The Age of November 29 last year.
ANALYSIS
It was the low-key response from Collingwood to Caroline Wilson's article in The Age in November suggesting that the Pies should consider sacking Dane Swan that led to The Footy Show interview last Thursday.
For Swan and his manager Liam Pickering, agreeing to the interview would have been about weighing up the risk and the reward. The risk, given it was not a club-sanctioned interview, was about the potential for a fine and creating more tension between the Pies and one of their star players. The reward was the opportunity for Swan to put to bed the public speculation about his private life and, most importantly, put his family's minds at rest.
Swan displayed a fair degree of courage to put himself in such a public forum to answer questions about whether he had a drug problem.
For a player to take this action, it is clear that the underlying issue - Collingwood's lack of reaction to the article - has not gone away. And this is not the first time a player has gone outside the club protocol to get a point across.
We should not be naï¨ıve enough to believe that Swan - or his manager - arranged the interview for financial benefit. It has been reported that Channel Nine paid $25,000 - further inflaming the controversy surrounding the interview. It is likely, however, that Swan was actually paid less than half that.
Enough to insure that any potential sanction would be covered and there was enough left over to cover the petrol from Olympic Park to the Olsen Hotel. But not enough to risk a breakdown in relations with the club.
Interestingly, not one of the questions was about Swan's form or Collingwood's hopes this season. It was all about Swan's reaction to rumour and innuendo about his private life and drugs.
Some would say that all the interview achieved was to alert those who were not aware of the rumours, or had not read Caroline Wilson's article.
But what has actually happened is that we are not talking about the interview any more, but rather the controversy surrounding it.
Collingwood president Eddie McGuire criticised Pickering and, in turn. Pickering called McGuire a hypocrite. After all, McGuire ignored the Melbourne Football Club's media policy when he interviewed Liam Jurrah.
At the time, the comment was made that if an interview took place with a Collingwood player in such a sensitive situation, McGuire would go off his tree.
In truth, Pickering acted how many managers would in that situation. His client clearly wanted to speak out, and the inference is that Collingwood didn't want him to.
And that throws up the biggest point of all this, that Swan has doubts about the level of support he has received from the club.
The interview itself is not the issue, the issue is why Swan felt it was the only option he had.
Collingwood is not upset simply because the manager did not observe protocol, it is upset because it lost control of a delicate situation. Do you reckon he would have been fined if all he'd spoken about was his great pre-season on the training track and how well the Pies are going in their tilt for another premiership?
Control is understandably a big thing at footy clubs - particularly when the rumour mill is working overtime. But every player has a family and every player has emotions.
If Swan felt that responding to rumours about his private life was the best way for him to put those close to him at ease, then no media policy was going to hold him back.
The Secret Agent is an AFL-accredited agent.
