Cricket Australia review anti-doping laws after Warne controversy

A review of Cricket Australia's anti-drug policy that is underway may, in future, prevent the type of controversial ruling that has allowed Shane Warne to play charity and testimonial matches while serving a ban for drug use.

Peter Young, Cricket Australia's (CA) general manager of public affairs, told Wisden CricInfo that CA's anti-drug policy, which was based on that of the Australian Sports Commission, was under annual review. Young didn't indicate how long it would take for any possible changes to be put in place, but stressed that the Australian Cricketers' Association (ACA) would be consulted, as they were a significant stakeholder in the game.

The loopholes in the policy came into sharp focus after the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) strongly condemned the arbitration ruling which permitted Warne to train with St Kilda club, Victoria and even Australia, during his one-year ban. David Howman, chief executive of WADA, believed the wrong clause in CA's anti-drug policy may have caused the problem. He said that the arbitration decision clearly stated that Cricket Australia (CA) did have the power to enforce a ban, but the clause which it invoked - and which was in turn contested by the ACA - wasn't the one which allowed it to prevent Warne from playing.

"It [the CA] has full, unfettered jurisdiction under clause 12.4 (b) of the memorandum of understanding which states: 'Nothing in paragraph (a) above prevents the ACB from refusing to approve a player's request to play in a particular match or from imposing additional conditions upon its approval for a player to play in a particular match."

The WADA's view was criticised by Tim May, chief executive of the ACA. He said that Howman didn't appear to understand the principles behind the decision. "The arbitration was not about Shane Warne, it was about whether or not CA has the ability under its anti-doping policy to extend a ban to testimonial and bona fide charity matches. It has been proven - it does not.

"Whether the ACA, CA, WADA or the man in the street thinks that a cricketer found guilty of a breach of the anti-doping policy should or shouldn't be allowed to play in charity matches becomes irrelevant. Governing bodies can only penalise players according to the rules and agreements that exist at that time - penalties cannot be based upon the wishes and demands of people supporting some alternate policy or alternate view."

May stated that the ACA supported WADA's charter to rid the world of drugs in sport, but at the same time it supported the adherence to pre-existing agreements made between two or more parties.

Howman, meanwhile, said that while May might be doing his best for the cricketers, he needed to see the issue from an international perspective in the battle against drug use. He added that CA and the ICC needed to fall in line with the mainstream world of sports and sign up to the world anti-doping charter.