The Australian Football League (AFL) is facing scrutiny over a secret agreement between the Geelong Football Club and a player who had suffered multiple concussions. The contract required the player to assume all legal risk for any further head injuries, a move that has sparked widespread outrage and calls for transparency from league officials.
The matter came to light on Thursday, prompting a strong response from various figures within the football community. Former Hawthorn president Jeff Kennett criticized the deal as "worse than a rort," condemning both Geelong and AFL chairman Craig Drummond, who was also Geelong’s president when the agreement was made in 2024. Kennett called on Drummond and AFL chief executive Andrew Dillon to clarify what they knew about the contract and the approval process. He described the arrangement as a deliberate attempt to shift legal responsibility from the club to the player, raising serious ethical and safety concerns.
According to sources close to Geelong, senior AFL officials were aware of the agreement in principle but did not scrutinize the specific terms before it was signed. Initially, Geelong denied the existence of such a deal but later acknowledged it. The player in question, who had suffered several concussions during his career, signed the contract in an effort to continue playing at the highest level despite the acknowledged risks. The agreement explicitly stated the player’s acceptance of potential severe and permanent neurological damage and the assumption of legal risk for further head traumas.
Melbourne head coach Steven King, a former assistant coach at Geelong, condemned the contract, saying he would never ask a player to risk their health by signing such an agreement. Former West Coast coach Adam Simpson also expressed difficulty comprehending how any club could consider such an arrangement acceptable.
On Thursday night, the AFL and the players’ association (AFLPA) issued a joint statement confirming that the player had been cleared to play by an AFL Concussion Panel prior to signing the letter. The statement emphasized that the waiver was not lodged with or approved by either the AFL or AFLPA, and that Geelong had agreed to remove the waiver. Both organizations asserted that they would advise clubs that any agreements impacting players’ legal rights must be approved to ensure players are not solely burdened with risk.
The controversy also extended beyond Geelong. Reports emerged of a similar agreement involving a Sydney player returning to football in the Victorian Football League (VFL) years earlier. Unlike the Geelong case, that player’s contract was reviewed by the AFLPA, and the agreement was subject to different conditions due to the player competing outside the AFL's standard Collective Bargaining Agreement.
The AFL has not yet provided detailed information about when it first became aware of the Geelong agreement or whether similar contracts exist elsewhere. The incident has raised significant questions about player welfare protocols and legal protections within the league, with observers calling for greater oversight to prevent such situations in the future.