Lord (Sebastian) Coe, an adviser to the English Football Association on drugs and testing, suggested yesterday that he would be disappointed if Rio Ferdinand's eight-month suspension for missing a drug test were reduced on appeal.

The former Olympic gold medallist was commenting on Ferdinand's appeal hearing, which begins today. The case is expected to finish tomorrow and will be heard by an independent three-man panel which could reduce, increase or uphold the Manchester United defender's punishment.

FIFA's guidelines suggest a 12-month suspension for missing a drug test, though Ferdinand hopes his ban will be sufficiently reduced for him to play in Euro 2004.

Coe has helped the FA create a new doping control policy, which should be announced in the next few weeks, and left little doubt he would be upset if Ferdinand's penalty were cut. "I would make observations if and when that happened," he said. "I would certainly speak to somebody."

He pointed out that an athlete could have expected the two-year ban recommended by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). "On balance and given some of the circumstances, (Ferdinand's punishment is) probably about right," he said. "If an athlete had not taken a drug test for whatever reason and only got eight months out of the sport, they'd think they had a result."

Ferdinand's legal team will stress to the three-man panel that the player had not taken drugs, citing a hair sample as evidence. They hope this will substantiate Ferdinand's claim that he missed the test purely because of forgetfulness. They are also expected to point out that players in other countries such as Jaap Stam, Frank de Boer and Edgar Davids served bans of less than eight months for positive nandrolone tests.

The FA's lawyer Mark Gay, who helped Greg Rusedski escape a drug ban in tennis, is expected to remind the panel that article 63 of FIFA's disciplinary code states that any player who "fails to appear for a doping test" or "refuses to undergo a test" should be banned for at least 12 months.

Ferdinand failed to provide a sample at United's training ground on September 23rd and opted to start his ban on January 20th.

Coe added: "The FA have recognised there were areas where they needed to improve what they were doing.

"I was asked to look at their issues in a widespread manner and our report on that will be out."

Ferdinand could have his suspension actually increased by the three-man appeals panel made up of Ian Mill QC, FA chairman Geoff Thompson and Roger Burden, a City businessman who also sits on UEFA's disciplinary panel.

Sports lawyer John Hewison believes the Ferdinand team will have more chance of achieving a result with the argument that internationals - such as Jaap Stam, Frank de Boer and Edgar Davids - all tested positive for the anabolic steroid nandrolone and yet ended up with bans of less than six months, than the hair test argument.

Hewison said: "There was no suggestion at the last hearing that he had been taking drugs and had therefore refused to take the test - just that there was no compelling reason as to why he had not taken the test.

"They then came up with a punishment they thought was appropriate. The hair sample may demonstrate he wasn't using drugs, which may be fine to demonstrate to the public and his commercial sponsors, but shouldn't actually have a bearing on the case.

"If you are looking for a comparison with other high-profile cases, however, you have to look to Europe and argue that he should be punished in line with players such as Jaap Stam or Davids."

As a result of the saga the FA are reviewing their doping control policy and the results are expected within the next few weeks. The United defender began his suspension in January in the hope that if it is reduced he will still be able to play for England in Euro 2004.