St Kilda forward Ahmed Saad is under AFL investigation over allegations of using a banned substance, and faces a two-year ban if found guilty.
The AFL is investigating whether Saad has breached the league’s anti-doping code after providing an irregular sample this month.
If found guilty, the 23-year-old could face a two-year ban.
“Ahmed is surprised and extremely disappointed to find himself in this position, after returning a positive sample to a substance alleged to be on the prohibited list in the AFL Anti-Doping Code,” St Kilda said in a statement released on Wednesday.
The club did not specify what the alleged banned substance was.
It said the product suspected of being the cause of the positive sample is permitted for use out of competition but is not allowed to be used in competition.
Saad has played for St Kilda for the past two seasons, playing 28 games and kicking 43 goals.
Up to now, Saad’s has been an AFL feelgood story.
Saad, who is Australian-born but spent much of his childhood in Egypt, has had a fairytale rise since only taking up Australian rules aged 16 after switching from soccer.
He is now an AFL multicultural ambassador, and has become noted for his extra-long run-up when kicking for goal.
Saad has not played for the seniors since early July when he was in the Saints’ team which lost to Fremantle.
If charged, he would face an AFL Tribunal hearing.
Under the World Anti-Doping Agency code which the AFL adheres to, use or possession of a prohibited substance can lead to a two-year ban for a first violation.
Richmond’s Justin Charles and Hawthorn’s Travis Tuck are the only AFL players to be suspended over banned drugs.
Charles was suspended for 16 weeks in 1997 for testing positive to an anabolic steroid.
Tuck was banned for 12 weeks in 2010 for registering a third strike under the AFL’s separate illicit drugs policy.
Tim
Guest
The AFL's job just got harder. It will be revealing to see how Ahmed Saad is sanctioned for his infraction, against the back drop of Jobe Watsons own admissions of ingesting a banned substance. Yet again, it would seem the AFL and a club have failed a player.
Franko
Guest
So an AFL player could do a line of coke in the toilets before running out on to the MCG, be drug-tested after the match and as it's only the 2nd time, not be sanctioned?
Jeff
Guest
Performance enhancing drugs don't have 2nd or 3rd strikes - it's zero tolerance. That's WADA and ASADA policy. Social illicit drugs - heroin, cocain etc are not under WADA/ASADA but under AFL rules and jurisdiction. That's the difference.
Franko
Guest
Is this his 3rd strike? If not, how does it differ from the illicit drugs policy? In an extreme example you could be caught taking heroin twice and not have the same scrutiny as someone who drank the wrong energy drink. Seems bizzare?