The Sydney Morning Herald logo
The Sydney Morning Herald logo
Advertisement

‘I never said it this time’: Collard denies using homophobic slur, faces wait on potential 10-week ban

Peter Ryan
Updated ,first published

‘I never said it this time’: Saints player says he did not use a homophobic slur

By

An unprecedented AFL disciplinary tribunal hearing to determine whether St Kilda’s Lance Collard directed a homophobic slur at a Frankston opponent will drag into a second day after both parties maintained different positions on what was allegedly said during the third quarter of a VFL match on March 27.

Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson KC said the panel was close to reaching a verdict but would deliver their finding and reasons on Friday.

Waiting on an outcome: St Kilda’s Lance Collard.AFL Photos

The implications for Collard are significant as the league is arguing that he should receive a “10-week” suspension if found guilty.

Collard, who was suspended for six matches in 2024 when he admitted using a homophobic slur in a VFL game, told the tribunal he said, “Come here, you maggot”, to his opponent and former Sandringham teammate Darby Hipwell.

The VFL opponent in question

By

St Kilda’s Lance Collard directed an alleged homophobic slur at Frankston opponent Darby Hipwell during a VFL match on March 27.

Collard decision deferred

By Peter Ryan and Scott Spits

The AFL will announce their decision in relation to allegations St Kilda’s Lance Collard used a homophobic slur during a VFL match on Friday after failing to reach a decision by the 5pm deadline.

The disciplinary tribunal hearing lasted almost four hours and tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson said, although they were close to a decision they were unable to deliver one and the accompanying reasons until Friday.

Sleepless night for a few people. It’s a fascinating case.

Therefore, the tribunal is set to publish written findings.

“We are confident that we’ll be able to deliver brief written reasons tomorrow,” said chairman Jeff Gleeson KC. “I can’t say what time, but we’re mindful of the fact that it’s Friday and the stresses that this places on everyone, this issue.”

Waiting on an outcome: St Kilda’s Lance Collard.AFL Photos
Advertisement

Collard deliberations underway

By Peter Ryan

The tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson and other members of the disciplinary tribunal have adjourned to deliberate.

We will be here when the decision is made.

Collard lawyer also arguing Saints player charged under wrong rule

By Peter Ryan

We are in the weeds now. Michael Borsky KC arguing his client should have been charged under rule 35 rather than Rule 2.3 (a) (Conduct Unbecoming).

He says procedural fairness has been denied the player if the tribunal determined the charge should have been made under rule 35.

Andrew Woods SC says it would have been procedurally correct to raise that matter before it went to the tribunal than now after the evidence in the closing submission.

AFL arguing for 10-week not a 10-match sanction for Collard if guilty

By Peter Ryan

It is unclear why that distinction is being made.

There is a 5pm deadline which means a sanction may not be determined today.

Michael Borsky KC saying he would prefer it is decided today. The hearing has now been going for 3 hours and 18 minutes, with a five-minute break.

Greg Swann wants shorter games. I think he should attempt to reduce tribunal hearing length.

Advertisement

Borsky KC arguing whether the rules being correctly applied

By Peter Ryan

Michael Borsky KC says the alleged offence should be heard as a potential breach of the Peek Rule, (rule 35.1) rather than an alleged breach of Rule 2.3 (a) (Conduct Unbecoming).

They are then arguing about the wording of the Peek Rule.

Borsky KC also arguing if the case was considered a breach of the Peek Rule then confidentiality breached as the allegation appeared on the AFL website on the day after the match.

Tribunal chair suggests further scrutiny of investigation report

By Peter Ryan

Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson KC wonders aloud whether he should see the AFL investigation documents in full after Michael Borsky KC said other people spoken to did not hear the alleged remarks.

There was also a question as to why the investigator’s interview of Frankston players wasn’t recorded.

The AFL spoke to 11 witness and some interviews were recorded and some weren’t.

“I am not enthusiastic about prolonging things,” Gleeson said.

The AFL want a 10-match ban for Collard

By Peter Ryan

Lance Collard could be suspended for 10 matches. He is contracted until 2027.

Darcy Hipwell and Bailey Lambert’s not being accused of giving false evidence but Michael Borsky KC suggesting that the Frankston players made a mistake in what they heard.

Lance Collard playing in 2025.AFL Photos
Advertisement

Collard lawyer says it’s impossible to not know what you have said but is possible to mishear what was said

By Peter Ryan

Michael Borsky KC said there is no objective evidence of what was said.

There is no recording of what was said and there are a disputed versions of what was said.

“That is a powerful reason why you would not be comfortably satisfied,” Borsky said.

He says it is impossible to not know what you said but it is possible for those on the receiving end to be mistaken as to what was said.

“The question is: “are you comfortably satisfied that he said the alleged word?” Borsky KC said.

Advertisement