of fighters because people are going to look at him and think as big of a name he is and as high profile he is and he’s only got a six month ban.
“It’s a completely different subject but look at Ant (From Ant & Dec) drink driving, they made a proper example of him and so they should, he’s an icon, people look up to him, they think he should be setting examples for the younger generation.
“They’ve given him a massive, massive fine and they’ve banned him for a couple or three years. That’s what Canelo should have got – a two or three year ban and a massive fine.
“It’s not a lifetime ban. When you’re given a slap on the wrist it’s not that bad of a punishment, people think they’re only going to get that.
“If people think ‘do this and my career’s finished, my life’s finished, people would think twice about it,” added Rhodes.
Chandler Waller is a staff writer for World Boxing News. Follow Chandler on Twitter @ChandlerWaller