AHMED Saad seems certain to be delisted by St Kilda despite pleading for leniency before an AFL anti-doping tribunal.

Saad's appearance before the 5pm tribunal on Wednesday, revealed by SuperFooty, saw his lawyer Jack Rush argue for significant concessions from the maximum two-year ban.

A written finding from the three-person AFL panel headed by David Jones could take as many as eight weeks to deliver an official finding.

If he receives a doping ban Saad, 24, cannot play, train or even be paid by the Saints, who have the right to void his contract.

And with St Kilda still needing to clear another spot on its list before the December 2 final list lodgement, it seems likely Saad will make way given a long-term ban seems guaranteed.

Even if he is awarded a 12 or 18-month ban ASADA would likely appeal that finding and argue for the maximum sentence.

PICK ME: EXCLUSIVE VIDEO OF THE SPEED MACHINE THE DEES WANT

Recently married Saad, 24, took the energy drink "Before Battle" from supplements company Viking Protein, which contains WADA-banned stimulant Methylsynephrine.

Any ban will be backdated to August 20, so in theory an 18-month ban would expire by March 20, 2015 - in time for that season.

But if St Kilda delisted him in coming months it would be arguable if they would redraft a player next November who was still serving a doping ban.

ASADA, represented by Melbourne lawyer Ben Ihle, was expected to push for the full two-year ban given Saad's admission and naivety in taking the banned substance.

Saad has few grounds to avoid the full two-year ban because he had attended AFL anti-drug seminars, admits taking the substance, and used it to enhance his performance by taking it on match day.

The fact he did not know it had illegal substances could be immaterial under the anti-doping system.

The view of ASADA and the Court of Arbitration for Sport is that if you take a substance on match day with a performance-enhancing benefit, you get a two-year ban.

Saad would have to show that there were exceptional circumstances behind his doping, or that he had no significant fault or negligence.

Both of those cases would be hard to push given his case.

Both Rush and Ihle worked on Essendon's dramatic peptides case, with lawyer Jones chairing the AFL anti-doping body along with two other members.

Melbourne barrister Paul Horvath has been consulting for Viking Protein, with Saad conceding he was simply unaware there was a banned substance in the supplement.

Former ASADA boss Richard Ings says the precedent for the Saad penalty is a two-year ban, with ASADA appealing two cases involving VFL footballers to ask for the maximum ban.

St Kilda has picks 3, 18 and 19 in the November 21 national draft and will take those selections before deciding what to do with Saad ahead of the December 2 deadline.