The story begins with a collision on the football field during the VFL Round 2 match between St Kilda and Frankston Dolphins on March 27, 2026. What should have been just a routine dispute between two players quickly turned into the biggest scandal of the current AFL/VFL season. Darby Hipwell, a 23-year-old Frankston player, filed a formal complaint accusing Lance Collard – 21-year-old St Kilda striker – of using a homophobic slur (“f*ing f**t”) aimed directly at him during a brawl in the middle of the field.
Collard, who is under contract until 2027 with St Kilda, immediately strongly denied it. He insisted he only said “Come here, you maggot” – a common slang term in Australian football to refer to opponents, and not any discriminatory words. However, the incident does not stop at empty words. After a hearing lasting more than four hours at the AFL Disciplinary Tribunal, the situation became even more tense when Collard and his legal team threatened to countersued for defamation. But then, testimony from witnesses completely changed the situation.
Context of the case: From the field to the courtroom
The match took place at Kinetic Stadium, Frankston. In the third quarter, a strong collision between Collard and Frankston player Jackson Voss sparked a fight. According to Darby Hipwell, Collard grabbed him by the collar, pulled his face close to his ear and whispered clearly: “Darby, you fing ft” hoáş·c “Darby, you are a fing f****t”.
Hipwell insisted there wasn’t any possibility he’d misheard. “He pulled me close, his head touching my ear. I heard every word,” Hipwell told the court. He also emphasized that he had played on the same team with Collard at Sandringham (St Kilda’s VFL affiliate team) in the previous two seasons, so he clearly recognized his opponent’s voice.
Another Frankston player, Bailey Lambert, also testified and completely confirmed Hipwell’s testimony. Lambert said he heard Collard say the exact same phrase. Referee Sam Morgan, who was present near the scene, only heard loud and soft sounds but could not distinguish specific words.
Collard’s side vehemently objected. During the hearing, he stated: “I admitted last time I said it, and I regretted it. But this time I didn’t. I said ‘Come here, maggot’. I signed a sworn statement affirming that. I’m telling the 100% truth.” Collard recalled that after the match he told St Kilda staff Lenny Hayes and Damien Carroll that he had been accused of using the slur but had actually just said “maggot”.
This is not the first time Collard has been involved in a similar scandal. In 2024, while still playing for Sandringham, he admitted to using homophobic language and was suspended for 6 matches. Collard later participated in the Pride in Sport educational program and publicly apologized: “I deeply regret my words and any hurt they caused.” St Kilda also called the behavior “completely unacceptable” at the time.
Therefore, when the new incident happened, public opinion and the AFL immediately raised big questions. Is this a repeat offense or just a fatal misunderstanding?
4-hour hearing: Verbal testimony
The hearing at the AFL Disciplinary Tribunal took place on April 9, 2026 and lasted from over 3 hours 30 minutes to almost 4 hours with still no verdict. This is a special hearing because it deals with the charge of “conduct unbecoming” – a rule that rarely comes to the tribunal as such, rather than just a direct penalty on the field.
St Kilda’s legal team, led by Michael Borsky KC, harshly cross-examined Hipwell. They suggested that the two Frankston players might have misunderstood due to the chaotic atmosphere of the brawl, or even been influenced by the precedent of Collard in 2024. Hipwell dismissed: “There is no possibility of my hearing wrong. I heard exactly what he said.”
The AFL, represented by Andrew Woods, argued that the testimony from two independent witnesses (Hipwell and Lambert) was enough for the tribunal to be “comfortably satisfied” that Collard had used the forbidden word. They recommended the harshest sentence: up to10 weeks suspensionif found guilty – the harshest penalty ever in the history of the AFL relating to homophobia.
Collard appeared via remote connection, with the St Kilda leader present. He repeated his stance: “I never said that word this time. Last time I admitted and took responsibility. This time I signed an oath because I told the truth.”
A notable point is that after the match, Hipwell immediately informed the referee and recounted the incident to referee Sam Morgan over the phone. This shows that the complaint is not an afterthought but an immediate reaction.
Threat of defamation lawsuit and response from Collard
During and after the hearing, Collard’s legal team not only denied it but also strongly signaled that it would countersued Darby Hipwell for defamation. They argue that the false accusations are seriously damaging the young player’s reputation and career. Collard, who is a promising talent for St Kilda, is facing the risk of losing his place in the AFL squad if a heavy fine is imposed.
However, it was the testimony from the witness that “changed everything”. The fact that Bailey Lambert – an independent player – confirmed Hipwell’s statement weakens Collard’s “misunderstanding” argument. In addition, the tribunal also heard testimony from Hayley Conway (Pride Cup CEO) and Katrina Amon (St Kilda’s Aboriginal Player Development Manager), emphasizing the importance of maintaining a non-discriminatory football environment.
Currently, the AFL is considering its harshest disciplinary measures to date. If Collard is found guilty, it will not only mean a suspension but could also lead to long-term consequences: loss of contract, impact on brand image, and even pressure from the LGBTQ+ community in Australian sport.
Wider implications for the AFL and Australian football
The Lance Collard incident is not just the personal story of a 21-year-old player. It reflects the AFL’s wider struggle to remove discrimination, especially homophobia, from the field. In the past two years, at least six AFL-listed players have been suspended for using homophobic slurs, including Collard, Jeremy Finlayson, Wil Powell, Jack Graham, Riak Andrew and Izak Rankine.
The AFL has invested heavily in educational programs such as Pride in Sport and the Pride Cup. However, repeated incidents show that education alone is not enough; A stronger deterrence mechanism is needed.
For St Kilda, this is a dilemma. The club strongly condemned Collard’s behavior in 2024. If he is convicted a second time, pressure to dismiss his contract will increase. On the contrary, if Collard is innocent, the case could become a precedent for abusing accusations to “defame” opponents.
On the community side, public opinion is divided. One side supports the stance of “zero tolerance” towards any form of discrimination, especially when the victim asserts it firmly. The other side is concerned about the risk of the “court of public opinion” and how “misheard” testimony can destroy a young player’s career without physical evidence (like microphones on the field).
Darby Hipwell, despite being the central character, remains calm. He emphasized that the goal is not to “destroy” anyone but to protect respect on the football field – where every player, regardless of sexual orientation, deserves to play without fear.
The end of the hearing and what’s next
After more than four hours of fierce debate, the tribunal has not yet issued a verdict and will continue on Friday (April 10, 2026). This is a sign that the case is so complicated that it requires time to carefully consider opposing testimony.
Regardless of the outcome, the Collard – Hipwell case has become a potential “landmark case”. It could reshape how the AFL handles discrimination allegations in the future: will there be a need for on-field cameras/bodycams, or increased mandatory education, or even changes to maximum fines?
Lance Collard affirms his innocence and is willing to fight to the end, even counter-suing. Darby Hipwell and Bailey Lambert stood by what they heard. Between the two sides is a gap in truth that only a tribunal can judge.
In the meantime, Australian football once again faces a familiar but still painful question: How to turn the field into a truly equal place, where words are no longer a more dangerous weapon than physical contact?
This incident not only affects the two young players but is also a major test for the entire AFL disciplinary system. With the possibility of a penalty of up to 10 weeks and the risk of civil litigation, this scandal will certainly last and leave a deep mark in Australian football history.