Two words prove AFL got its handling of Izak Rankine case horribly wrong
The AFL have come under heavy fire over their handling of the latest homophobic slur case with two words proving where they went wrong.
The AFL have a zero tolerance approach when it comes to racism, vilification and discrimination.
That’s what every policy and rule book within league documentation states. This week however the AFL showed that tolerance has some wiggle room.
FOX FOOTY, available on Kayo Sports, is the only place to watch every match of every round in the 2025 Toyota AFL Premiership Season LIVE in 4K, with no ad-breaks during play. New to Kayo? Join now and get your first month for just $1.
For more than five days the AFL went back and forth with the Adelaide Crows after Izak Rankine used a homophobic slur against a Collingwood player.
It took until Thursday afternoon for a ruling to finally be handed down with Rankine copping a four-match suspension.
A ruling that was less than many in the football world had predicted and one that proved the AFL’s supposed zero tolerance stance was anything but.
For the sixth time in the past 16 months, the league found itself handling a situation where a player had delivered a homophobic slur to a rival.
The first five instances, all under Andrew Dillon’s rule, were dealt with swiftly and punishment was handed down without a drawn out process.
Then came the Rankine case.
Never miss the latest sports news from Australia and around the world — download the news.com.au app direct to your phone.
Instead of standing firm, the AFL allowed the situation to steal the headlines for an entire week ahead of the final round of the season.
The supposed zero tolerance stance was given leeway to allow the Crows every fighting chance of reducing Rankine’s ban.
Now we’re not saying the Crows didn’t deserve the right to appeal, but the AFL needed to prove this is a zero tolerance matter by handing out a ban in a swift manner like they have done with past situations.
The league will say its delayed ruling had nothing to do with the fact the Crows sit on cusp of claiming the minor premiership with finals are just around the corner, but it’s impossible to think otherwise when looking at the picture as a whole.
Rankine’s case was handled entirely differently to the five that had come before it. A fact that has not been lost on the football world.
Former AFLW star turned media personality Kate McCarthy, who has become a leading voice around the league for speaking out about LGBTQIA+ issues, took aim at the league for going away from it’s zero tolerance stance.
“If you look at all of the policies, all of the handbooks, all of the rulings in the AFL and the words that come after anything to do with racism, vilification, any sort of discrimination around sexual orientation or gender is zero tolerance,” McCarthy said on Triple M.
“I don’t think we’ve seen zero tolerance play out this week.
“In the sense that he said what he said, it was proven that he said it, therefore the sanction should be handed down. That’s it, there’s zero tolerance.
“There’s nothing that you can do or say to justify that and that is the sanction.
“I feel like that’s what we’ve seen with every other incident that has played out in this. Clubs have accepted it, they’ve owned that what was said was wrong, the sanction has been handed out and we’ve moved on.”
McCarthy said she felt for AFLW players at the Crows and says if she was in there shoes she’d be feeling anger towards the club for how it handled it all.
“There’s been back and forth between the AFL and the Adelaide Crows and my initial thoughts in all of that go to the AFLW players at that football club that are openly gay,” she said.
“They’re hearing that their football club is challenging a sanction that has been handed down for someone that has delivered a homophobic slur on field.
“If I was a player at that club, and I’m not talking on behalf of any of those players this is purely me, I would be really disappointed and a little bit angry at my football club for taking that stance.
“If you are accepting full responsibility like they’re saying they have and they’re saying Izak has, you accept it and move on and that’s that. I don’t know why there has been so much back and forth here.”
The Herald Sun’s Jay Clark pondered if the medical reasoning, listed by the AFL, deserved any benefit in the ruling.
“Do you put any weighting in the fact that Andrew Dillon today said they had factored in some compelling medical circumstances,” Clark asked.
“Now they haven’t been explained. I think it’s pretty obvious that it will be a mental health concern in this next period for Rankine.
“But does that fly with you?”
McCarthy was blunt in her response.
“I can’t judge on those (medical) circumstances, I have no idea what they are obviously we’re not privy to any of them,” she said.
“My stance on that is, there is absolutely nothing you could say to me that would justify using a homophobic slur.”
McCarthy wasn’t alone in condemning the league for how it handled the situation with veteran journalist Gerard Whateley tearing the AFL to shreds.
“The Izak Rankine four-week suspension is such a disappointing moment from a disappointing administration,” Whateley said on SEN.
“It is the AFL’s stand to rid the game of homophobic language… a campaign they began last season and from what we understand it is specifically Andrew Dillon’s stand.
“And at the moment of greatest challenge he couldn’t see it through. The penalty for the use of a homophobic slur without self-reporting is 5 weeks.
“This confected outcome hid behind ‘compelling medical submissions’. All those involved know they can avoid accountability by using such an oblique phrase.”
Whateley said the issue should have been dealt with in a swift manner regardless of who the player was, which club he played for and regardless of the time of year.
“(AFL CEO Andrew) Dillon and his legal team should have travelled to Adelaide on Tuesday and sat with the Crows administration,” Whateley said.
“Dillon should have said the penalty is five weeks now let’s hear your submissions.
“Dillon should have followed up with the penalty is five weeks now let’s hear your appeal.
“And finally Dillon should have said the penalty is five weeks now let’s go and front the press conference.
“That should have happened regardless which club and which player it was. This was the moment a struggling administration needed to hold firm in what it believes in and show unwavering commitment and leadership.
“But Dillon and his executive couldn’t see it through. It’s just so disappointing. And a little bit more faith is lost in those running the game.”
The Adelaide Crows will take to the field on Saturday for their last home and away game of the season against North Melbourne before they gear up for the finals.
Rankine, like the rest of us, will be watching on from the sidelines.
AFL’s previous bans for slurs
Jeremy Finlayson (April, 2024) – three game suspension
Wil Powell (May, 2024) – five game suspension
Lance Collard (July, 2024) – six game suspension
Jack Graham (July, 2025) – four game suspension
Riak Andrew (July, 2025) – five-game suspension
Originally published as Two words prove AFL got its handling of Izak Rankine case horribly wrong
Inside ‘emotional risk’, Cats duo’s bizarre duel in Dees coaching race
