Alex Antic (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Last week the Australian Football League banned Adelaide Crows player Izak Rankine for four weeks for using a slur, citing its dedication to respect and inclusion. Yet the 2025 grand final headline act is Snoop Dogg, an artist with a history of using similar language in his songs and on a recent podcast. I ask the question: what's the difference? Excusing a high-profile musical act while penalising players, I would say, sends a pretty mixed message.

But the AFL loves its ESG targets and its advertising revenue. This is also a league which punishes players for on-field breaches but profits from online gambling partnerships. Doesn't this reliance on betting revenue clash with the AFL's moral posturing? If the AFL truly values inclusion and integrity, shouldn't it apply its standards consistently across players, entertainers and partnerships? But we know how this is going to play out: Snoop Dogg's going to be there on grand final day—they've paid too much money not to have him—Rankine won't be there, and nothing will come of it because the league is the only show in town.

Don't get me wrong; I don't have any problem with the headline act performing. But what's with the inconsistency? I'm going to give a little bit of advice: one way for the AFL to avoid such mixed messaging is to stay out of politics and just play their game of football.