On the drive back from "Royal" Wangaratta races yesterday (Thursday) afternoon, in my role as a form analyst and jockey manager, news of the Neil Mitchell/Eddie McGuire argy-bargy was broadcast over the radio and it reminded me of my former life as 3AW Sports Today and AFL coverage producer.

During the first wave of the Ben Cousins drug hysteria in March 2007, every media outlet was looking for their angle.

I received a phone call from my then-3AW colleague Justin Smith who is Neil Mitchell's producer at a bit after 7a.m. one morning while spoon feeding my then one-year old some Weet-Bix.

"Hi mate, sorry for the early call, but have you got a number for Fred Farknuckle?"

(You've probably twigged that "Fred Farknuckle" wasn't his real name. The "Fred" as he'll be referred to from here on, was a well-known recently retired AFL footballer in his 30s.)

Now Fred was unfortunately losing his friends, money and career at a too-quick rate due to his post-footy embrace of the party scene, and while we were once close, we'd drifted apart due to differing lifestyles.

However he'd never done the wrong thing by me, so the "blokes code" kicked in with Smith's enquiry.

And it hardly took a heap of gut instinct to assume he wasn't ringing to see if "Farknuckle" could fill in for Tony Leonard by doing a "Pub of the Week" review either!

So I bulldusted and said, "No sorry mate, I haven't got a number for "Freddy". Why do you want it?"

"We've been told that he is a drug addict and we've had it confirmed."

Personally as far as shocks go, this was probably a "one" if the Richter scale went to about 100,000.

But something gnawed at me so I rang him back.

Me: "Mate just out of interest, why is it ok to name an ex-footballer who has no current AFL involvement (including any media profile) as a drug taker?"

Smith: "Well we think it's of public interest."

Me: "But he didn't take drugs when he played. He's in a bit of strife now, but he's got no involvement with the game." (Nor a media profile.)

Smith: "Well that's still in the public interest."

Me: "But naming him will ruin his life and any chance of getting himself back on his feet."

Smith thought about it and rang me back: "Mate we've had it "legalled" and we're going to go with it because the story is right."

And having now heard Neil Mitchell's full, earnest piece about why he was right to name the Collingwood players, make no mistake that this is the thought process in these situations:

1) Will this get a reaction?

How can we word this to get the maximum reaction without incurring any legal challenges?

Sorry, but having spent over a decade at a pretty reasonable level in the AFL media, the "public interest" angle that is used as a defence for (often prematurely) rushing the names of AFL footballers into the media spotlight is a crock of shite.

It is also as good an example as you could get as to why the AFL and the players association so fervently and rightly fights for the illicit drug policy to remain so confidential.

They know that when the hungry beast that is the media wolf-pack feeds on any subject, they move on pretty quickly once the story is down to the rotting carcass that gets left behind.

"He's been accused of acting inappropriately! This is the final straw, regardless of whether anything is proven or not he must be sacked now!"

"He overdosed on drugs and nearly died! Here's a full page photo of him in case the 20 games he's played to date mean you wouldn't recognize him if you saw him in the milk bar walk!"

"There is a former footballer who is gay! He's being offered a fortune to come out of the closet!"

"They've been interviewed by police! I'll justify naming them because..."

Please!

Never mind that the person or people concerned with a non-sporting controversy could be going through hell along with their nearest and dearest.

If the vile, anonymous and gutless slurs posted in various areas of "social media" that the net now provides aren't hard enough to cope with, the new media age means that so-called mainstream and credible journalists can justify lowering their hard-earned standards and credibility by saying "it's already everywhere, and this is what others are saying."

Ironically, it's another 3AW stalwart in Gerard Healy who has the right attitude when it comes to how the media should cover sporting controversies, while knowing full well that the Mitchells, Hinches, Joneses, A Current Affairs and Today Tonights of this world will always run their own race.

In a nutshell, if it genuinely and knowingly affects the outcome of the sporting situation, then talk about it.

So voyeurism aside, a story such as the Kangaroos greatest ever player and then-captain Wayne Carey leaving his team on the eve of a football season HAD to be spoken about at length about the implications for the team and the game.

But if a sports person is interviewed by police, takes drugs in a private setting, leaves his wife, turns gay or waxes downstairs, are they really entitled to LESS privacy than anyone else?

And "Fred Farknuckle?"

Well I got onto someone close to him when it was clear he was going to be named and shamed and explained the urgency of the situation.

He then personally spoke to Neil Mitchell who agreed that it could possibly ruin "Fred's" life, and at best make any chance of rehab a lot more difficult in the public gaze.

So the man described by Collingwood president Eddie McGuire as a "self-appointed, self-important windbag" went on air and proudly announced how "after thinking long and hard about it" he personally decided not to name a former footballer who was battling a drug problem, despite legal advice saying that he could, after confirming the story with "several sources."

I'm glad he didn't.

Fred Farknuckle is now clean and healthy. 

"Racetrack" Ralphy Horowitz is a full-time racing analyst for private clients and media commentator for Sport 927. He is a former producer at 3AW, SEN, The Footy Show, & Sunday Footy Show.