AFL legend Jason Dunstall is concerned with the league’s decision-making after it was revealed Izak Rankine’s ban for using a homophobic slur was reduced due to mental health concerns.
And he has led a chorus of criticism after it was determined the Adelaide superstar will miss four games, not the expected five, for using the slur against a Collingwood opponent during last Saturday’s win at Adelaide Oval.
The ruling means Rankine could play in the Grand Final if the Crows lose their qualifying final but then win their way through to the decider.
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.
Adelaide CEO Tim Silvers said the possibility of playing in the Grand Final, rather than knowing his season is over, was a “carrot” for Rankine.
“In terms of Izak the individual, I think it’s nice that there’s a carrot for him, and that it means his season’s potentially not over. I think that is good for his mental health,” Silvers said.
The AFL said there were “compelling medical submissions” which contributed to the decision to reduce the ban.
According to the Herald Sun’s Jon Ralph, the Crows pointed to previous medical treatment for Rankine’s mental health, including him being “triggered” by Dan Houston referencing his bump which knocked Rankine out during the late-season 2024 Showdown against Port Adelaide in their defence.
“The Crows’ submission detailed not only the club’s fears for his mental health, but also specific circumstances dating back to Gold Coast and his medical treatment there, and how that potentially instructed his response,” Ralph said on Fox Footy’s Thursday night pre-game coverage.
“Now they are aware that that will be seen to be playing the mental health card, but they spoke about specific and very complex aspects of his diagnosis, and could potentially have triggered his response in uttering that slur.
“So Rankine takes some time away from the football club over the weekend, then will return to apologise to the AFLW and AFL team.”
Dillon addresses Rankine’s 4-game ban | 09:23
But Australian Football Hall of Fame legend Jason Dunstall could not understand how Rankine’s mental health was a good enough reason to reduce his suspension by a game.
“I’m about as confused as I could possibly be,” Dunstall said on Fox Footy.
“I regard myself as at least a semi-intelligent man. I don’t know how compelling medical evidence gets you from five weeks down to four, and if we’re talking about mental health, by what metric, measurement scale are we saying that equates to one week. I don’t understand, I’m confused. Can someone explain it to me?”
Ralph attempted to do so, saying: “So what Adelaide would say is that there were certain triggers in regards to this, that he was triggered because being knocked out by Dan Houston last winter last year, that was one of the factors.
“They would say that it’s not just the mental health card, and they would believe that it’s not setting a worry. I think maybe that’s what worries you (Dunstall). Any player who is now suspended for four or six or eight weeks says, look, I’m battling with my mental health, and I wonder what this might do for me, and so give me a discount on that penalty.
“They (Adelaide) would say that there are very specific incidences here. And of course, they need to respect his confidentiality, and so there are potentially things in his past there that have instructed what he’s done here.
“Do you worry Jason about that precedent, though, that every player now in a situation where they might miss a final says, okay, my mental health will be impacted. I need a discount.”
Dunstall replied: “The problem is we don’t get it properly explained to us. So there are triggers because you got knocked out last time. That’s a trigger, and I’m not having a go at Izak Rankine; I’m having a go at this case and the way it’s gone from five weeks to four weeks based on supposed compelling medical evidence.
“And we’re hearing there are triggers that prompted a response, I just don’t get it, and I can’t comprehend how the fact that he got knocked out last time they played has anything to do with it.
“The issue is they’re not idiots at AFL House. I’ve got great respect for Andrew Dillon. He’s a smart man as are the other people around him, but we’re not getting all the information. We’re just expected to take this as blind faith and say they’ve made the right decision.
“We can’t do that because it doesn’t make sense without all the relevant facts to understand why they’ve decided to give a week off (the ban) to give him hope, perhaps, of playing in the Grand Final.”
Dunstall later suggested the league was “a victim of their own wokeness”.
“They don’t want to offend anyone, they want to take every issue and every condition – and I would never downplay mental health, by any stretch of the imagination – but rules are rules,” he said.
“And it doesn’t matter, if you transgress, you have to cop the punishment but they don’t want to offend anyone and by doing so they’ve offended everyone.”
The criticism of the AFL’s decision has been almost unanimous.
AFL 360 host Gerard Whateley declared on SEN it was “such a disappointing moment from a disappointing administration”.
Collingwood great Tony Shaw tweeted: “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 incompetent, amateurish, laughable.”
Former AFLW star Kate McCarthy said on Triple M, of the league’s suggestion it has zero tolerance for homophobia: “Zero tolerance? I don’t really think we’ve seen zero tolerance play out this week.”
Discussion about this post