The league learnt almost 14 months ago of allegations that the former No.1 draft pick Whitfield had sought to avoid drug-testers and moved for a short period into the home of then Greater Western Sydney welfare boss Craig Lambert.

The evidence strongly suggested Lambert had responded in the Giants' then chain of command to to his football boss Graeme Allan. The incident took place in May 2015 and Whitfield had an illicit drug issue.

When Whitfield spent those nights in the Lamberts' home, he did not follow drug policy protocols by informing the relevant authorities.

There is a suggestion he was advised not to do so.

The climate at the time was shrouded in some paranoia for players after Collingwood pair Josh Thomas and Lachlan Keeffe had tested positive to performance-enhancing substances as a result of illicit drug use.

And Whitfield had a girlfriend who initially approached the club through concern for his welfare. Now, given the strength of text message evidence she has in part provided, she is being presented in some circles as a woman scorned.

And yet even allowing for the climate created by the Collingwood pair, this was bungling of the highest order. There was no suggestion there was to be a drug test, none arrived at Whitfield's home and what could perhaps have resulted in a positive strike now sees the player facing a lengthy ban of two to four years. Allan and Lambert face the same penalty if the allegations are proven. Were they even aware of the drug code rule they were potentially breaking? Or the potential penalties?

Although GWS ordered an independent investigation at the behest of CEO Dave Matthews and his then director and integrity committee chair Gabrielle Trainor, the club did not have the resources of the AFL which has spent at least a year delving into this sorry case.

The Giants cleared all three individuals, who all protested their innocence, but the club had also immediately referred the case to head office which, with the approval of the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority, seized mobile telephones and laptops from the player and two officials in an attempt to analyse and rebuild data. The trio were all interviewed at length.

It is the understanding of Fairfax Media that the AFL was armed with sufficient information as early as late June this year and has been unclear on its next move for at least a month, but at any rate has stalled on taking action. The league will surely offer some explanation for this, but it looks strange. That the story has emerged in this, the celebration week of football, presents as dreadful timing.

In a statement issued late on Tuesday, the league said: "The AFL will now forward its completed brief to the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority.

"The AFL has no further comment to make at this time while the investigation and determination process is ongoing."

While Collingwood was aware that Allan was being investigated by the AFL when it employed him, claiming his role was to set up its women's side and netball club, surely the league should have made the Magpies fully aware of the allegations against him. It is a poor look that the competition allowed the appointment.

The same applies to Lambert at the Brisbane Lions. He has been placed in charge of welfare on a three-year contract at a time when the club fights an uphill battle to retain its players and remains reliant on remaining viable through AFL funding. That these two men stand even accused of a such a botched operation and lack of integrity should surely have been made clear to the clubs employing them.

Both the Lions and Magpies say they were made aware the respective employees were being investigated but not the full extent of the allegations. Both Lambert and Allan have protested their innocence and did so again on Tuesday.

Club and AFL officials now face fines of up to $250,000 for leaking any information regarding illicit drugs and yet intrigue surrounds the source of the leak and it motivation.

Collingwood is internally torn as their season comes to a close and when they should be looking forward to a 2017 filled with hope.

Instead it is a club shrouded in mistrust and disappointment over the treatment of Neil Balme, who could well depart as a result of the Allan appointment. This is despite Balme's close relationship with coach Nathan Buckley.

Allan was McGuire's captain's pick. Could someone at the Holden Centre be looking to discredit Allan? Or McGuire?

Lambert has had a problematic first season back in Brisbane where his close friend Justin Leppitsch was this week sacked as coach. He does not like hearing this, but the welfare manager has clashed with various personnel and his style has upset others. He is contracted for a further two years.

Or GWS which remains highly suspicious of Allan's dealings with Collingwood in the Adam Treloar trade. While highly praiseworthy of his choice of coach Leon Cameron, and the list and draft selections he has created for the Giants, there has been some mess left behind and the club remains cynical regarding his negotiations with McGuire.

Still, the club did not need this on the eve of its first final on the day the New South Wales Premier was lauding the strength of the AFL in his state. The question aimed at Matthews is why were Allan and Lambert not sanctioned for hiding the incident regarding Whitfield for close to two months. The club claims they were strongly rebuked but nothing more.

On the upside for GWS, there is no suggestion the club will be sanctioned and the player concerned has been portrayed in some informed circles as a troubled kid under the influence of drugs badly advised by his team bosses.

In short, this unfortunate revelation on the eve of September has exposed festering sores in three states and with various axes to grind. And the AFL, which has previously called out ASADA for its long delays, for such a procrastinated investigation. By any measure it fails the pub test.