33 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

I wouldn't be surprised if Adelaide were to test a penalty in a court of law. AFL would hate that. It could be why there is a delay in announcing a penalty.

Possible but I suspect AFL is sending subliminal messages about not bringing down the whole house.

Definitely something going on

43 minutes ago, biggestred said:

Just read that Houston told Rankine that he would need the stretcher again (a reference to Houston knocking Rankine unconscious last year).

In no way does that excuse what Rankine said, but what an abhorrent thing to say.

I do not condone any use of vilifying language on the footy field, be it around race, religion or sexual orientation. It is vile and unacceptable.

But on the same level, so is sledging someone's family, or making fun of opponents being seriously injured.

What Zorko said to Petty was deadset disgusting. You just don't bring families, kids or partners into any type of on field sledging. At all. Ever.

Likewise how did Willie Rioli get only one week for threatening to harm an opponent?

I do not support nor condone what Rankine said. It is unacceptable. But it's no more unacceptable than Houston telling him he will knock him out again, like that's some sort of badge of honour.

Thank god we didn't get Houston. A lot of talk and not a lot of output for a highly paid snipper.

Knock a bloke out and end his career in a final, do so while playing for Collingwood: no penalty.

Call a Collingwood player an offensive name on the eve of the finals: penalty is five weeks suspension.

Mind numbing.

Sticks and Stones may break your bones..

But names will get you 5 weeks !!

1 hour ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Just read the AFL is still considering the penalty and Adelaide will have time to mount an appeal.

I assume an appeal will be to the AFL Tribunal.

If so, there is no hope of a reduced penalty if Gleeson is Chair when keeping any penalty will help Coll final/flag chances.

I wouldn't be surprised if Adelaide were to test a penalty in a court of law. AFL would hate that. It could be why there is a delay in announcing a penalty.

That is quite possible, as given a full finals ban is far more than any other penalty given for the same offence to other players.

I also wonder if previous “mistakes“ by umpires against the Crows in recent years, which cost them the chance of finals, is now surfacing in their thought process, giving rise to the victim mentality.

5 minutes ago, Redleg said:

That is quite possible, as given a full finals ban is far more than any other penalty given for the same offence to other players.

It's still 4-5 games though, the penalties have been consistent here, don't think it should be reduced because its at the pointy end of the season. The slurs are abhorrent but also think first time suspensions for this should be a less games, but it's too late for that now.

I think it's also important to consider that in the AFL's hubris, trying to stamp out homophobia and discrimination by dishing out significant penalties to players, they have accidentally provoked more discrimination from fans. Some of the comments on social media are outright disgusting. And volume of those comments is far bigger than anything said on field. There is value in having a proportionate response to issues. A week or a fine would probably suffice. Practically all players would hate to have even a week off. Giving them four weeks doesn't send a stronger message, it just frustrates fans to a point where many of them start to take it out on the LGBTQI community, which is really something we want to avoid.

28 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

I do not condone any use of vilifying language on the footy field, be it around race, religion or sexual orientation. It is vile and unacceptable.

But on the same level, so is sledging someone's family, or making fun of opponents being seriously injured.

What Zorko said to Petty was deadset disgusting. You just don't bring families, kids or partners into any type of on field sledging. At all. Ever.

Likewise how did Willie Rioli get only one week for threatening to harm an opponent?

I do not support nor condone what Rankine said. It is unacceptable. But it's no more unacceptable than Houston telling him he will knock him out again, like that's some sort of badge of honour.

Thank god we didn't get Houston. A lot of talk and not a lot of output for a highly paid snipper.

The Willie Rioli penalty is inexplicable.

I wonder what most people on a footy field, or off it, would find more offensive, a homophobic slur, or a threat of severe violence?

One gets a one game penalty and the other a whole finals series wiped out.

How is that justified I wonder?

10 hours ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

, yet Maynard got let off and allowed to play in a premiership after carelessly ending Gus's career.

Rod - careless is way too soft.

Reckless maybe, more like intentional (injury not necessarily career ending).

On 12/08/2025 at 17:26, spirit of norm smith said:

Apparently Blakey was not offended and didn’t lodge any incident. Ummmm. That raises more questions than answers.

Beware, spirit. You could risk getting 6 weeks for a homophobic inference. The AFL in their infinite wisdom see that as far more dangerous than head injury risk or striking.

48 minutes ago, Redleg said:

The Willie Rioli penalty is inexplicable.

I wonder what most people on a footy field, or off it, would find more offensive, a homophobic slur, or a threat of severe violence?

One gets a one game penalty and the other a whole finals series wiped out.

How is that justified I wonder?

You only ever need ask one question:

Who benefits ??

All reasoning emanates from that core 😉

AFL hypocrisy at its worst…

https://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2017/jun/21/snoop-dogg-homophobia-young-thug-moment-i-feared

35 minutes ago, BORNADO said:

I think it's also important to consider that in the AFL's hubris, trying to stamp out homophobia and discrimination by dishing out significant penalties to players, they have accidentally provoked more discrimination from fans. Some of the comments on social media are outright disgusting. And volume of those comments is far bigger than anything said on field. There is value in having a proportionate response to issues. A week or a fine would probably suffice. Practically all players would hate to have even a week off. Giving them four weeks doesn't send a stronger message, it just frustrates fans to a point where many of them start to take it out on the LGBTQI community, which is really something we want to avoid.

Now if you fined a player say $50K or even a $100K but didnt suspend him, do you think the fans would care? I think not, they just want Rankine to play the game. But Rankine would care because its a significant hit to the pocket. I think this still gets through to the players without sanctioning the club and its fanbase indirectly.

The AFL have absolutely butchered this. it is just another botched job under Dylan. With every year, it is clear this Dylan is going down in the history books as one of the more incapable AFL CEO's.

35 minutes ago, GS_1905 said:

Now if you fined a player say $50K or even a $100K but didnt suspend him, do you think the fans would care? I think not, they just want Rankine to play the game. But Rankine would care because its a significant hit to the pocket. I think this still gets through to the players without sanctioning the club and its fanbase indirectly.

The AFL have absolutely butchered this. it is just another botched job under Dylan. With every year, it is clear this Dylan is going down in the history books as one of the more incapable AFL CEO's.

I tend to agree that a meaningful financial punishment may be the best way to address this type of issue - the one caveat being the clubs could cover it somehow which would defeat the purpose if they did that. I'm not a particularly big fan or Rankine or Adelaide necessarily but it seems these types of suspensions are way OTT

I get to a few games every season, some unfortunately do not have civilized MFC members in attendance 😀 If the AFL banned any supporter that verbally abused players, umpires or other supporters then we'd see a serious drop off in crowd numbers

I know the world has changed but back in my day playing if we had the AFL as it is now back then no one would be playing.

... apparently filth players are not to be called meatballs

16 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

... apparently filth players are not to be called meatballs

prestia got a trademark on it?

1 hour ago, Docs Demons said:

I know the world has changed but back in my day playing if we had the AFL as it is now back then no one would be playing.

DD I am old probably similar to you. I said to friend this morning that you can knock someone out and end their career. Potentially decreasing their quality of life for the next 50 years and get off Scot free to play in a GF. However if you call someone a name you get 4-5 games and potentially not play in a GF. It seems way out of wack to me.

Can we please stop reducing this to “name calling”?? This is not just a name, and you CANNOT do it in the workplace (do it, see what happens).

Now, whether or not the Willie Rioli incident was adequately punished (I don’t think it was) is irrelevant. The AFL has handed out punishments for other players, and it is now stuck with a precedent. Now again whether you think it’s the right number, relative to knocking someone out or the Rioli incident, is not relevant. Rankine knew what he did, and he would know there’s precedent. End of story. Don’t want the punishment? Don’t say it? We need to teach our boys better.

And finally, the sledge leading to this terrible homophonic slur is irrelevant. I’ve been called tons of things, on and off sporting fields, and have never said that, and never thought of saying that.

I know there’s lots about ranking being a ‘good bloke’. Yeah yeah everyone is a good bloke, I get it. But I dunno, there is something to be said about someone who resorts to the use of a term they know full well is designed to cause hurt.

Someone saying things to you?

Walk away. If rankine did, he’d be tearing up finals. Instead he’ll likely watch from home which is a shame because he is electric when on.

(Unless the AFL does some gymnastics to avoid its own precedent, likely off the back off finals games being worth more or the concept of provocation), which would be dumb but not unexpected.

Edited Wednesday at 08:522 days by Red But Mostly Blue

The harsh suspension for homophobic slurs is virtue signalling and deflection for the elephant in the room namely that no gay AFL player has ever publicly outed himself that I am aware of. It goes to show that gay players still do not feel accepted by the wider footballing community. And the hypocrisy of having the Dogg perform the GF entertainment makes a mockery of supporting gay players. As for Rankine, he should be punished but suspensions for this kind of reactive offence are too harsh. Severe fines are more appropriate for inappropriate cultural infractions. Harsh suspensions have the perception of vindictiveness and are more likely to entrench bad attitudes.

Edited Wednesday at 09:362 days by John Crow Batty

7 hours ago, Sydee said:

I tend to agree that a meaningful financial punishment may be the best way to address this type of issue - the one caveat being the clubs could cover it somehow which would defeat the purpose if they did that. I'm not a particularly big fan or Rankine or Adelaide necessarily but it seems these types of suspensions are way OTT

I get to a few games every season, some unfortunately do not have civilized MFC members in attendance 😀 If the AFL banned any supporter that verbally abused players, umpires or other supporters then we'd see a serious drop off in crowd numbers

Your last sentence says just what the AFL’s #1 priority is - $$$$$. Small attendances brings smaller $$, and eventually smaller sponsorships, and maybe relatively smaller TV rights.

10 hours ago, BORNADO said:

I think it's also important to consider that in the AFL's hubris, trying to stamp out homophobia and discrimination by dishing out significant penalties to players, they have accidentally provoked more discrimination from fans. Some of the comments on social media are outright disgusting. And volume of those comments is far bigger than anything said on field. There is value in having a proportionate response to issues. A week or a fine would probably suffice. Practically all players would hate to have even a week off. Giving them four weeks doesn't send a stronger message, it just frustrates fans to a point where many of them start to take it out on the LGBTQI community, which is really something we want to avoid.

Yeah we should try to avoid the homophobes being offended.

priority number 1?

This issue is so much bigger than a bump or punch. It’s hundreds of years of not being accepted. Stamp it out. Big penalties needed.

3 hours ago, John Crow Batty said:

The harsh suspension for homophobic slurs is virtue signalling and deflection for the elephant in the room namely that no gay AFL player has ever publicly outed himself that I am aware of. It goes to show that gay players still do not feel accepted by the wider footballing community. And the hypocrisy of having the Dogg perform the GF entertainment makes a mockery of supporting gay players. As for Rankine, he should be punished but suspensions for this kind of reactive offence are too harsh. Severe fines are more appropriate for inappropriate cultural infractions. Harsh suspensions have the perception of vindictiveness and are more likely to entrench bad attitudes.

What absolute nonsense. We have a group of people that have been abused and derided for so long, just for who they are. It is 100% on the same level as racial abuse and should not be tolerated.

posters are showing their true colours

11 hours ago, Willmoy1947 said:

Last paragraph would be purely supposition on your part, because Adelaide would know that Collingwood would do anything for leverage.

That was a quote from an article on Code Sports. And I agree with your comment on Collingwood doing anything for leverage.

7 hours ago, Docs Demons said:

I know the world has changed but back in my day playing if we had the AFL as it is now back then no one would be playing.

Agree. It’s good to acknowledge that the world has changed in many good ways

Let people be who they are, regardless of sexually or race

These people have suffered enough over the years