Report: NSAC warns Eddie Hearn over handling of Chavez Jr. situation

The NSAC has objected to the way Eddie Hearn of Matchroom Sports has handled the Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. situation.

The Nevada State Athletic Commission has made it clear that Eddie Hearn of Matchroom Sports must follow Nevada law – or else.

Bob Bennett, the Commission’s executive director, sent a letter to Hearn objecting to the fact Chavez is scheduled to fight Daniel Jacobs in Phoenix even though Chavez is temporarily suspended for refusing to take a drug test in Nevada, according to a report by Thomas Hauser on BoxingScene.com.

The Chavez-Jacobs fight had been scheduled to take place in Nevada before Chavez declined to provide a test sample on October 24. The venue was then changed to Phoenix.

Bennett isn’t fooling around. He states in the letter, obtained by Hauser: “Grounds exist to bring disciplinary action against Matchroom before the NSAC. If Matchroom does not take the necessary action to come into compliance with Nevada law, our office will consider its options.”

The letter lays out Nevada law, including a portion that applies directly to this situation. It reads: “Under the Ali Act, no boxer is permitted to box while under suspension from any boxing commission due to, among other things, failure of a drug test.”

The issue is scheduled to be discussed by Nevada commissioners on November 20. Hauser explained the possible outcomes of that meeting this way:

“The NSAC placed Chavez on temporary suspension pending the result of a November 20 commission meeting. At that meeting, the five commissioners are expected to review the temporary suspension and set it down for a hearing on December 18.

“The key question is whether, in the interim, the NSAC commissioners will classify Chavez’s suspension as an administrative suspension or a suspension for refusing to submit to a sample collection. If they opt for the latter, the Arizona commission would be in violation of federal law if it allowed Jacobs-Chavez to be contested.”

Here are portions of the letter:

“Nevada law prohibits any promoter licensed by the NSAC from having any dealings related to unarmed combat with a person who has been suspended by the NSAC. Nevada law also prohibits a promoter from permitting a person under suspension from participating in any contest or exhibition of unarmed combat during the period of suspension. Any violation of Nevada or Federal law by a licensed promoter provides grounds for disciplinary action.

“In addition, under the Ali Act, no boxer is permitted to box while under suspension from any boxing commission due to, among other things, failure of a drug test. Under Nevada law, an unarmed combatant that refuses to submit to the collection of a sample or specimen upon the request of the NSAC or its representative, or otherwise evades the collection thereof, has committed an anti-doping violation and is subject to disciplinary action just as he or she would be if he or she failed a drug test.

“Based on Matchroom’s ongoing dealings with Chavez while he has been on suspension, it is apparent that Matchroom has violated Nevada law. Further, given that Chavez’s suspension is based on his refusal to submit to a drug test requested by the NSAC, and thus an anti-doping violation, it is apparent that the event scheduled to occur in Arizona on December 20, 2019, is in violation of the Ali Act. As such, Matchroom is promoting an event that potentially violates federal law.”

The letter goes on:

“On November 7, 2019, I contacted Shaun Palmer, Matchroom’s Head of Legal and Business Affairs, and informed him of the legal issues with Matchroom’s dealings with Chavez discussed herein. I further informed him of the potential consequences should Matchroom not take corrective measures to comply with Nevada law, including that a violation of Nevada law would be considered by the NSAC when deciding whether to renew Matchroom’s promoter’s license.”