The ban and the subsequent reversal of it highlights dangerous neglect on the part of the PCB and team management in ensuring that players were constantly kept aware of doping issues © AFP

Laugh, cry, pull out hair, or applaud? It's difficult to know exactly what to do with the decision of the appellate committee to completely overturn the bans imposed on Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif by a previous tribunal.

Set aside details for a moment: the first broad message conveyed - possibly the most significant - is that two players who have tested positive for a banned substance have been let off without any punishment at all. Even granting them the benefit of doubt and acknowledging that there was no intent, nothing at all, not even a piddling fine or a slap on the wrists? For ignorance at least? What that says to young cricketers in Pakistan is frightening. The more cynical might extend it and argue that Shoaib Akhtar can have a suspect action, test positive for drugs and tamper with the ball (he's been caught twice and Sky TV caught him doing something suspicious with the ball in an ODI in England this summer) and still have an international career.

For Pakistanis who are celebrating this decision, they should first cast a sombre glance at the cases of Meherullah Lassi and Faisal Karim. They are possibly Pakistan's best boxers, among the region's cream as well, and they have just been handed life bans by the Pakistan Boxing Federation for testing positive for use of cannabis. The cases and circumstances differ but seen together, the message Pakistan sports sends out is inconsistent.

Now in the details, the messages are equally mixed. In effect, one committee has referred to international regulations, claimed ignorance is no excuse, and punished the players. Another committee subsequently claims that ignorance is an excuse and that local regulations should be applied, which duly exonerate the players.

Which of the committees was right? I admit I thought the first one had got the decision correct, firm but fair. But Intikhab Alam's comments a day after the decision, regarding Shoaib in particular and how he had to be made an example of for his lifestyle if nothing else, discredited his own verdict badly.

The second committee also has a point - this was an internal matter they argued and thus any judgment should have been based on internal codes. But one of the committee's members, Danish Zaheer, a medical expert, has expressed serious dissent with the judgment. As well as saying that the testing procedure was flawed, he also claims that the 'exceptional circumstances' (possible contamination of nutritional supplements used by the players with banned substances) by which the players were absolved were never authentically proved to the appellate committee. The supplements were never provided for analysis, as they have been in other cases where a drugs ban has been overturned, so how was a conclusion reached?

At least on one point both committees agreed and that is the failure of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) - not specific regimes but as a generic administration - in all this. For starters, the lawyers representing Shoaib have insisted that the PCB's anti-doping regulations are, to put it mildly, laughably flimsy, vague and completely out of sync with international codes. The deeper malaise is that they don't seem to have ever treated the issue of doping with any great seriousness. Both reports highlight dangerous neglect on the part of PCB officials and members of the team management in ensuring that players were constantly kept aware of doping issues. Neither the anti-doping officer (yes, there is one) nor the physiotherapist or the trainer has taken responsibility for dispensing information on doping; they have passed the buck and it hasn't stopped anywhere.

In all this, there is an uneasy question for the game as a whole: how can cricket operate with such a wide divergence in the doping policies of a national board and the body that runs cricket? It is a divergence wide enough for one set of rules to impose a harsh punishment and another to completely absolve them.

What happens, as one reader rightly asked, if the players test positive during the ICC World Cup now, knowing that nandrolone remains traceable in the bloodstream for a considerable period of time after it has been ingested?

Undoubtedly, the ICC and WADA will have their say over the next couple of days, but perhaps they should first reflect on the need to align cricket's policies as a whole and ensure that one code applies to all cricketers, as it does to athletes. What happens, as one reader rightly asked, if the players test positive during the ICC World Cup now, knowing that nandrolone remains traceable in the bloodstream for a considerable period of time after it has been ingested?

Indeed, is there any sense in only instituting dope tests during major events as they currently do? What is preventing them from instigating testing during bi-lateral series and tours, or for ODI tournaments not organized by the ICC? Is it not their duty to keep a tighter vigil on such issues?

Of course, the other lasting message that will resonate around the world is that the whole affair gives off the nasty odour of a PCB sham, from start to finish. People will not delve into details and legal lacunae in the two reports. They will simply see that two key players tested positive for substance abuse, were banned and then reinstated with crucial assignments on the horizon. In any language, that is a sham. Laugh, cry, pull out hair, or applaud? Do it all. In unison.

'He drinks alcohol, has an active sex life and he's been part of anti-doping awareness programmes' - Intikhab Alam on Shoaib Akthar © Getty Images

"We didn't have any doubts in our minds about what we have announced," Intikhab, the former Pakistan captain, told Bigstarcricket. "They were not able to convince us of their innocence. It was crystal clear. They admitted themselves that they had been taking dietary supplements. They are both adults and players have to be responsible for their own actions. Sometimes you have to take these decisions. We have done a good job."

Intikhab was certain that the tough, albeit sad, decision had to be taken as it would set an example for the young cricketers of the future. "It's sad that it happened but now the youngsters coming up will be very, very careful. We had to set an example.

"If the players just got their strength from good old-fashioned fitness work and didn't abuse their bodies with these supplements, they would still be playing."

Intikhab also said he didn't know why the two players declined the chance to give a second B test and suggested the only reason could have been that their retest would also have been positive.

Intikhab rubbished speculations that the panel was unfairly harsher on Akhtar than Asif. "If people read our statement they will understand," Intikhab asserted. "He [Shoaib] drinks alcohol, has an active sex life and he's been part of anti-doping awareness programmes. Shoaib has been around for the last ten years and the written statement that his spokesman gave about him taking dietary supplements and not consulting a doctor, shows he was negligent."

On Asif he said: "We decided to ban him for a year because his English is not that good, he comes from a remote village where he would not have been educated on the dangers of drugs in sport and so he doesn't understand."

Kamran Abbasi

Wings spread in celebration of a kill will become the stuff of legend © Getty Images

Icarus flew too close to the sun but he had nothing on Shoaib Akhtar. The Rawalpindi Express, the world's fastest bowler, the world's flashiest cricketer. The man who flew too close to the sun too often has finally set fire to his wings and will fly no more. The sight of
Shoaib spreading his wings in celebration of a kill will become the stuff of legend, a DVD classic, a spook story that mothers will tell their would-be superstar children: "Lose touch with your humility,your senses, and your mortality, and you will end up like him, the man from Rawalpindi, whose pride knew no bounds and whose stupidity knew
no limits."

For let's be clear, this is no two-year ban for Shoaib Akhtar this is a life sentence. Pakistan cricket has lost its most exciting bowler and the world has lost a great entertainer. Worse still, with the ban on Shoaib and Mohammad Asif, Pakistan are no longer serious contenders for the next World Cup, unless one of their many reserves grows in stature by several miles over the next months. On the evidence of the Champions Trophy and this summer's tour of England, such an outcome is not worth a wager.

Shoaib began with great promise, a bug-eyed, floppy-haired, handy-bendy, lightning-fast showman. The run up was exhilarating, the effort exhausting. The ball was full, fast, and
swinging. The celebration and the agony were sheer entertainment. The stress on his body and the recurrent injuries were evidence enough of the huge price he paid for becoming the world's first 100mph bowler.

But despite his high speed Shoaib rarely struck you as an athlete who looked after his body -- although the drugs inquiry has revealed a bewildering cocktail of potions that Shoaib and his gormless advisers pumped into his body. A member of Mensa would have struggled to know
what was in that cornucopia of medicines and bodybuilding pills.

Indeed, the first half of Shoaib's career was a bizarre obsession with breaking the 100mph barrier as if it mattered more to him than taking wickets

Fast life, fast bikes, and fast bucks were part of the package, the package that propelled him to break the speed limit also propelled him to madness elsewhere. Indeed, the first half of Shoaib's career was a bizarre obsession with breaking the 100mph barrier -- as if it mattered more to him than taking wickets -- interspersed with bad boy behaviour of rock star proportions. Once he had the record you hoped he would move on, and he did in a Shoaib kind of way, promising more control and less addiction to speed. Yet, right to the end, the injuries disturbed his career, the rumours of late-night partying -- to the detriment of his cricket -- hounded him, and the promise of going faster continued to spew from his lips.

Perhaps more than any Pakistan cricketer, Shoaib has divided opinion.Is he villain or hero? Is he master-blaster or high-class fool? The best guess is that he is probably both, a classic flawed genius, a unique talent balanced on the edge of ecstasy and damnation. Whatever
he was, we must not forget that there were times when Shoaib was very very good, the most feared fast bowler on the planet, and as big a box-office draw as you could hope to find. Shoaib was good for cricket but his cricketing success ruined him.

The box-office draw © Getty Images

Shoaib emerged under the shadow of Wasim Akram and Waqar Younis, but he held his hero to be Imran Khan. For much of his early career his selection was not automatic, Pakistan's legends were not willing to be dislodged and Shoaib at times complained that he was being wasted. But when he bowled Sachin Tendulkar first ball in Kolkata, you knew that the time of the Rawalpindi Express was about to come. And it did. The 1999 World Cup may have ended in calamity for Pakistan but it made Shoaib a superstar, propelling him to the first rank of the world's fast bowlers, and launching him into first place in the rankings for flamboyance. A sumptuous career beckoned, a destiny to be fulfilled.

It almost ended there though. Shoaib's action was beyond the comprehension of umpires and match referees and it was condemned as illegal. But the University of Western Australia showed that Shoaib's action was a quirk of nature, an extreme of hyperextension. It was enough to
secure his return, and perhaps one of the most memorable moments in his career followed as an Australian crowd welcomed him back to international cricket with the warmest reception that a Pakistani may have ever received there. Australia, and the world, had been attracted
to his corny "simply the best, better than the rest" rhetoric. But just like the accusations of partying without leave and of an unprofessional approach, just like the injuries and the fatigue,
complaints about his action never subsided, even after the ICC changed its throwing laws.

'A few overs of pumping energy, supreme speed, and control could bring the best teams to their knees' © Getty Images

In between all this, in between the rows with the cricket board and medical inquisitions, in between the bans for ball-tampering and unprofessional conduct, in between the Bollywood offers and the chicken dances, Shoaib remained a match-winner. The world's best teams and the world's best batting line-ups withered in the face of his thunderous assault. A few overs were all it took for Shoaib to transform the complexion of an innings, of a whole match. A few overs
of pumping energy, supreme speed, and control could bring the best teams to their knees. Reverse swing was his inheritance. Short balls were inevitable. But his slower ball became a precious deadly weapon.

For my money, Shoaib's best performance was delivered in the murderous heat of Colombo, in the face of a hammering by an Australian team in its prime, Shoaib reduced one of the finest middle-orders in
the history of Test cricket to rubble. Fifteen balls five wickets, including Ricky Ponting, Steve Waugh, Mark Waugh, and Adam Gilchrist. The Tendulkar-golden-duck series and last year's defeat of England occurred at both ends of his career and will rank as his most influential performances, each a memento of what might have been had injury, hyperextension, partying, irresponsibility, and Nandrolone not intervened.

My contention has always been that Shoaib is an outstanding talent whose failures are also the failures of management. I still believe that. But Pakistan's Icarus has crashed to Earth and we can't see his future for dust. His fans will be devastated, his enemies laughing. No kind of sporting hero takes drugs to enhance performance, and if Shoaib did that wittingly his reputation deserves to be dust too. Notwithstanding something extraordinary, this is the end of his star-crossed cricket career. What an almighty waste.

Osman Samiuddin

Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif: uncertain futures © Getty Images

In the run-up to the final verdict of the drugs tribunal on the charges laid against Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif, few bets were placed on the outcome. Some predicted harsh punishment. Others, cynically mindful of the nature of internal inquiries, thought lenient judgments would emerge, based possibly on technicalities and legal loopholes. After reading the report, however, few can argue that in accepting the tribunal's recommendations of a two-year ban for Shoaib and a one-year one for Asif, the correct decision has been taken by the PCB.

Mundane and plodding as such reports often are, this one is a must-read. Forget for a moment the minutiae and assess it as a whole. Broadly taken, it reveals a comprehensive and fair trial for both players, one where both were offered the fullest opportunity to defend themselves. Once digested, you cannot help, on the evidence presented, but conclude that a just verdict has been reached. Firm no doubt, but fair nonetheless.

In the details though, there is significance: on basis of the statements they provided, neither player conjured a satisfactory explanation, not even - some will note - that their mothers provided them with the medication. Shoaib's experience, the fact that he was a signatory to a drugs awareness programme the PCB organised in 2002, worked against him. He delayed in giving a sample, admitted to using an array of supplements, vitamins and medication, some of which he didn't name. He was vague about whom he sought advice from for taking such prescriptions, claimed he hadn't seen WADA's list of banned medication provided to players and has regularly sought medical help from outside the PCB. In short, he hasn't helped his case.

Asif's background, his inexperience and his ignorance, on the other hand, has aided him. He wasn't part of the last drugs awareness programme and there appears to be some doubt about whether he received the list of banned substances. The tribunal concluded, a touch bewildered, that he probably wouldn't be able to comprehend such documentation anyway. He admitted using a protein supplement but stopped when he was told to lay off by the team's physiotherapist, but couldn't provide any defence otherwise.

Firm and fair it is, but deeply depressing also. The temptation exists to say, in Shoaib's defence, that his body is a uniquely fragile creation, wracked by genetic disabilities, worsened by the rigours of bowling at a pace few have equalled. He said just before the Champions Trophy that he dreamed of playing just one day without pain, an admission now simultaneously haunting and revelatory. The pressures of staying fit or recovering from an injury, on such a being, are unfathomable.

The temptation exists to say, in Shoaib's defence, that his body is a uniquely fragile creation, wracked by genetic disabilities, worsened by the rigours of bowling at a pace few have equalled

There remains now only a bare sense of fulfillment about a career even rock stars might think excessive, blotted as it is by injuries, suspect action, disciplinary problems and now a drugs ban. We thought he had finally settled after that astounding series against England and yet, not for the first time, we were all wrong. At 31, a two-year ban is as awful as it sounds and the fear is that his career will remain unfulfilled. Some will say good riddance, others will mourn his absence; rarely has it been different.

The tragedy with Asif is of a different kind, though tragedy it is. At the age of 23, a one-year ban is no end, but the stain will persist in every article, discussion and interview about him from hereon in. By all accounts, a potentially wondrous career awaited him, a fast bowler unique still in a country that has produced some of the breed's greatest. That he will return is not doubted but how he will respond, only he will know.

Finally, as odd as it feels, the PCB deserve tribute. Once the results of the tests had arrived, they acted swiftly. Both players were immediately called back, therefore sparing unplanned embarrassment at the hands of an ICC dope test. An independent tribunal was immediately set up and, but for an unusually long break for Eid, a verdict was reached in good time.

And face it, if a way was found to spare their two premier strike bowlers - on current form among the best in the world - you would not have been wholly surprised. Disgusted perhaps at the lack of justice, but not altogether shocked. So for accepting the tribunal's findings, further praise. Anything less would not only have been an abominable precedent for younger players, it would have reflected poorly on Pakistan and cricket in general.

Lest the board get carried away though, they should be directed immediately to point 35 of the report, which minces no words in condemning the PCB's unsatisfactory manner in advising and cautioning its players in doping matters. "We have found much 'passing of the buck' between the various PCB officials who have appeared before us," they admonish. Therein lies the tale: Yes, the crisis was handled well eventually, but really it might not be altogether bad if such crises were prevented from arising in the first place.