Headline NewsPro News

WBC claim McMahon withdraws Munoz appeal

The WBC have released a statement revealing that Christina McMahon has withdrawn her appeal against the Zulina Munoz result. McMahon challenged the Mexican for the WBC title in Mexico earlier this year and lodged an appeal post fight.

The Monaghan fighter, who also revealed some very worrying news about her previous world title fight in America and her treatment Stateside, raised issues regarding the lack of anti doping testing, the gloves and the judges with the WBC.

The governing body claim they investigated all issues resolved the doping question and found nothing wrong with the gloves or scoring.

However, Team McMahon requested mediation under WBC rules, but pulled out because WBC does not ultimately follow the Court of Arbitration for Sport mediation rules.

While the WBC claim McMahon and her team have accepted their ruling there seems to be some tension between the parties.

The WBC have released the following statement, which some have suggested is ‘defensive’ and even ‘disrespectful’ to McMahon.

The statement in full reads:

On March 16, 2016, the WBC received a¬†letter from Mr. Martin McMahon, husband , trainer and manager of Christina McMahon,from Ireland, appealing the outcome of¬†the voluntary defense WBC Female Super¬†Flyweight World Title bout between Christina McMahon and Zulina Mu√Īoz. In support of his protest, Mr. McMahon set¬†forth the¬†following three allegations: (1) lack of anti-doping testing; (2)¬†glove manipulation; and (3) judges‚Äô scoring.

The WBC’s preliminary investigation of what transpired the night of that fight revealed that apparently the event’s promoter failed to have the anti-doping sample collector present. Upon discovering that irregularity, and in order to attempt to remedy the situation, the promoter and the WBC Supervisor Dr. Lorenzo Soberanes, a physician and very experienced supervisor, attempted to obtain anti-doping cups.  Due to the late hour (almost 3 AM), they could only obtain cups that were not suitable to perform the on site post-fight anti-doping tests.

Accordingly, and in light of Mr.¬†McMahon‚Äôs protest,the WBC ordered¬†Champion Zulina Mu√Īoz to take an anti-doping test immediately ¬†after¬†receiving the McMahon protest and confirming the facts with the fight supervisor. The test¬†was performed and came back negative in all counts.

At the same time the WBC appointed an officials‚Äô panel to review the fight`s video. ¬†The panel‚Äôs¬†report came back consistent with the official judges‚Äô¬†scoring of the bout, with a unanimous report in favor of Mu√Īoz .

Also the WBC Investigated the allegations concerning the gloves that were provided to the fighters at the dressing room.  After interviewing WBC officials present at the bout,including referee Rocky Burke from USA,  the WBC found no evidence that anyone had tampered with the gloves in any form or manner.

Upon learning of the WBC findings, the McMahon camp requested a mediation under the WBC Rules & Regulations.  Pursuant to Rule 5.2 of the WBC Rules & Regulations, the WBC instituted its pre-mediation procedures. The WBC communicated the procedure that would be followed pursuant to its Rules & Regulations. On April 27, 2016, Mr. McMahon communicated to the WBC that they were withdrawing from the WBC mediation process.

The WBC has supported Ms. McMahon’s boxing career. On May 2, 2015, she fought for the WBC Interim World Bantamweight Championship after coming from a 2-year absence from the ring. After winning that bout by majority decision, Mr. McMahon’s opponent protested the outcome based on an allegation of inconsistent scoring.

The WBC reviewed the bout, confirmed Ms. McMahon’s win and ordered a rematch because it found that it was a very close and highly disputed fight.  The winner of the rematch would then become the mandatory challenger against Yazmin Rivas. The McMahon camp refused to follow the WBC order and did not agree to the WBC-ordered rematch.  In order to accommodate the McMahon camp, the WBC supported her fight against Alicia Ashley for the vacant WBC World Super

Bantamweight Championship. Ms. McMahon lost to Ashley and complained to the WBC about the commission-required medicals she had to pass in New York, which requires a special protocol for fighters older than 40 years old.  Despite her loss the WBC continued to support Ms. McMahon to challenge Zulina Munoz.

While the McMahon’s camp latest protest was based in part on anti-doping, they justified withdrawing from the WBC mediation process alleging that the WBC does not ultimately follow the Court of Arbitration for Sport mediation rules.

The WBC Rules¬†& Regulations must govern¬†mediation because anti-doping issue are expressly¬†excluded from mediation under CAS. ¬†CAS Mediation Rule, Section A, Article¬†1, states: ‚ÄúDisputes¬†related to disciplinary matters, such as doping¬†issues‚Ķ are excluded from CAS mediation.‚ÄĚ The WBC mediation¬†process, to the contrary, permits¬†mediation to address disputes related to¬†doping issues. In short,the McMahon camp¬†rejected the form of alternate dispute resolution that actually¬†would have¬†provided it the opportunity to pursue its protest.

It is very unfortunate that the honorability of champion Zulina Mu√Īoz who has defended the WBC title 10 times and has always been and example inside and outside the ring.

The WBC has accepted the withdrawal of the McMahon camp’s protest with prejudice and considers the matter closed.


Integral part of the Irish boxing community for over 13 years