I can’t believe I’m saying this but I agree with Nick Kyrgios.

Tennis faces a significant problem and a PR disaster over doping.

This is an issue that has been compounded by inconsistent punishments and a complete lack of transparency in the authorities’ handling of its violations.

Kyrgios has been vocal in his opinions on this, saying “it’s disgusting” that men’s world No.1 Jannik Sinner and former women’s world No.2 Iga Swiatek were handed minimal bans for their doping violations.

Sinner tested positive twice for an anabolic steroid in March and, although still faces the possibility of a suspension, he’s still playing in (and winning) grand slams. Swiatek, the Polish former world No.1, only served a one-month suspension after testing positive for a banned heart medication in August.

“I just think that it’s been handled horrifically in our sport,” Kyrgios correctly lamented

Are their rules for some not for others? Why is it some people will have years off for an “accidental” contamination (Swiatek ‘s excuse), and others get handed just a month? Where is the transparency of the investigations and uniformity of punishments?

As an athlete it is drilled in to you about fair play and what a doping violation means to you, your sport and knowing any breach can end your career. While I was playing international hockey, the punishment for deliberate doping went from a two-year ban to four years.

A doping violation can mean many things however, and this is where it gets murky.

It can mean a test is showing a banned substance but can also be because you refuse to take a test, or are not where you are say you’re going to be during a specific time of day for a random drug tests. It can mean, as in Australian Max Purcell’s case, too much of a certain liquid IV, or can be a drug that is legal out of competition but illegal in competition.

But the tennis bans still confuse me. For years as an athlete I did countless urine and blood tests? I listed my whereabouts (which is where you have to be accountable for an hour every single day of the year for a random test, and if you get this wrong you have a strike next to your name). I batch tested my protein powders for fear of having a banned substance in it. I refuse to medicine which would make my colds shorter or my injuries heal quicker. Would I have done all that if I knew the penalty was a one-month ban, or in Sinners case, no ban at all?

I’d like to think I would still remain clean but would I take a gamble if I knew it was only one month on the line, not multiple years? It seems many do take this gamble.

The issue of inconsistent punishment in tennis is a serious concern. While a doping is a violation of the sport’s rules, the penalties players face are often seen as arbitrary and seem influenced by factors such as their reputation, marketability or the timing of the offence. The blame is never taken by the player and is handballed to someone else such as a doctor, physiotherapist or manufacturer.

The perception to me is that some players can get away with doping, or that investigations are handled behind closed doors, which creates a sense of unfairness among those who are dedicated to clean competition. Kyrgios has battled an injuries but said “there’s so many things out there that are prohibited in our sport that I could have been doing to get me back quicker … (but) that’s just not who I am. I’m always against that.”

Sport needs to be as fair as possible and clean sport is what we are aiming for. So while it won’t always be fair in accessibility and money for coaching and training, the one thing we should be able to rely on is the anti-doping bodies.

But can we even trust them? I don’t even know anymore. Well done to Kyrgios for being loud when so many remain quiet, and you just wonder, are they quiet because they disagree with him, or quiet because maybe they’re trying to fly under the radar too.

This is the slippery conspiracy slope we find ourselves on when asking questions without clear and consistent answers.