Listener feedback | Butters and Collard decisions (15.04.26)

0:00The Hyundai Open Line was blowing up, Ross out the back has his hands full. If you have something to say, please buy all means and give us a buzz. One, three, hundred, seven, three, six, seven, three, six, let's go to Michael in Preston to get things going. Morning, Michael. Yeah, Tom, look, it's just amazing with Lance Skull, I've got you in a quarter of a year. No one knows about your prize or previous convictions before you get sentenced. So what chance did Lance have, whether he's right or wrong, whether he did say it or not? Everybody already knew that he had a prior regarding homophobic spirit. Yeah, appreciate you, Paul Michael. It was part of the argument from the AFL and we did ask James Gallagher about that a few moments ago as well. Let's go to thank you for the call. Let's go to Jaden and Karam Downs. He wants to talk about Zack Butter's. G'day, Jaden. All right, G'day, Tommy. How you going? Well, thanks. Yeah, me alone, three things quickly touch on. Yeah, I work with an official that was doing that game on Sunday and he categorically says that the button's 100%

1:02said what Nick was saying. Not that it's any news. That's what's been said. You know, yeah, again, she's up. Did he hear it, Jaden? Sorry, did he hear it or did he just say that because Nick foot was categorical on it? No, well, yeah, I think he's just because Nick was categorical but they all spoke big, you know, immediately after. So yeah, second thing is with our audio, the audio is only there for them to communicate to each other. So it's only like a mic to pick up their own voice. So sometimes you're able to get a little bit of outside noise but in that instance, it's not designed for that. So that's why we didn't pick it up. And the third thing was, did you end up, you know, the last nine and three 60 where race, race brought up that an um, Juneau come up to him during the game? Yes, that's something that I've been discussing with people behind the scenes this morning. We'll play that soon. So stay tuned, Jaden. We'll get to that audio in a few minutes time and then, um, and then we'll discuss that.

2:03I appreciate your call, three very valid points. Let's go to James in queue. Morning, James. Morning, Tom. Um, look, I just found a very interesting how, um, you both think that the collard case and the others cases different, vastly different when you've got, in both cases, you've got two against one. Yep. In one case, they believed the two against the one and he copped his fair whack. He got the full whack of the nine weeks. In the other case, they believed the one over the two and he got a slap on the fingers. Yeah. If he's got a fairer guilty, he's got to get given his fair whack and I'm not, I'm not, I'm probably more of an unpowered bachelor like everybody else as much as football, but all we've been concerned about is Nick Butter, what about foot, um, he's, his name's been dragged out now to two. So, you know, where's the concern for him? That's a valid point with foot and I have asked Rob Kerr, who's the, uh, AFL umpires association boss to come on for a chat, he hasn't got back to me yet, but hopefully we can get him on today or tomorrow.

3:04I said yesterday, James, on air, that I know Nick foot, uh, personally, and I really liked Nick foot and I really trust Nick foot. I think he's a good man and I think he's a hugely successful umpire as well as umbite of grandfinal, 270 games. You could argue he's in the best two or three umpires in the sport, not just in terms of decision making, but also his manner with the players. So I trust Nick foot, but I also know um people who know Zack Butter's really well, I've never met him personally myself and I'm entirely inclined to think that Zack Butter's believes he's telling the truth as well. So, um, I, I think there's, there's a middle ground here. There's a nuance where you don't have to be against either party. You can actually support both parties if you the AFL and reach a conclusion in the end. They've gone with the umpires word over the two players words and you're right, there are similarities between the collard case. And the Butter's case, absolutely there are the two V1 component um is, is, is interesting. The fact that both go onto the, to the tribunal um is interesting as well. But I guess the, the biggest difference and the discrepancy that I was referring to before with James Gallagher is that one is umpire abuse

4:07or alleged umpire abuse. The other is a, is a homophobic slur from a first nations man that has, uh, that has, uh, uh, that has transgressed in the same way before. And, and I think the latter is far more delicate um, and far more um, concerning because of the community that, uh, is around that and the LGBTIQA plus community, um, that, uh, that is clearly impacted by those sorts of words. So as much as I, as I feel for the umpires in this situation and I feel for butters and poor Adelaide, I, I feel for that community far more because I think it's far more wide ranging and it's less about the football and more about, uh, language and our society. But I hear your point, there are similarities in both. Thank you, James, for your call. Uh, some text messages coming through. The butters case will be thrown out straight away on appeal just on the basis of legal process, let alone the flimsy evidence. How can a juror leave the proceedings during closing arguments and reconnect while driving a car? A clown show. It was, uh, particularly short on that answer. Wasn't it James Gallagher? Morning time, you need to get the umpires point of view.

5:09The players are not angels. They did not tend to forget what they say. Andrews from Bendigo. We are trying to get, uh, Rob Kerron, hopefully he can come on at some stage in the next couple of days. We'll continue to take your calls after the break. Waitly for Australian made. When you buy certified Australian made, you're backing local businesses, jobs and our economy right here. This is your town. This is your station. This is Wade Lee. If you're just joining us, Tom Morris, uh, Tom Morris filling in for Jared Waitley, but joining us earlier was, uh, James Gallagher, the CEO of the AFL Plays Association. You can catch up with that extended chat regarding collard, butters and many other football issues towards the very end on your podcast app. I urge you to have a listen because he covered it really well. I thought even if you don't agree with everything the Plays Association is saying or doing, uh, you can't argue that they've got the best interest of the players at heart. And of course the players are super important for the, uh, for the future of the game and the sport and making sure AFL football is as entertaining as possible for as long as possible.

6:09You'll listen to waitly for Australian made. When you buy certified Australian made, you're backing local businesses, jobs and our economy right here. We've got Bratz and Erasen, like new ball partner coming up in about half an hour's time. Chris Coles is going to join us from England. He's going to talk about English Premier League. I might have been asking about Rexham as well. Uh, a bit happening in the Western Bulldogs today as well. Uh, Harry as in Prince Harry is at the Western Bulldogs. Sentence I thought I'd never say is there for a charity event for November. We're just, uh, trying to work out exactly what's going on and, uh, whether we can be part of it as well, that's all for the new a cafe drinks range. But just for the next little bit, really keen to touch base with the waitly listenership and get your thoughts on, uh, the Lance Collard case, the Zack Butter's case and what James Gallagher said earlier. So he gives a buzz on one three hundred seven, three six, seven, three six, the Hyundai open line. Let's go to Paul in Ballarat. Paul morning to you. Good morning Tom. Good to speak with you too. Um, first of all, I thought I'd put for AFL is an extremely powerful entity and the different makes

7:10in so many areas of people lives in his country amongst others, um, is really empowering. So I think AFL, um, as a whole, but the work they do in so many areas is really critical for how a lot of us live our lives. Um, now, second point, most importantly, um, Tom, I want to talk about Lance. Now, I'm really strong about this. I'm a gay, masculine male. Um, my father is extremely masculine male. Three of his children turn out to be gay men. And a four, God knows, but he would have thought back to know. So, um, and I think what's happening with Lance is really, I don't think this is productive or constructive in here. And actually, that's the fact that my, it's like a punishment for what's going on for him. It may be another one, I don't know how Lance is thinking and I'm not Lance, but, um, taking away possibly the one thing that he loves playing the game of AFL football, where for some footballs, that football field,

8:12in a sense of peace, says the way of getting away from other issues in their life. And for him taking that, taking that away from him, I'm not saying what he's done is right by him, and you know, I don't think he's any right or wrong about it, but I think we need to be more constructive and productive with how we look at these, these type of issues. So, maybe for Lance, his, um, he's, um, environment, his culture of how he's brought up, um, is where he's at his own point today. So, I think maybe looking at, um, setting out not so much community service, because I can see he's seen as a punishment and a deriverment to him, but maybe a linking with, um, the gay community and some gay, masculine males, and having open his eyes, I'm saying, well, guess what? There are the gay, masculine males out there, just like, just, just, just, just make them the you are, who happen to be gay. And maybe linking them then, and open his eyes and set up a program with him over a period of time. And others, and I think that's the way we need to go.

9:13Um, yeah. Not pain, I mean, not pain, because we're all too, we're just all so ahead of you. And that's, that's, that's, that's, that's destructive for him. Yeah, Paul, I really appreciate your thoughts and, um, and, and how consider they are. Um, so that might work for Lance Collider, might work for any player that's, that's in the situation in the future. I hope that there's not, but if it does happen again, um, do you think the AFL and the competition as a whole needs to worry or have a, an eye towards the optics, uh, setting an example for others? Do you think that is a consideration when handing down a sanction to players who have now offended more than once? I don't, I don't, so I think when someone's sanctioned being pinched in the third time, we need to look at that and kind of write there. So then we stop at the happening in second time. So what's having been Lance and the outcome of what they are for? Look, I'm not saying the AFL are wrong, as I said, there's no wrong author. They look from maybe from their point of view, and I'm not going to put words in there. They may look at the point point of view.

10:14They need, they have to be seen to be doing something about this that we can't accept this in the game. But I'm not sure first time punishment they would give and that hasn't been productive for him for footage has allowed this to happen a second time. So I think AFL need to look at, uh, a program, look at a model that we can work with players similar to himself. Or any AFL player that comes out with a destructive demeanor mindset that comes out on the field and look at it as a whole and look at, you know, and I don't have, obviously, each player is different and just look at the way we can empower them to guide them, support them, encourage them, help them to be more aware and open their eyes up. I appreciate it. Yeah, no, no, Paul, I really, I didn't mean to cut you off. I really appreciate your call and again, how considered it was. I know, um, when I was sacked at Fox for, uh, yeah, more than four years ago now, um, Tanya Hosh from the AFL, um, actually set me up with a number of different programs

11:16that you speak of. And I just wondered whether those programs have been available to Lance Collard and others who've been in the same situations. And, um, and they were hugely beneficial to me. They weren't just a module where you go in for 45 minutes and tick a few multiple choice boxes. It took, it took me literally hundreds, hundreds of hours to go through it and, um, and learn and educate myself on where I went wrong. And I just hope Lance Collard has the same, um, the same things available to him. Paul, appreciate your call. Thanks for jumping on. Let's go to Albert in essence and Albert. Welcome to the show. Hi Tom, just quickly, if I make a few points, um, first of the umpire had no way of knowing the audio device. He was wearing it and capture what Butter said. He's acted thinking that possibly there's a chance that it has been recorded. So I believe that the umpire uh, heard it and I believe that Butter said it. Now, I say that not a lot of it, but isn't Butter's one of the most fine players in the competition at the moment. And it'll be reasonable to suggest, therefore, that he can't control his emotions or his anger in the heat of battle on the field. And this is just another example of that.

12:18Having said that, I do believe the tribunal have acted inappropriately and given what we know, I don't believe how they can put more weight in the testimony of an umpire than the testimony of a player. I think they should have in the absence of any evidence, just worn both parties and moved on from there. But I do believe, and I can't believe I'm saying it, that Butter said it and the umpires were correct in this instance. I think that's a pretty balanced take, Albert. Appreciate you jumping on. Let's go to Adrian in South Morang. Welcome, Adrian. Hey, you know, Tommy. Well, thanks. How are you? Yeah, very well. Yeah, just want to wait on the Butter's uh, situation. Is the tribunal like, isn't it like a court of law where it's sort of innocent until proven guilty? Because the evidence, unless there was other evidence that, you know, it wasn't broadcast to the public, you know, I tried to slow down the Fox footy, uh, snippet and the Channel 7 snippet on, you know, Instagram and I tried to slide down, I'm like a muter and I just couldn't, I couldn't make out anything that was said

13:20because their ground noise oversook it. I don't know if there's another snippet that we, the public, the fans haven't heard, but I thought if you're not proven guilty or innocent, if that makes sense. Yeah, and I hear you, Adrian. I think with these ones in a barrister, actually texted in yesterday, in the absence of evidence, often, um, the tribunal or juries can make, um, can make assessments on the balance of probability. And they, they clearly felt as if, uh, in this case, the Nickfoot's story or Nickfoot's truth and reality was more convincing than that of Zach butters and Ollie Wands. And you can make your own assessment about that. Appreciate you jumping on Adrian. Thanks for that. Let's go to Matt on the Gold Coast. Matt, welcome to the show. Welcome. How you doing? Well, thanks. How are you? Good. Thank you again. Now, I think the fairly gets lost in this is, uh, just prior to that, that decision, and what happened was I was, uh, as a poor elephant, I was just really questioning the discipline of the port players or at least the, you know, sometimes you can have a 15-minute gameplay between a decision that,

14:21an employer makes that's a contrary to another decision by another employer on the ground. But when decisions that, one end of the ground, we can two, three minutes, uh, favoring just one side in particular and the locals are getting really, really restless. And, you know, it was really frustrating. So if you even think about that decision where Jordan Sweet has not, has not been holding, uh, then I'm sorry, the number 10 player for a prosecutor is named now, but he, he gets a free kick and that's the, that's one of, like, numerous, poor decisions. And it's where, you know, the obviously there's got to be some level of accountability to their performance from the umpires. And that's, they, they, they had that already. Um, um, and I just think that maybe, maybe Nick was probably also a bit defensive and, um, it was aware that there was some poor, judgment poor decisions. And Zach, he could have actually said something that was not about payment, but Nick's immediately defensive understanding where of the heightened situation and, and how, you know, that's why, why would Nick be so defensive?

15:22Immediately to think that, but I said that even if he didn't. Yeah, that, that is a thread that's coming through quite a bit on the text message of machine, Matt, you're not the only one to bring that up. I appreciate you giving us a call and, uh, I hope the Gold Coast is, uh, is lovely today, a bit jealous of the weather up there. Let's go to Darcy and Ashburton. Darcy, good day. Did they're Darcy? Hey, Tommy. Yes, gotcha. I heard a lot of talk about Nick footbang soft door and overreaction this week. I, I find it quite, uh, hot, hypocritical from Zach butters today. The man that's going to be paid 20 million over the next 10 years, essentially crying on the news over a $1500 fine. Yeah, so I don't think it's about the, the monetary value. I don't think he really cares whether it's $1,500 or $500. I think Zach butters cares about the reputational damage that he perceives would be, uh, on his back now that this, um, this, this sanction has been handed down. Do you see that? I don't think there's been any reputation damage to butters.

16:24I think everyone's essentially supported him and Nick footbang made the enemy. Look, look, I, I agree with you that the reputational damage to Zach butters is negligible. Look, I think it's minimal. I made the point to Kane last night on lockdown that Liam Ryan got fined $1,500 for umpire abuse last year. And no one remembers that. Daisy Thomas got fined $7,500 in 2019 for calling, uh, a banjo umpire and effing cheat. Um, and no one looks at Daisy Thomas and goes, geez, what a terrible bloke he is because he did this to an umpire seven years ago. I think if you are a activist, if you do it a number of times, then you are at risk of reputational damage. But I think the reputational damage for Zach butters has actually been overblown. I, I get why he's pushing back but I also don't think it's going to affect him when I go to going forward. Um, I think what will potentially affect him and Port Adelaide is if and when Nick foot does the next port power game, um, or the Port Adelaide game, I think that will be an interesting moment in time. I think you made some salient points, Darcy. Appreciate you call. Let's go to Jack on the road.

17:24Can I, Jack? Uh, Tom, uh, a lot of people are missing the point here. Now let's go back to the Ruckman who the discretion was all about. Look at he's demeanor whilst talking to Nick explaining to him, he was confused. Morton, Zach butters about why the freak was given against him. And that was never taken into account. Secondly, Zach butters was so close to the umpire. Is that an explanation why it wasn't recorded? Thirdly, until umpires become fully professional, 100% and not have conflict of interest, possibly conflict of interest, for someone who is part of the sports bet team, I cannot believe that Nick. I know he's on racing.com. He's a good commentator, but to be an ambassador for sports bet

18:26is completely wrong. AFL should be making all umpires completely 100% professional and have that job. Jack, appreciate you call. I think the, um, the pushback from umpires is they believe this is their view that they actually better umpires because they're not fully professional. They get a chance to switch off rather than think about what's a hole in the ball, what's a push in the back, what's an insufficient intent all day. I see both points. I think it would make some sense for some umpires to be fully professional, but I'm not sure it's actually financially feasible to make every single field umpire financially full time, which has been a point for a while now and so far the umpires have pushed back on that. Okay, Jack, appreciate you call. Thanks for jumping on.