Star found guilty of using homophobic slur

Collard’s penalty will now be determined at a sanction hearing, after the initial marathon tribunal hearing didn’t reach a verdict, with the league asking for a monster 10-match ban.

Watch every match of every round of the AFL Premiership Season LIVE and ad-break free during play on FOX FOOTY, available on Kayo Sports | New to Kayo? Join now and get your first month for just $1.

“The AFL acknowledges the decision of the independent disciplinary tribunal today to uphold the charge against Lance Collard of the St Kilda Football Club following a finding that he breached AFL Rule 2.3(a) (Conduct Unbecoming) by the use of a homophobic slur directed towards an opponent in a VFL match on March 27,” the league said in a statement.

“A sanction hearing will now be convened to determine the sanction at a date and time to be determined.

“The AFL has no tolerance for the use of homophobic language in our game and its expectations have been made extremely clear to all of our players, including by education that all AFL and VFL players receive.”

St Kila said in a statement: “St Kilda Football Club is naturally disappointed with the decision handed down by the AFL disciplinary tribunal this afternoon.

“The process is ongoing, with further submissions from both parties to be made on any penalty. A date for this next step is yet to be confirmed.

“The club is also reviewing the tribunal’s written findings and will consider its position, including avenues of appeal. We will continue to support Lance throughout this process.

“As the matter remains ongoing, the club will make no further comment at this time.”

In a three hour and 30-minute hearing, Collard denied using the word f****t and signed a statutory declaration to that effect, instead claiming he said “maggot”.

However Frankston players Darby Hipwell and Bailey Lambert both maintained they heard Collard call Hipwell a “f***ing f****t”.

Tribunal chair Jeff Gleeson returned after 5pm and declared the panel would meet again on Friday to determine a verdict and possible sanction.

“We’re well advanced in our discussions and deliberations, but not in a position to communicate our position. We are meeting again tomorrow and will resume our deliberations. We’re confident we’ll be in a position to deliver brief written reasons tomorrow,” Gleeson said.

Collard was previously found guilty of using a homophobic slur in a 2024 VFL game but admitted to it in that case.

In the marathon case the Saints argued there was no objective evidence either way, and that Collard “voluntarily exposed himself to the risk of perjury in order to clear his name”, given the potential penalties for knowingly signing a false statutory declaration.

“It is in my submission, impossible, to be mistaken to the word you yourself used. But it is plainly possible … for Mr Hipwell and Mr Lambert to be honestly mistaken,” Michael Borsky said for St Kilda.

But the AFL said the Tribunal should be comfortably satisfied Collard used the word, given he has done so before, and among other arguments said “it’s inherently unlikely the words ‘come here maggot’ were used because he’s in the process of letting Hipwell go” at the time of the incident.

TRIBUNAL HEARING RECAP

Michael Borsky represented St Kilda while Andrew Woods represented the V/AFL, with Jeff Gleeson the Tribunal chair along with jurors Scott Stevens and Melia Benn.

Collard’s lawyer said he “vigorously denied” the allegation including in a statutory declaration.

“You can’t be comfortably satisfied on this evidence that this alleged word was said,” Borsky said.

Gleeson said the Tribunal would consider a finding that it could not confirm the word had been uttered as a resolution in Collard’s favour.

St Kilda argued were the word found to have been uttered, the incident would not fall under conduct unbecoming, but rather the Peek Rule.

AFL planned to call three witnesses:

– player Darby Hipwell, who it’s alleged Collard directed the word to;

– Bailey Lambert, another Frankston player who was nearby;

– Sam Morgan, the umpire who did not hear the phrase but was told of its alleged use.

Hipwell said the incident occurred after his teammate Jackson Voss had been struck in the head by Collard.

“Just before he let me go, he had one final pull towards him, he had his head up against my ear and said either ‘Darby, you f***ing f****t’ or ‘Darby, you are a f***ing f****t’,” Hipwell said.

“I know his voice having played with him for a few years at Sandringham.

“I could not be more confident in what I heard.”

Hipwell said he didn’t believe he had heard the words maggot (which Collard claims he used) or f****t being used on a football field before.

“Bailey instantly reported it,” he said.

Hipwell was asked by St Kilda if he recalled calling Collard a coward in their scuffle. He said he did not use that term and did not use derogatory language.

“I can’t remember the exact words but it was something along the lines of, ‘you’re an idiot mate’,” he said.

The Saints said Hipwell and Lambert had multiple discussions about the incident before the report was made, and Hipwell said he didn’t recall how many times they had discussed it, but that they did discuss it at some point.

“Do you recall telling the AFL’s investigator you and Bailey Lambert had a conversation during the three-quarter-time break, and also post-match about the incident?” the Saints asked.

Hipwell confirmed they spoke post-match but didn’t recall whether they spoke at three-quarter-time.

Hipwell was shown a record of his interview with an AFL investigator a day after the incident, in which it says he spoke with Lambert at three-quarter-time and post-game, with the Saints suggesting it’s an accurate record.

“I don’t recall the exact words I said to the investigator,” Hipwell said.

The Saints cross-examined Hipwell further over his use of the word “stern” to describe Collard’s voice when using the word, questioning who between Hipwell and Lambert told who the word had been used.

The Saints suggested that an AFL Integrity Officer contacted his team’s footy manager on the phone, and then Hipwell was put on a phone call with the umpire, which Hipwell denied as the chain of events.

“That’s the umpire’s account of what happened, and you say that’s completely incorrect?” he was asked.

He replied: “That’s not what happened … I came to the umpire, I made a decision to make a complaint or a report.”

The Saints asked Hipwell whether he and Lambert had spoken about the incident multiple times since being interviewed.

“I wouldn’t say there was much discussion about what we heard, because that was blatantly clear,” he said.

The Saints and Hipwell were also in dispute on whether Collard was generally softly spoken.

The Saints questioned whether the people around the incident also heard it, arguing Hipwell told the investigator he did not respond to the comment.

Hipwell said he did not respond in the immediate aftermath but he and Collard made contact about 10 seconds later, and that the AFL investigator’s notes were “not verbatim”.

Hipwell said he was not directly offended but he knows gay people and recognises the word shouldn’t be said in the game.

The Saints said the AFL is proposing a 10-week suspension.

“It’s quite possible you misheard or misunderstood him? I’m not saying you’re lying, I’m saying it’s gotta be possible,” Borsky asked for the Saints.

“There’s no possibility I misheard him. I know exactly what he said,” Hipwell replied.

“What he said was ‘maggot’. He said ‘come here, maggot’,” Borsky said.

“You might’ve just been mistaken – it’s (maggot) a word you’ve said you’ve never heard before on the footy field.”

Hipwell replied: “I was not mistaken at all.”

The AFL’s lawyer took Hipwell through the vision and showed the moment where Hipwell alleges Collard pulls his jumper, gets in close and uses the word.

Hipwell said after the incident he told Collard something like “why would you say that?” and pointed to the moment in the vision, around 10 seconds later, when he claims to have said that – along with the moment Lambert told the umpire something along the lines of “did you hear that? He just said a homophobic slur”.

Bailey Lambert, the player who reported the alleged slur, was then called to give evidence.

“Vossy got hit late by Lance, and then we came in to remonstrate as you usually do … then what happened happened after that,” he said.

He went on to explain what he heard.

“This is where it happens (when Collard grabs Hipwell) … and then I carry on like a two-bob watch,” Lambert said.

“He said, ‘Darby, you’re a f***ing f****t’.

“I was very, very close (to his face) and looking literally at his face.”

Asked if he’s confident Collard said f****t and not maggot, Lambert said: “100%. I wouldn’t be here otherwise.

“I said (to the umpire) ‘umpy, did you hear what he said? He just said the F word umpy’ … I thought we were going to get a 50-metre penalty from it.

“We do all our training modules before the year and we’re told we’re meant to speak up and say the right things … I also thought we’d be getting a 50-metre free kick, that’s why I tried to do it so quickly.”

Lambert said the umpire asked if he wanted to speak during three-quarter-time in the middle of the ground about it, but said he didn’t want to do it during the game, and then didn’t speak to the umpire afterwards because “it was Darby’s issue to deal with”.

Borsky for the Saints suggested Lambert said to the umpire, “did you hear that ump? ‘Repeat offender’.”

Lambert denied that and when asked why he was smiling said “I’m not that witty … I didn’t say that”.

He remembered calling Collard “weak” after the hit on Voss, but not a “coward”, and didn’t hear that word said by anyone.

Lambert said his teammate Patrick Dozzi, who is shown to be nearby in the vision, told him he hadn’t heard the word. He said he didn’t remember chatting with Hipwell about what they heard at three-quarter-time.

“We both just agreed on what we’d heard (in a full-time discussion), and then I just said to him, it was his thing to report,” Lambert said.

“It wasn’t really a discussion, more an agreeance about what we heard.”

Like they did with Hipwell, the Saints questioned whether Lambert used the word “stern” to describe Collard’s language.

The Saints asked Lambert if there was an explanation as to why Hipwell also told the investigator Collard’s voice was “stern”.

The AFL objected saying he would not know the answer to that question, but the Tribunal permitted it, and the Saints suggested Lambert and Hipwell had agreed upon what they had heard and what they would tell the investigator – which he denied.

The Saints suggested “it is very possible you misheard what he said … you’ve never heard maggot (on a footy field), you know he’s said f****t in the past … I’m not saying you gave false evidence, but you might be mistaken?”

Lambert said: “I don’t agree. I wouldn’t be here right now if I thought he might not have said it.”

Lambert said he had been contemplating not giving evidence, and was “somewhat” talked into giving evidence by someone from the AFL’s legal department because it “makes the case stronger”.

“I kinda keep saying it because we were told at the start it was gonna be one statement and that’s it … but it’s turned into this massive thing, and obviously taken up so much time, I’ve taken time out of work,” he said.

Lambert confirmed he had been told he could be compelled to give evidence if he refused.

Umpire Sam Morgan said he was first told about the incident at three-quarter-time when a player reported the homophobic slur – he did not remember which player it was though first mentioned Hipwell, before clarifying he wasn’t sure.

He said he spoke to Hipwell on the phone after they were connected via the Frankston team manager, and confirmed he was told Collard used the term “f***ing f****t”.

The Saints asked whether the microphone the umpire was wearing picked up the slur and Morgan said he did not know.

He also confirmed he could not remember anything specific which was said between the players in the melee, but “in general” heard people “arguing back and forth”.

St Kilda called its Indigenous Player Development Manager Aunty Katrina Amon, who has known him since his draft interviews and supported his move from WA to Victoria to become an AFL player.

Amon spoke to Collard’s personal growth since joining the footy club, trying to serve as a role model for First Nations and non-First Nations youth through their ambassador program.

Amon spoke to Collard’s difficult background: “He hasn’t had a strong male role model in his family … he went and lived with his Nan to support her, he financially supports his Nan now and they have a really strong relationship.”

She said the 2024 homophobic slur incident “showed his personal growth” as he admitted what he had done wrong and gained insight through the training which followed.

“He owned it, and then he moved forward to develop himself as a person,” she said.

They also called Hayley Conway, the CEO of Pride Cup, which works with sport at all levels to promote LGBTIQ-inclusive environments, including 100-150 football clubs.

She ran the pride education for Collard following his 2024 homophobic slur use.

“I found Lance to be very engaged in the session. He seemed quite nervous at the start … he was quite remorseful, shy and also really thoughtful in his comments especially as the session went on,” Conway said.

She said Collard had reflected upon his own experiences of racism, especially with some people who were not aware of his Indigenous background due to his lighter skin tone, and she felt he had drawn a strong connection to inclusion based on that.

Conway said one of the consequences of incidents like these was the “passionate supporters of football clubs who are on the receiving end of those sanctions don’t often turn their vociferous support towards the actions of their football club, but they turn it towards the LGBTIQ community … so we will suffer the consequences as well of ever-increasing sanctions.

“When a punishment is levied, we are blamed for that punishment.”

Tribunal chair Gleeson asked if there were way to minimise the impact of these penalties on the LGBTIQ community, and she called for deliberate engagement with fans engaging in a negative way, along with showcasing LGBTIQ and pride supporters of their club.

“Actions, if they’re found to have occurred, deserve consequences, but they occur within an enabling environment … and we need to really think of the entire culture across footy,” she said.

Lance Collard then gave evidence, saying: “I grabbed him (Hipwell) and said, come here, maggot.

“I know they think I’ve said the word f****t, because I’ve said it before, but I admitted it last time when I said it – but I’ve never said it this time.

“I signed an oath (statutory declaration) during the week about it that I’m being 100% honest. Last time I stood up and admitted it, and took it, I was remorseful … I wouldn’t make the mistake again.”

He said he learned from his pride education the connection between homophobia and racism.

He knows making a statement in a stat dec that he knows to be untrue is a criminal offence.

“I’m being 100% honest. I’m not lying,” he said.

Collard said after the game, he spoke with St Kilda’s Damian Carroll and Lenny Hayes and told them immediately he had said maggot, not f****t.

Collard said he had been called a coward before he said “come here, maggot.

“He didn’t really say anything and he just walked off.”

Collard agreed he was frustrated in the moment of the alleged incident, as he was when the 2024 slur was uttered, but again denied using the word f****t.

Collard said he knew the Frankston players had called it out to the umpire but said “I told him, I never said it.”

The AFL suggested Collard did not try and correct what Lambert was telling the umpire in the moment, but Collard says “well, we were playing the game, I wasn’t even worried”.

Collard said “me and my mates say it (maggot) a lot”.

Woods for the AFL said: “Would you agree it was usually a word preserved for umpires when they were wearing white?”

Collard replied: “I wasn’t even born back in those days.”

The AFL suggested Collard was making up that he used the word maggot to avoid the consequences of using the word f****t, and because it sounded similar so it might help him avoid being found guilty. He denied this.

Collard said he knew they were accusing him of using the slur because the Frankston players were telling him “enjoy your holiday”.

Tribunal chair Gleeson clarified whether he said “f***ing” before he said maggot – given the accusation is he said “f***ing f****t” – but Collard said no.

The AFL’s position was “you should be comfortably satisfied that the phrase ‘f***ing f****t’ was used, and not ‘come here maggot’, for a number of reasons”.

– Because Collard has done it before, using “precisely the same word in a markedly similar situation” … “the player has a tendency to use that word on a football field when frustrated or angry”;

– “There was a nudge towards some concoction between (the two Frankston players) … he (Hipwell) has no reason to lie”;

– The umpire being told at three-quarter-time what happened “makes it pretty unlikely there was any concotion or lying on behalf of everyone”;

– Maggot “is not a familiar term on 2026 on a football field”;

– “It’s inherently unlikely the words ‘come here maggot’ were used because he’s in the process of letting Hipwell go (not bringing him closer)”.

St Kilda pointed out “there’s no objective evidence of the disputed or contested conduct”, which is not disputed by the AFL.

“That alone is a powerful reason – I don’t say determinative – why you would not be comfortably satisfied as to the allegation,” Borsky said.

They also say there were “contemporaneous and contested denials … including on oath” from Collard.

“He voluntarily exposed himself to the risk of perjury in order to clear his name.

“It is in my submission, impossible, to be mistaken to the word you yourself used. But it is plainly possible … for Mr Hipwell and Mr Lambert to be honestly mistaken.”

The Saints said they’re not calling the Frankston players liars, but that they might be mistaken.

“He (Collard) has put his money or potential liberty where his mouth is. That’s how sure he is,” Borsky said.

The Saints also questioned the AFL’s first point about Collard having done it before being critical, saying it’s “wrong in principle” because “it contradicts the prospects of rehabilitation and the potential utility of education in this important space.

“There is no logical possibility for the Tribunal other than to find Mr Collard is knowingly lying, or not to be comfortably satisfied of the charge. There is no middle ground here.”

On the Frankston players, they said “it’s clear they colluded in their stories – not meant in the sense of dishonesty or concoction – but they plainly compared notes and told each other what they thought they heard.”

For this reason the Saints said you can’t consider their evidence as that of two separate accounts, but of one shared account which “contaminates their evidence”.

The Saints also questioned why the AFL did not record the two interviews with the Frankston players.

The Saints argued if the Tribunal believes Collard is lying, that conduct would still fall short of conduct unbecoming – because that is suited to conduct that’s “more serious” – and should be addressed under the Peek Rule which relates to vilification or discrimination.

This would involve a more confidential process and conciliated outcome, should it be possible.

“It’s very significant in this case that the AFL itself announced the allegation against Mr Collard, and the fact of the investigation, on the very day the investigation commenced … on its website,” the Saints said.

“From the outset confidentiality was breached and this was made public by the AFL’s choice to proceed under (this rule) … we say it’s most unfortunate, and if the AFL had followed proper process, the result would’ve likely been no further action given Mr Hipwell said he was not personally offended.”

Originally published as Saint’s charge upheld by AFL as monster ban looms for anti-gay slur allegation