As the Court of Arbitration for Sport confirmed WADA had requested it to find "that each of the players be found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation, and that an 'appropriate sanction' be imposed", lawyer Graham Smith said it was bewildering that the case against the Bombers had been reactivated.

The Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority had opted to not appeal the findings of the AFL anti-doping tribunal - that it could not find to its comfortable satisfaction the players had been administered a banned drug during the Bombers' 2012 supplements program - preferring to give WADA the chance to get involved, which it has.

"Is the AFL thinking about walking away from the WADA code? If not, it should be because the decision of WADA to appeal suggests a complete disregard of the interests of the AFL competition and the players," Smith said.

"I wonder whether any of the CAS arbitrators on the Australian list will accept an appointment if they take a hard look at their ethical responsibilities given the appeal has all the hallmarks of a witch hunt rather than an evidence-based consideration.

"ASADA had the right to appeal and they didn't exercise it. From the AFL's perspective, the matter should be all over. It appears to be completely unnecessary.

"I would have thought the AFL, at the very least, should be reviewing why it shouldn't break away given what has happened."

The AFL has maintained its intent is to remain WADA compliant but the AFL commission now appears likely to debate this. It should be remembered the partnership was only agreed to after significant pressure from the federal government.

The AFL has already said it is seeking feedback from all of Australia's major sports leagues in making the code more appropriate to team sports.

While CAS has indicated it could subpoena key witnesses - compound pharmacist Nima Alavi and biochemist Shane Charter through the Victorian Supreme Court - Smith, a partner with Clayton Utz and an industrial relations and employment law specialist, said that again would fail, as it had for ASADA last year before Justice Clyde Croft.

"It's exactly the same as the Croft decision. I think that will apply again. I can't see any reason why that is different with WADA," he said.

Smith said as it was not a commercial dispute, rather it was about the tripartite contract the players signed with the AFL and Essendon and "therefore you can't use the commercial arbitration act".

WADA has 10 days to present its brief of evidence to the players, with the players then given 20 days to respond. A date for a hearing will also need to be organised.

There are 19 Australians listed on the CAS database as potential arbitrators in the case which could be heard in Melbourne or Sydney. The case will be held before three arbitrators, with CAS possibly securing its selection from overseas, ensuring a fresh viewpoint.

A majority decision is accepted but if there are three different views, the chairperson can make the final call. The various parties are only told of the final decision.

David Grace QC, who had represented 32 of the 34 players, is a listed arbitrator. While he won't be asked to fill that role, Smith said there was no reason why he could not continue to represent the players.

In a statement, CAS has said "WADA requests that the CAS issue a new decision based on an appropriate burden of proof and evidentiary standards. It goes on to request that each of the players be found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation, and that an 'appropriate sanction' be imposed.

"The Australian Football League (AFL) and the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) have been nominated as interested parties and, as a consequence, may participate in the proceedings.

"The CAS arbitration procedure has been opened and the parties will exchange written submissions before a hearing is held in front of a panel of CAS arbitrators."

Essendon coach James Hird maintains he and the club are "very confident" the players were not given thymosin beta 4, even though there has has yet to be confirmation about what the players had been injected with, due largely to the Bombers' poor record-keeping.