There are still serious questions to be answered over the biggest story in footy, with Carlton in the spotlight.
Plus a heartbreaking injury that’ll shape the flag race and the AFL’s growing reliance on the ARC comes under fire, as the big issues from Round 6 are analysed in foxfooty.com.au’sTalking Points!
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.
‘DIM VIEW’: SAD TRUTH OF HOLLANDS DRAMA COMES INTO FOCUS
Questions still linger over Elijah Hollands’ Thursday night mental health incident, with Carlton’s actions – or lack thereof – becoming the focus of the footy world.
The club could be facing a major sanction, according to Herald Sun chief footy writer Jay Clark, if they’re found guilty of conduct unbecoming over their handling of the 23-year-old.
Carlton CEO Graham Wright confirmed on Sunday morning the club was aware Hollands was “struggling” in the narrow loss to Collingwood, in which he had just one disposal while playing most of the game, and revealed he’ll miss next week’s trip to face Fremantle.
“We were aware that he was struggling in the game, and he has previously had anxiety and panic attacks. Our guys were dealing with him in the game, and obviously he was having some problems.” Wright admitted.
Wright was then asked why Hollands was out on the field for nine minutes of the crucial final term despite the Blues’ knowledge of the state the 23-year-old was in.
“We’re looking into all of that right now. Part of the process has started and we are working through that now,” the Blues boss answered.
Carlton CEO: “Aware he was struggling” | 00:55
They were not the only ones aware. Fan footage of Hollands was spreading on social media during the game, and Collingwood players themselves were seen speaking about the incident post-match.
Veteran reporter Caroline Wilson told 3AW on Saturday Hollands “was telling some Collingwood players that he had been drinking”, and that is backed up by a fan-created video shared online where Dan Houston appears to be telling teammates during the post-match presentations what he noticed.
While the Blues said on Friday Hollands had suffered a mental health episode – with SEN’s Sam Edmund reporting they were “absolutely certain” – on Sunday Wright toned that down slightly, saying “at this stage, we don’t suspect (drugs or alcohol).
He added: “We’re dealing with a mental health issue at the moment but we’re in the process of going through all the circumstances leading up to the game, two or three weeks up to the game and if there were changes for Elijah.”
There are also medical privacy rules under AFL policy which limit what can be disclosed without a player’s consent.
The league has begun its investigation into how the Blues handled Hollands and why something wasn’t done earlier.
“The AFL released a statement saying it wanted answers, it wanted an explanation from Carlton, it wanted the findings of the Blues’ investigation into what on earth happened on Thursday night – and why Elijah Hollands … was allowed to not only play in the first place, but continue to play throughout the game with getting only one touch of the Sherrin until early in the last quarter when he came to the bench,” the Herald Sun’s Jay Clark said on Fox Footy’s Super Saturday Live.
“My reading of this situation is the Blues are in genuine trouble here, because the AFL has made it quite clear they are on the hook, and they want a full and frank explanation. And potentially to assess and determine whether there was any serious medical negligence, or a genuine breach of the duty of care from the Carlton Football Club.
“This will take several days for Carlton to wind up its own probe, then those findings will be passed onto the AFL, and Laura Kane and the team will assess and scrutinise that pretty closely. Because if the AFL isn’t satisfied on this one, this is a really big story – they could potentially penalise or sanction, deliver a heavy fine to Carlton under the AFL’s conduct unbecoming rules.
“If the AFL finds that Carlton’s care for their own player in this situation was inadequate or unsatisfactory, there could be a fine coming Carlton’s way.”
Blues coach Michael Voss could be seen speaking with Hollands after the final siren and ex-Port Adelaide boss Ken Hinkley believes there is every possibility Voss did not know about the situation until the fourth quarter.
AFL put Blues ‘on the hook’ for Hollands | 00:43
“If you see the behaviour, clearly you take the player out of the game and you look after the player,” Hinkley said on Super Saturday Live.
“But you’ve got to trust all of the people who are working at the club – there would’ve been so many people involved … I know Chris Davies really well, football manager at Carlton now, he would’ve made sure everything was done to the letter of the law. Look, I don’t know how it’s unfolded exactly, it looked obvious pretty early that he was in some problems, but they let him play for a bit longer than they should’ve or could’ve.
“When you’re the coach, when you’re busy doing what you’re doing, it’s hard … you assume the messages were coming through, and if they were then there’s a bigger issue at play. But if they weren’t, and the game’s going on around you as the coach – I’m not defending Michael but as the coach, you’ve got a lot going on.”
Richmond champion Jack Riewoldt was critical of Carlton being slow to act, declaring: “As soon as there is a sign of what’s happening, he comes off.
“You’ve got five on the bench! The player’s welfare and safety is paramount.”
And that delay in Hollands being removed from the game could be the critical component of the league’s investigation.
“Part of the duty of care – you must be (aware),” Jay Clark said.
“There’s an official, a coach, a welfare officer, a player development manager … there’s adults everywhere, employees of Carlton, so if he’s not right and you go back to the vision of one hour before the game where he’s having that set shot on goal and it bounces off his ankle and goes at right angles.
“People in the stands are already onto it up on the top deck in row 24. If they can see it, how does no-one at Carlton pick it up?
“So the fact they haven’t observed it, that is part of the problem, even when he’s running out through the banner on the club’s own Instagram account you can see from behind him some unusual movements, some jerkiness, some twitchiness, that is part of the problem and the AFL is taking a dim view as we speak.”
NO DARCY, NO DOGS? EXPERTS’ VERDICT REVEALED
Two weeks ago, the Western Bulldogs were the only undefeated AFL team and seemed destined for A premiership push.
Two alarming losses and, just as notably, a season-ending injury to Sam Darcy later, there’s now doubt around their flag credentials.
That’s how significant Darcy’s blow is.
Worst fears confirmed for Darcy | 00:31
The Bulldogs will be without their young superstar forward for the rest of their 2026 campaign after scans confirmed he’d ruptured his ACL against Geelong on Friday night.
A range of Fox Footy pundits were then asked over the weekend whether the Bulldogs could still win the 2026 premiership without Darcy.
It was, ultimately, a polarising question.
“I don’t think so,” triple premiership Tiger Jack Riewoldt told Fox Footy.
“That paired with Tim English (recent injury), that’s two big blows in consecutive weeks and in the space of a month.
“It’s hard to see them going deep in September without Darcy.”
Brownlow Medallist Mark Ricciuto said a Dogs flag without Darcy was now “highly unlikely”, while Herald Sun chief football reporter Jay Clark also cast doubt.
“It’s hard to see how the Western Bulldogs can win a premiership here,” Clark told Fox Footy.
“It’ll be interesting to see whether Luke Beveridge, who’s been full on for a flag tilt to this point in the season, and his strategy or approach will adjust at all on the back of this injury.”
But not everyone is writing the Dogs off yet.
Ex-Power coach Ken Hinkley conceded Darcy’s loss “makes it a lot harder” for the Dogs, he said so many premiership sides win a flag without an important player. Hinkley pointed to West Coast in 2018 when it claimed the cup minus Nic Naitanui, as well as Geelong (2011) and Hawthorn (2014 and 2015) after losing Gary Ablett and Lance Franklin respectively.
Can Dogs win flag without star? | 02:47
Four-time premiership Hawk Jordan Lewis also remains bullish, arguing the Bulldogs still have enough top-end talent to contend.
“No I still think they could. I still think they’ve got enough A-graders to carry them over the line,” Lewis told Fox Footy.
But for Lewis and Hinkley, it’s the Bulldogs’ defensive issues – not their forward line chasms – that could be their biggest barrier to lifting this year’s cup.
It prompted Lewis to float a radical move to help stabilise the Dogs structurally.
“The thing with me and the Bulldogs is I’d love to see Marcus Bontempelli in defence,” he said.
“I think they lack leadership, that’s the biggest thing they lack in their back-end.
“That would be the biggest difference from them going from wanting to contend to contending.”
While the Bulldogs remain in the flag mix, Darcy’s absence means they mightn’t be feared in the same way as before.
‘RUBBISH!’ – Gerard cracks it at ARC | 00:28
‘JUST MAKE YOUR CALL’: ARC REVIEW THAT LEFT COMMENTATOR LIVID
It was the score review call that left Fox Footy commentator Gerard Whateley fuming mid-broadcast.
Halfway through the second term of Friday night’s Cats-Bulldogs clash at GMHBA Stadium, key forward Aaron Naughton had a flying shot at goal. It sailed well wide of the goals and, essentially, over the behind post.
The goal and boundary umpire looked at each other with uncertainty as to whether it was a behind to Naughton or out of bounds on the full. It prompted the field official to send the decision to the ARC, with the umpire’s call a behind.
What followed felt like a waste of time. ARC reviewers assessed the play using camera angles that, ultimately, where a definitive call seemed impossible … unless the behind post had doubled in length.
Cue an outraged Whateley.
“How have these umpires not worked out that there’s nothing here that can help?” Whateley asked on Fox Footy.
“Look where the goal umpire is, look where the boundary umpire is – just make your call. This does not belong in the ARC.”
Fellow Fox Footy commentator Anthony Hudson suggested: “But the decision belongs not with umpires, does it? It’s higher up. The administration have got to tell them this.”
But Whateley replied: “I think they have been encouraged. They now need to be told: ‘If we’re going to pay you, you have to make this call – otherwise hand your cheque back and we’ll get someone out of the crowd.’”
Whateley’s frustration was shared by co-commentator Garry Lyon – and, no doubt, many fans watching on.
A similar incident happened the next day in the Hawks-Power clash, when a high snap from Jack Ginnivan floated well wide of the goals – and the goal umpire called for ARC assistance to help determine whether it was a behind or no score.
But the technology never stood a chance.
“Given how high the ball went, how are you going to tell?” Fox Footy commentator Jason Dunstall said.
Co-analyst Adam Simpson added: “No one’s going to know, so why would you take it upstairs?”
The league also came under fire across the weekend for continuing to review last touch out of bounds free kicks – going against their stated goal of speeding up the game and going against the core concept of the rule.
That, at least, can find sometimes an answer that’s not apparent in live play.
Ultimately, when the ARC is called upon for instances where the ball flies over the top of a post – as opposed to the side of the upright or around the goalline – we just don’t have the technology to make a confident call.
Yet it seems, when unsure on a decision, goal umpires are instructed to lean on the ARC.
If there is to be a change in that approach, it must be driven by AFL headquarters.
Kenny’s Butters trade verdict | 03:12
‘THAT’S WHAT EVERYONE FORGETS’: KEN’S BIG CALL IN BUTTERS STAKES
The Zak Butters discourse is ongoing, and while it’s not set to die down any time soon, Ken Hinkley says there’s a key aspect “everyone forgets”.
This year’s premier free agent, Butters was prolific in Port Adelaide’s near-upstaging of Hawthorn on Saturday afternoon at Marvel Stadium.
Butters racked up a game-high 35 disposals, five clearances, 447 metres gained, a goal and seven intercepts to finish as the game’s highest-rated player in the three-point loss.
And while Geelong and the Western Bulldogs remain the purported leading trade candidates for the midfield superstar, triple Richmond premiership star Jack Riewoldt floated a different idea after Saturday’s action.
“I think today, though, maybe (Hawthorn) is the suitor for Zak Butters … after watching the weekend of footy and seeing a contender like Hawthorn up close, maybe he could end up in the brown and gold,” he posed to Hinkley on Fox Footy’s Super Saturday Live.
But the former Port Adelaide mentor had a different idea.
“I think Port are still big in this conversation,” Hinkley said on Fox Footy.
“People want to just talk about (the suitors) … he’s a high-quality player, anyone’s going to want him.
“I’ve said it a number of times; he loves Port, he loves his teammates, he lives with (Mitch) Georgiades.
“Yes, he wants to think regularly about going home. Does he choose to go home? Most of the punters are saying he’s going to get pretty close to saying yes to that.
“It’s not going to be a money decision. It’s going to be about where he can win.”
Hawks hang on against the Power | 03:16
It’s expected Butters will land a long-term contract of at least eight years, on close to $2 million a year, but that figure will only rise as more contenders enter the race for his services.
Yet it’s that external fixation on the dollar amount that seemed to frustrate Hinkley when probed on the topic.
“He either stays at Port, or he’s going to pick the side, in my view (that is closer to a premiership) … Zak won’t go home for money — that’s the challenge that everyone forgets,” Hinkley continued.
“Everyone talks about this money … Nasiah, he stayed in Melbourne for money, because his club had the most money. They were never going to lose him.
“If you’re Port Adelaide, there’s no chance you’re sitting there saying ‘we’re going to take a risk when we don’t need to’ around money. Zak, whatever it takes, you tell us and we’ll sign the cheque.
“If he leaves Port Adelaide, it will be about the team he thinks can win the quickest.”
You’d be remiss not to take Hinkley at his word, considering that of anyone to cross paths with the 25-year-old over the past seven years, his former coach might have a solid idea of his thought process.
And his words only solidify the likes of the flag-contending Cats, Bulldogs and Hawks as the most-credentialed suitors for Butters’ services — and discredits the success rate of a Richmond pursuit after the Tigers were thought to have thrown their hat in the race.
Suns down spirited Bombers on Gold Coast | 00:52
INSIDE AFL’S PECULIAR PRIME TIME MYSTERY… AND WHY IT SURPRISINGLY WORKS
Looking at this weekend’s Friday night fixture, it’s an understandable reflex to question why the heck there are two matches clashing with each other — one of which was a state Derby.
In a market where the AFL has made growing the game in the northern half of Australia, namely with Opening Round, the idea of having Sydney and GWS lock horns just half an hour after Geelong and the Western Bulldogs took flight at GMHBA Stadium doesn’t make much sense on face value.
But, as SEN’s Sam Edmund explained on Saturday morning to Crunch Time, there is a method behind the apparent madness.
“The AFL is trying to do what is best for fans and those non-Victorian clubs in particular,” Edmund began.
“The league wants good attendance at those venues, and Friday night guarantees that. That was actually a record Sydney Derby crowd — 43,986 — most they’ve ever had.
“Down in Geelong, we get a crowd three thousand higher than forecast, and the fourth-highest crowd since the Selwood Stand opened.”
Swans beat inaccurate GWS after delay | 03:19
After the standard double-header on Good Friday where matches didn’t overlap, Round 6 was the first clash between games in the prime time fixture.
Richmond and Melbourne’s annual Anzac Day Eve match will make for just one Friday night game next week, before the AFL embarks on five straight weeks with the strategy.
“Then, it’s about what’s best for the broadcasters, they fuel the game. The AFL would not schedule double-headers if they were losing viewers; in fact, the opposite is happening,” Edmund continued.
“It’s about what those local markets are willing to watch. Free-to-air TV in Sydney, they only watch the Swans. They don’t give a stuff about Geelong and the Western Bulldogs.
“In a couple of weeks, it’s the ‘Showdown’ (in a double-header). Everyone will lose their mind that it’s not a stand-alone Friday night game, but the Showdown on TV last year into Melbourne was the lowest-rated game of the round there.
“No one watched it, but they will watch it Adelaide, and in prime time. It was a Saturday night and a double-up.”
Last year, both of Adelaide and Port Adelaide’s matches clashed with another fixture; their Round 20 clash in particular up against two Victorian teams.
“One for the Dawson family!” | 03:04
Beyond ratings for broadcasters though, the double-up also gives the league more flexibility with the scheduling of Thursday night matches the week after. Self-restrictions prevent clubs having more than three five-day breaks in a season, with the short turnaround unavoidable for at least one team on a Thursday if there is only one Friday night match the week before.
“With two games on a Friday, it gives them better flex on a Thursday night. Each club can only have three five-day breaks, but four teams on a Friday night gives them a better flex on a Thursday,” Edmund said.
“The benefit here, is you’d like to think it will protect and help guard against the Thursday night shockers … we had some shocking Thursday night games as part of the floating fixture last year.
“The idea of this is, we get greater quality control on a Thursday night in the back half of the year.”