WAS Wayne Carey better than Gary Ablett? Was he worse? Yes and no, but he should be treated the same as Ablett and no he shouldn't be in the hall of fame this year.

The contrivance that is the entity of congratulation known as the hall of fame performs no service other than recognition but it is an important recognition for it reveres the sportsman not only for being good at sport but being sporting.

Carey was one of Ablett's few peers on the field, indeed many contend he was the superior talent, but has his retired life and indeed his behaviour in the dying stages of his playing career been as egregious as Ablett's. Of course it has not, Ablett was involved in the death of a young girl, but Carey is not currently behaving as a man to admire and revere.

There is small doubt there is a seat for Wayne Carey in this hall at some point, but that point is not now.

The selection committee will meet this week and, as it did when it wrestled with Ablett's inclusion, it must ponder the entire package considered "on the basis of record, ability, integrity, sportsmanship and character", the statement of criteria reads.

The committee cannot cherry-pick the criteria it finds most convenient, so Carey currently fails the test. As with Ablett that is unlikely to lead to life-long exile.

Carey had significantly repaired his public image from the awful Anthony Stevens breach of trust such that that incident would have provided no bar to inclusion. But Carey's life is now, by his admission in the latest edition of a women's magazine, at "rock bottom" as he battles a drug problem and confronts courts in the US over violent incidents involving his girlfriend and others.

He has been dropped by all of his media employers because of this string of incidents and the fact he was no longer an appropriate person to be a public face for those organisations.

Carey has not behaved as Ablett did but he has not behaved well.

That these incidents have involved violence against women is significant not simply because it is not the first time Carey has offended against women but it comes at a time when the AFL is seeking to guide and mould attitudes to women among its players and thus society.

To laud Carey now would be the most appalling message.

Eventually those who argue for Carey's immense sporting deeds to be recognised will rightly prevail over those who caution about his non-sporting misdeeds but for now the ledger is too heavily weighted against him.

It is true there are those in the hall of fame already, in addition to Gary Ablett, who at some time in their lives would have failed a similar character test.

But they would not have failed it at the time of inclusion. Time had passed. Time had healed.

For now this is a debate Carey will unlikely enjoy, but one that is likely to be at the peripheral of his thoughts.

He has admitted to a drug problem he wants to overcome to help get his life back. Now that is a test of character.