Firstly every other case that has had a homophobic slur has been handed down a penalty straight away. None of the other players got to fight it or give evidence & nor they should. And it didn't take 5 days.

Being knocked out isn't a form of defence. Nor mental health. I really feel like this is just being used as an excuse these days.

Also why did Andrew Dillon need a presser. Just announce it & be done.

No sympathy for rankine if he misses a flag

15 hours ago, Jibroni said:

I think when you have an organisation like the AFL trying to act as the moral arbitrator for society we have a problem.

Rankine made a mistake, nothing more.

and now we will have a spreadsheet to determine severity of the words Is it impact based like a hit or do we be prescrptive?

ie calling people old or overweight or skinny or weak on the footy field will have to judged for penalty purposes

10 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

It’s a circus

AFL ARE 🤡🤡 CLOWNS 🤡🤡

Rules being made up

Tony Shaw: “The compelling medical advice taken into account on Rankine plea? Izak is feeling sad that he stuffed up badly letting himself,teammates and club down. Well blow me down that deserves 1 week less? AFL is incompetent, amateurish, laughable”.

ADELAIDE star Izak Rankine has been banned for four matches for using a homophobic slur, leaving the door ajar for him to play in the Grand Final this season.

The Crow was suspended after the AFL Integrity Unit investigated an incident following Adelaide's thrilling win over Collingwood on Saturday night.The AFL said "compelling medical submissions" from the Crows and Rankine were part of their considerations when determining the sanction.

10 hours ago, Red and Bluebeard said:

I am not sure that I follow this. I see that any footballer would rather miss 5 home and away games rather than any final. But this not about what the players want; it is about what is fair for a given offence.

Put another way, when Kossie got rubbed out for three weeks in Round 1 of 2023, are you saying that he should have only got one or two weeks if he had done the same thing to a Collingwood player in the first final? It seems to me (an ignorant non-lawyer) that this is the first step on the road to the situation where Barry Hall doesn't get rubbed out for a Grand Final after thumping someone simply because "he would miss a Grand Final".

This is a fairly new non physical act penalty and all I am saying is that home and away games shouldn’t have the same weight as finals, when assessing penalty.

On 20/08/2025 at 11:19, Lucifers Hero said:

Collingwood raised it with Adelaide the day after the game. Adelaide reported it to AFL Integrity unit.

The cynic in me wonders whether a club with a history of anti-social behaviours acted in their own interests to reduce Adelaide's chances of a flag and of beating Coll again in the finals.

I in no way condone Rankine's comments.

So Collingwood enticed Adelaide to report.....

1 hour ago, Kent said:

and now we will have a spreadsheet to determine severity of the words Is it impact based like a hit or do we be prescrptive?

ie calling people old or overweight or skinny or weak on the footy field will have to judged for penalty purposes

This is the can of worms the AFL has opened.

I support them taking a stand on many social issues, Drugs, Racism, Homophobia, etc, but how they manage the fine to the crime is critical. AS many have said the comparison with ending a career by an illegal physical attack is an obvious issue. The impact of a physical contact is much easier to discern than a mental impact, but cannot now be ignored.

I was being facetious when I suggested that two players conspire to claim an opponent made an offensive remark and they should self report. Such an issue is not as clear cut as aknee to the kidney or a slide int a contest, but could have an immeadiate distracting impact on a player

Perhaps the AFL may have to institute a return to what happens on the field stays on the field practice. They can now supplement this with new technology and increased surveillance by umpires.

As I said, I dont know but the can has certainly been opened. The Pies again gain an advantage if they end up playing Crows in the first final. Can our result this week affect that?

10 minutes ago, Willmoy1947 said:

So Collingwood enticed Adelaide to report.....

Not sure about 'enticed'.

I've never trusted Coll! And once Moore claimed 'concussion' in rnd 24 last year for a collision he contributed to and got Kozzie suspended for 3 weeks they, are capable of anything.

Could they have not raised it with Adelaide and kept it in house? It depends on what the offended player wanted. If he wanted it taken further then Coll must honour that. If the player was circumspect about it Coll had a choice. We will never know.

Once it was brought to Adelaide's attention (Rankine did not self report) they had no choice but to take it to AFL. The fallout from doing otherwise would be grim on a number of fronts.

Edited August 22Aug 22 by Lucifers Hero

Collingwood 1 Everyone else 0

Good old Collingwood, they know how to play the game........

18 hours ago, Superunknown said:

Sorry but this is just all wrong for the reasons many have described here (NOT because they’re just words - I’m not saying that)

Why? AFL have made it very clear over the last two seasons that homophobic language will not be tolerated, and that incidents that crop up with face a severe suspension. They have made that blatantly clear over the last two seasons since Clarkson was pinged. Numerous players have faced bans of multiple weeks, and the AFL have stated that any subsequent offences will face a more severe penalty than the previous one. The AFL in that are being consistent. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Rankine didn't just let a word slip out. He repeated the slur numerous times throughout the match, then tried to make himself the victim by saying he was triggered by Houston who knocked him out last year. Houston was not even the target of his homophobic language, Quaynor was. So using that as an excuse was pissweak in my opinion.

I don't give a stuff if it's finals. He repeatedly used the word towards Quaynor multiple times throughout the game.

2 hours ago, Kent said:

and now we will have a spreadsheet to determine severity of the words Is it impact based like a hit or do we be prescrptive?

ie calling people old or overweight or skinny or weak on the footy field will have to judged for penalty purposes

It was not a mistake given it was repeated several times throughout the game. That's not a mistake, that's purposeful.

Are we certain that there was one single offended player? Rankine might have said it to player A but ten other players could’ve heard it and found it gross.

I thought the issue with slurs etc is less about personal offence and more about the overall cultural impact of using those types of words.

By not making this clear the AFL aren’t doing anything to change the minds of the ‘sticks and stones’ brigade.

Edited August 22Aug 22 by deegirl
Spelling

Hopefully this case will encourage some players to "come out" and acknowledge their sexuality secure in the knowledge that it is an acceptable status. If this then leads to less of the disastrous impacts we have been told of this will be a great step. We can treat each other with respect as human beings with equal rights and more importantly feelings. It is easy to unwittingly offend it should be as easy to genuinely apologise and show remorse.

This is a very complex issue and I acknowledge I do not have any golden bullet solution. I know that I have had and have a range of friends with a range of opinions, I accept and respect their opinions and actions. I learn and try to retain their friendships which are the most valuable thing.

I will not make any further comments on this site on this issue but will continue to personally have much introspection to ensure I can be the best person I can.

2 hours ago, Katrina Dee Fan said:

It was not a mistake given it was repeated several times throughout the game. That's not a mistake, that's purposeful.

Correct me if I am wrong but i never said it was a mistake

Statement from the Ruby Demons. I’m disclosing now that I’m a committee member of Ruby Dees, and I’m the one who wrote this statement

https://www.instagram.com/p/DNpSUkozxqH/?igsh=eHFmZXdnMHhreXYw

Edited August 22Aug 22 by Katrina Dee Fan

1 hour ago, Kent said:

Correct me if I am wrong but i never said it was a mistake

Apologies, it was meant for Jibroni, who you were replying to

Snoop daggy dog reportedly/alledgedly has made comments which if the AFL are serious should see him get 5 weeks which means he will miss the G.F ! One can only hope!

Edited August 22Aug 22 by picket fence

34 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Snoop daggy dog reportedly/alledgedly has made comments which if the AFL are serious should see him get 5 weeks which means he will miss the G.F ! One can only hope!

The AFL will cite 'pre existing medical conditions'..

Get off with a $5000 fine payable to " medicinal shop' of his selection. 3 game suspension ( suspended )

Ironic snoop makes those comments today when the afl are dealing with rankine

1 hour ago, Katrina Dee Fan said:

Statement from the Ruby Demons. I’m disclosing now that I’m a committee member of Ruby Dees, and I’m the one who wrote this statement

https://www.instagram.com/p/DNpSUkozxqH/?igsh=eHFmZXdnMHhreXYw

For the benefit of those not in instagram because many aren’t can you post the text

8 minutes ago, dees189227 said:

Ironic snoop makes those comments today when the afl are dealing with rankine

What comments

[censored] Collingwood, [censored] the protected Daicos kids, [censored] the AFL.

great piece by Kate halfpenny in Domainfax

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/the-afl-s-dithering-over-slur-shows-they-re-not-ready-to-embrace-an-ian-roberts-moment-20250821-p5motx.html

Serong on Croft. ‪Seriously. How’s that different to May. Serong should have expected Croft to win the footy first and amend his contact. You cannot cannon into his head. It’s Careless. Yes. High impact/Head. Yes. Low impact. That’s a suspension.

11 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Serong on Croft. ‪Seriously. How’s that different to May. Serong should have expected Croft to win the footy first and amend his contact. You cannot cannon into his head. It’s Careless. Yes. High impact/Head. Yes. Low impact. That’s a suspension.

Absolutely not.

Croft put his head into that, as Serong was low going for the ball.

Nothing to answer.

PS: Does Ginnivan get a week for punching Zorko to the throat before the game started? Clear potential to cause serious injury. Of course he won’t be suspended, he isn’t May or Kozzie.

Edited August 24Aug 24 by Redleg