The decision to play Saad, who was a late inclusion against the Brisbane Lions on Saturday night, was criticised on Monday by AFL.com.au's Luke Darcy and Damian Barrett on Access All Areas.
As of Monday afternoon, the Saints had not been advised when Saad's 'B' sample would be tested but it is understood the result could be known in the next week.
If charged, the 23-year-old's fate would be decided by a specially-convened AFL Tribunal hearing.
Saad faced a torrent of abuse from opposition supporters at the Gabba, which Ings said demonstrated a lack of public understanding around the World Anti-Doping Authority code.
Under the code, athletes who test positive to less serious 'specified substances' can avoid a provisional suspension and continue competing.
Normal protocol under the code dictates that athletes have the right to remain anonymous until they return a positive 'B' sample.
"Every sport and every government that has adopted the WADA code – over 200 governments and over 100 sports – apply exactly the same rule as the AFL applied on the weekend," Ings told AFL.com.au.
"The benefit of the doubt is given to the player and they are allowed to play until an anti-doping tribunal decides to impose a sanction against them.
"A positive test for a specified substance might attract a ban of weeks to a couple of months, depending on the circumstances.
"So if you provisionally suspend someone, they may actually be provisionally suspended longer than the actual ban would have been."
ASADA, which will dictate the timing of the testing process, would not comment on when Saad's 'B' sample result would be known.
Ings, however, said the result of a 'B' sample was usually known within two weeks of the athlete being notified of an irregular 'A' sample.
The sample will be put through two machines – a gas chromatograph and a mass spectrometer – which can test for over 4000 chemicals.
Anything that is found to exist in abnormal concentration produces a spike.
Saad will be given the right to be present when the 'B' sample is unsealed ahead of testing.
This is offered so he can confirm the sample is indeed his, to ensure there is no legal challenge to the validity of the test if it comes back positive.
"He can decline the option and this can be done this week. If he says no, that's fine – he doesn't have to attend," leading sports medico Dr Peter Larkins told AFL.com.au.
"If he says yes, then he goes along with his lawyer and someone from St Kilda and the sample is unsealed.
"Then there's no dispute if comes back positive. If it's positive, then end of story.
"There are many cases in the past where the athlete has just accepted straight away he was guilty and doesn't even want the 'B' sample tested.
"Other athletes who are shocked or surprised or think there might be some case to answer for exceptional circumstances, they'll be given the choice."
Any sanction for Saad could range from a warning to a two-year ban, depending on the degree of fault and care taken by the young Saint.
Through a statement, Saad last week said he was "surprised and extremely disappointed to find himself in this position".
ASADA clearly states if athletes use supplements, they do so at their own risk.
"There have been cases where both Australian and international athletes have been sanctioned after they have used supplements that they thought were OK, but which were actually contaminated with prohibited substances," the ASADA website says.
St Kilda's medical officer is Dr Tim Barbour, who has been at the club since 2008 and has a wealth of experience with athletes competing at an international level.
He has held previous roles with Athletics Australia (2003-2008), and has been the team doctor for the Australian Olympic Athletics team (2004 and 2008), the Commonwealth Games Athletics team (2006) and the World Championships Athletics Team (2003 and 2007).
Nathan Schmook is a reporter for AFL Media. Follow him on Twitter @AFL_Nathan
Jennifer Phelan is a reporter for AFL Media. Follow her on Twitter @AFL_JenPhelan