Preferential treatment was a narrative, fairly or not, in the reaction to, and coverage of, Sinner’s ongoing saga.

His legal team successfully argued the contamination came through his then-physiotherapist, Giacomo Naldi, who used an over-the-counter healing spray called Trofodermin, which contained clostebol, to treat a cut on his finger.

Naldi continued to massage Sinner without gloves during that time. Sinner avoided a ban, but WADA has appealed that decision, meaning his nightmare is far from over.

Experts with all the facts and evidence will determine these cases – but scepticism is rife partly because of the secrecy that initially surrounded them. Perceptions matter.

Loading

Lesser-known British player Tara Moore, who lost 19 months of her career because of her own positive test to a banned substance before eventually proving her innocence, has become the face of the alternative scenario to the Sinners and Swiateks.

Perhaps no sport has such a divide between the haves and have-nots as tennis.

The speed of being able to identify the reason for the alleged contamination is key here.

It’s much easier to do that if you are a wealthy player with a huge support team to turn to, unlike peers such as Moore, who is ranked 268 in the world.

Loading

Moore was still trying to investigate the cause of her positive test when her provisional suspension was announced. It was not until 19 months later that a panel found contaminated meat was to blame, and the ITIA subsequently lifted her ban.

How tennis handles provisional suspensions and subsequent announcements – given there is no umbrella WADA policy – must now be reviewed, after two of the sport’s biggest names became entangled in a drug-related mess that will forever be part of their legacies.

There are other talking points around athlete responsibility for what they expose themselves to, or even how sporting organisations can better protect their players.

However, the issue of transparency is at the forefront. Lack of it undermines trust in the system, and fuels cynicism.

A sporting universe forever sceptical after Lance Armstrong’s drug-fuelled cycling heroics went undetected for so long needs to feel some comfort that the overlords responsible for clean competition can be trusted.

Anyone who tests positive for a banned substance, and is provisionally suspended, will always deal with accusations of being a drug cheat, regardless of the explanation or findings.

But not all of them have equal opportunity to almost-instantly defend themselves and keep their drug-related nightmare private.

One way to level the playing field is to make all provisional suspensions public immediately, although that is not a problem-free solution either.

But the current process is flawed, and the players impacted, and the fans, are losing each time.