Appeal could save Akhtar’s career: Woolmer
PAKISTAN coach Bob Woolmer has urged his banned pacemen Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif to appeal against their respective two- and one-year bans, given that other notable sportsmen, including tennis player Greg Rusedski and sprinter Linford Christie, have escaped punishment after testing to higher levels of nandrolone.
Though accepting the decision of the Pakistan Cricket Board-appointed three-man panel, Woolmer was adamant that Akhtar and Asif should explore all options of appeal - particularly Akhtar, who now faces a premature end to his career.
Should he be successful in having his suspension halved, he would be available for Australia’s Test tour of Pakistan in early 2008, though would still miss next year’s World Cup.
“Nandrolone is a hot issue in sport at the moment, and not just in this case,” Woolmer told the Herald last night. "Both of these guys are vital to Pakistan cricket and I feel sorry for them. They would be devastated at the moment and I think they should look to appeal.
“There are many cases, up to 20, of sportsmen testing positive to nandrolone at higher levels and getting off. Rusedski and Christie are a couple. I understand the rules and the reason the tribunal banned them, but I think it would be sad to lose someone like Shoaib from the game, because he is very keen to play.”
Akhtar and Asif claimed that their positive tests were the result of nutritional supplements given to them by trainers. Akhtar also told the tribunal that he was on a high protein diet - “major portions steaks or steamed meat-mutton/beef twice daily,” according to the official report - which may also have contributed to his positive result.
But the panel, consisting of barrister Shahid Hamid, former Pakistan captain Intikhab Alam and Waqar Ahmed of the Pakistan Sports Board, found the pair guilty and suspended them.
In probing Akhtar’s medical history, the panel noted that the fast bowler was “sexually active,” and an “occasional smoker [with] past history of infrequent alcohol consumption, with a penchant for western lifestyle”.** Just what purpose those observations served in the case remains unclear.**