Western Bulldogs captain Katie Brennan out of AFLW Grand Final but will fight case in court
THE courtroom — not the goalsquare — could await for Western Bulldogs captain Katie Brennan, who gave up her fight to play in the AFLW Grand Final but will continue it at the Australian Human Rights Commission.
AFLW
Don't miss out on the headlines from AFLW. Followed categories will be added to My News.
THE courtroom — not the goalsquare — could await for Western Bulldogs captain Katie Brennan who gave up her fight to play in the AFLW Grand Final but will continue it at the Australian Human Rights Commission.
The skipper, who on Thursday had her appeal against a two-game ban for rough conduct dismissed by the AFL Appeals Board, and the club considered taking their battle to the Federal Court in an attempt to get her to play in today’s decider.
UPHELD: AFL APPEALS BOARD DISMISSES KATIE BRENNAN APPEAL
TRIBUNAL: BRENNAN FOUND GUILTY, BANNED FOR TWO MATCHES
Brennan, 25, insisted that in the best interest of the team that she would avoid immediate action and not seek to play but filed proceedings with the Australian Human Rights Commission against the AFL that it discriminates based on gender.
The forward is seeking to have her suspension overturned and for the AFL to amend AFLW rules to mirror those of the men’s competition with a broader view “to ensure that in future, other women players are not more likely to be suspended than men for identical conduct with identical disciplinary records”.
Brennan plead not guilty to the charge of rough conduct for her tackle on Demon Harriet Cordner that was careless, low impact and to the head at Tuesday night’s AFL Tribunal hearing — a charge that would have attracted a fine if she were playing in the men’s competition.
AFLW GRAND FINAL LIVE: CAN THE DOGS WIN IT WITHOUT BRENNAN?
“I believe my tackle on Harriet Cordner was reasonable and I strongly disagree with the guilty finding,” Brennan said.
“It is even more troubling to know that if I was a man playing in the AFL and was reported for the identical tackle, I would not have been suspended and I would be playing in a Grand final (today).
“The fight for gender equality is as every bit as important to me as the Grand Final and the decisions I have made reflect both of those priorities.”
Brennan had fought to return to football for the Dogs’ Round 7 win over Melbourne last week after battling an ankle injury that she suffered in Round 3.
She will have surgery on a torn deltoid ligament on the inside of the ankle next week, but had made the decision to live and play with pain rather than immediately go under the knife so she could play if the Bulldogs made the premiership decider.
Coach Paul Groves revealed that there had been an “open and honest” meeting about the situation on Wednesday night, and that he had treated Brennan as an injured player upon which a late call was to be made.
Stand-in captain Ellie Blackburn insisted that the drama had not distracted the playing group ahead of today’s Grand Final.
League chief Gillon McLachlan said that the match review and penalty system will be assessed at the end of the season, but rejected the suggestion that the AFL had discriminated against female players based on their gender.
“I think saying we’re sexist is unfair,” he said.
“There is a different set of rules. They play over seven weeks, not 22. There is a pay differential … that’s relevant here as well.
“The fact that the tribunal decision was different is only one of a number of differences, because they’re different competitions.”
There are no fines in AFLW, only reprimands and match sanctions.
“We’re always reviewing the rules. If this is raised that it is actually unfair or too harsh, then that will be reviewed,” McLachlan said on 3AW.
“If they’re wrong — and they’re too harsh — then Steve Hocking and the team will review them. It will definitely be looked at — whether there’s change is a different issue.
“I can see that it’s a different set of rules.
“What should happen is that people should exercise their full appeal rights … and Peter (Gordon) and the Bulldogs know that I’m supportive of that. Where that goes is up to them.”
The AHRC investigates claims before conciliation or policy change is considered before parties have the opportunity to take the matter to the Federal Court if they wish.
Bulldogs chief executive Ameet Bains said that the “greater good” and Brennan’s commitment to the higher principle is to be commended.
“We share Katie’s view that her suspension was wrong and we will fully support her challenging the AFL Rules on the basis of gender discrimination,” he said.
He praised McLachlan’s role in fast-tracking the women’s competition but said the penalties were sexist.
“There is no deliberate or malicious intent in respect to how this situation came about,” he said on SEN.
“In practice the answer is yes (they are sexist), but I don’t think there is any intent for it to be this way.
“There is no suggestion from the club or anyone I think in the broader industry that the AFL is sexist with respect to the AFLW in any way, I suppose that just in practice there have been some unintended and inadvertent consequences of the way these rules have been applied.
“What’s occurring in practice is different to what is intended.”
In their argument — led by Jack Rush QC in a legal team of seven, including Bulldogs president Peter Gordon — the club alleged that Brennan had been discriminated against due to her gender, given that a male player in the AFL would only be fined for the same second offence of rough conduct that was careless, of low impact and to the head.
Rush argued that the suspension represented a “fundamental breach” of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984.
“One of our primary submissions is that it’s close to extraordinary that a woman in the women’s league could have a penalty of suspension when an equivalent in the men’s league does not amount to a suspension,” Rush told the Appeals Board.
“Opportunities (for female players) to obtain and compete and get exposure … are more limited than male players. The women are played less and exposed to being suspended more for comparable transgressions to their male counterparts.”
Also referencing the Equal Opportunity Act, Rush said that the club believed discrimination was the very basis of the way Brennan had been dealt with, and that the ban was an “outcome which is less favourable than that handed to a male player in equivalent circumstances”.
Proportionality was also addressed, with the Dogs claiming that a two-match ban for Brennan in a seven-round season was the equivalent of a six-week penalty in the men’s competition.
The AFL rejected that suggestion, and said that the AFLW guidelines also govern lower-tier men’s competitions and thus could not be sexist.
BRENNAN’S DECISION ... SO WHAT EXACTLY DOES IT MEAN?
— Katie Brennan will not play for the Western Bulldogs in the AFL Women’s Grand Final.
— The club and Brennan have drafted documents to challenge the suspension in the Federal Court today, but in the best interests of the team, she opted not to go down that path.
— She’s off to court ... eventually. The 25-year-old has filed proceedings with the Australian Human Rights Commission. She’s fighting the principle that female players are more harshly penalised for the same conduct with the same disciplinary records.
— A male player that committed the same offence — a careless, low impact to the head incident of rough conduct and their second offence — would have been fined. Brennan’s second reprimand triggered an automatic two-game ban, reduced to one with an early guilty plea.
All-Aus Swan likely out for year, star Saint to face MRO music
The season of one of Sydney’s best AFLW players is likely over after an innocuous incident on the weekend. Plus a gun St Kilda ball-winner is set to go under the MRO’s microscope.
Conti, Tigers a challenge but Bowen backs in Cats’ own threats
Geelong’s Mikayla Bowen knows Monique Conti and top four Richmond pose a big threat to the Cats’ bid to stay in finals calculations. Plus, the special additions to the Cats’ pride jumper.