AFL legend Leigh Matthews and triple premiership coach Damien Hardwick have questioned the severity of the baseline ban length for players who use homophobic slurs as Izak Rankine awaits his fate.

The AFL Integrity Unit is expected to hand down its findings on Tuesday after investigating an alleged homophobic slur from Rankine to a Collingwood player during Adelaide’s thrilling win at Adelaide Oval on Saturday night.

Senior Herald Sun writer Jon Ralph reported on Tuesday night Rankine was looking at a four or five week-ban.

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? Get your first month for just $1. Limited-time offer.

Speaking on Fox Footy’s On The Couch, Ralph reported Adelaide would “desperately try and haggle this down to a three-week ban”, but said that play was probably not “going to wash” with the AFL.

“I think even the Crows would acknowledge a four or five-week ban is heading his way, which will effectively end his season,” Ralph told On The Couch.

Ralph also said Rankine “did not self-report” as a result of Saturday night’s events, with the AFL officially notified by the Crows on Sunday after discussions between the two clubs earlier in the day. Collingwood players post-game indicated they were aware of the incident, prompting talks between the Crows and Pies.

“He (Rankine) didn’t come forward post-match, he certainly didn’t have fits of regret and then call anyone in the next 24 hours,” Ralph said.

Dawson addresses Rankine investigation | 02:22

“He did, in his interview, speak about his contrition, his apology on Sunday to that player involved and the extenuating circumstances. But the base sanction here is five weeks. Even Jack Graham, who self-reported and got four, was extremely lucky.

“So I just can’t see any way in which Rankine receives a three-week ban. I don’t think the AFL will do it or the AFL industry or wider industry would accept it.

“It could be four weeks – and if they (the Crows) lose a qualifying final and go the hard way through, he might be playing again (in a Grand Final). But it seems like it’s likely he’s played his last game this season.”

Rankine is set to become the sixth AFL-listed player in the past 18 months to be banned for using an on-field homophobic slur. Port Adelaide’s Jeremy Finlayson copped a three-match suspension last season before Gold Coast’s Wil Powell was sidelined for five matches.

Speaking on Fox Footy’s AFL 360 on Monday night, Suns coach Damien Hardwick stressed he didn’t accept the use of offensive terms, but added he was concerned the AFL had “painted ourselves in a corner” on strict penalties.

“By no means do I condone the behaviour of it, but I think the term of suspension is probably the challenge point that clubs feel,” Hardwick told AFL 360.

“There’s certainly no place for it (homophobic language) in the game … but at what stage (do we ask) what can we say and can’t we say? This is completely on the ‘we cannot say this and we understand’, but it’s probably the penalty to me that I have a little bit of an issue with … It’s a significant penalty, I feel.”

‘I have sympathy for the club, not Izak’ | 05:09

Asked if his reservation around homophobic slur ban lengths centred around how a severe physical act would be required to trigger a four or five-week suspension from the AFL tribunal, Hardwick said: “I think so. The challenge at the moment – and even me here, it’s hard having the conversation – but what is it?

“We can have a player that belts a guy in the jaw and will get maybe five weeks. Then we use a term – which again I don’t condone the behaviour, it’s a term that should never be used on a football field and we understand – but I think we’ve painted ourselves into a corner with regards to penalty and the length of penalty at the start.”

Matthews, an eight-time premiership winner, said the AFL should’ve set a precedent by handing down a heavy financial sanction, as well as a suspension.

“I just think to myself: ‘Is this where a big fine (should occur) as well?’ It’s a relative thing, but is it a $50,000 fine and a couple of weeks suggestion? A significant fine as well as weeks?” Matthews told On The Couch.

“It (a lengthy ban) is always a deterrent and the words slip out and you do the crime, you do the time. But I wonder in terms of a fair penalty for things like this … as we know, you get four or five weeks for a physical indiscretion, you’d want to knock someone into next week to get five weeks. So it’s a big number of weeks in terms of the on-field suspensions, but a big fine and a few less weeks – is it a reasonable way of looking at it?”

Izak Rankine of the Crows. Picture: Daniel Carson/AFL Photos via Getty ImagesSource: Getty Images

Four-time premiership Hawk Jordan Lewis agreed with Matthews’ proposal, but added: “The precedent has been set, so there’s no way we could come back.”

It’s why triple premiership Lion Jonathan Brown said he expected the AFL to hand down a four or five-week ban like previous players who’d similarly transgressed.

“If you gave him four weeks, the cynics would say: ‘The AFL is giving him a chance which he doesn’t deserve.’ That’s why I think it’d probably be five weeks, just to take that off the table, especially when there’s form there with Wil Powell, who got a five-week suspension,” Brown told On The Couch.

“Because of the recency of the incidents, you can’t say the players haven’t been warned about it. It couldn’t be part of the vocabulary at all and couldn’t be part of what happens out on the footy field at all, so pretty disappointing.”

AFL 360 co-host Gerard Whateley said Rankine was likely looking at a five-week ban.

Whateley said homophobic slurs had “been a scourge for the competition for a year and a half now”, adding it was “Andrew Dillon’s absolute passion project to stamp this out of the game and the intrusion of a word which has no place in common use”.

“Where we find ourselves as an AFL community is troubling,” Whateley told AFL 360.

“This is well declared. The Finlayson incident was distasteful and the clearest warning. I remember thinking at the time I hadn’t heard this word in 20 years and it doesn’t feel like it’s in any sort of usage, but evidently with a certain demographic in various places, it is.

“It’s the sort of thing that needs to be addressed in locker rooms: ‘These are the two reasons it needs to be out: What it means from a society point of view and what the potential ramifications are if you reach for this word in the heat of battle.’ It just can’t be part of any flippancy or whatever else goes on between 20-year-olds.

‘Any role can be filled at the moment’ | 04:01

“Now we find ourselves here and, as a code, this is an awful pattern of behaviour over 18 months.”

Melbourne champion Garry Lyon added: “The code is doing its best to stamp it out, it’s the players now that need to learn the way and take responsibility. But I can’t guarantee it won’t happen again.

“The Crows haven’t put a foot wrong since the halfway mark of the season. They’ve got themselves into a top-two spot, they’ll host a home final – and they’re going to have arguably their best player jumping out of his skin, fully fit, sitting in the grandstand. That’s a worst-case scenario for any club.

“I’ve got no sympathy for him. I understand how it happens, but this is not sympathy for Izak. This is sympathy for the Adelaide footy club, who couldn’t imagine they find themselves in this situation after one of their great wins.”

Essendon coach Brad Scott, who said he “absolutely” had spoken to his players about the issue, revealed a comment from an Essendon player during a team meeting had been used as a teaching point.

“We actually had a situation where a player had used a term in a meeting – which was actually picked up in a recording of our meeting. I didn’t hear it live, but going back over the meeting I heard it through the mic,” Scott told AFL 360.

“I like to think these things aren’t malicious, it’s just a term that is ill-advised and used in the heat of the moment. But we used that opportunity – and we actually said to the players: ‘If this is picked up on an umpire’s mic in-game, there’ll be serious ramifications for this.’

“I think the players at the time thought ‘I don’t think it’s as serious an issue as you’re making out’ – and it just so happened that it turned out to be that serious.

“Our players are crystal clear, but I’ll use this opportunity to go back to our players. There’s no place for it and the ramifications are unbelievably significant.”