‘I hope he plays again’: Dillon’s heartfelt words for Hollands after Carlton fined $75,000 for bringing the game into disrepute

The AFL admitted Elijah Hollands should have been removed from the field earlier than he was when he experienced a mental health episode in the Blues’ round-six clash with the Magpies, citing visual clues, performance data during the match, and knowledge of his individual circumstances.

The Blues were fined $75,000 for bringing the game into disrepute and league chief executive Andrew Dillon expressed hope on Tuesday that Hollands would still return to football. But he said the league’s investigation was unable to definitively exclude the role of substances in the Hollands episode, and stressed its findings rested on what officials could see on the night.

An AFL source with knowledge of the situation confirmed the Blues were charged with bringing the game into disrepute and not under the medically fit to play rule because it was harder to sustain a charge that Hollands had been medically unfit, despite the subsequent diagnosis of a mental health episode.

“Bringing the game into disrepute” did not specify individuals responsible. As Dillon said during his press conference, “These findings have been made against the Carlton Football Club collectively, not against any individual.”

The charge, notably, did not question the conduct of any individuals in Carlton’s medical team, who were staunchly defended by the Blues.

“What we have been able to ascertain is based on those things — the visual cues and the performance data. The other information, I can’t do that at the moment,” Dillon said.

That accumulation of evidence – rather than any single moment – formed the backbone of the AFL’s conclusion that Carlton should have acted sooner as Hollands struggled through the match against Collingwood at the MCG.

In blunt terms: the signs were there, and they added up.

“Based on the visual cues, the performance data and also the understanding of Elijah’s individual circumstances, he should have been removed from play earlier than he was,” Dillon said.

But in a carefully worded statement from the Blues later on Tuesday, they seemingly avoided taking full blame for the situation.

“On 23 April, the club provided to the AFL a detailed, factual account of the circumstances relating to Elijah Hollands and the club’s round six match.

“This submission made clear the club’s position that it supports its people, who are highly-respected professionals with the utmost integrity, and operate with genuine care for all players and staff who represent the football club.

“The league has today determined that a decision to remove Hollands from the field should have come sooner than the 20-minute mark of the final quarter.

“The club will make the $75,000 donation to Headspace, the national youth mental health foundation which provides early intervention mental health services to young people.

“The club understands the public’s interest for further context to be provided on this matter, however will be unable to disclose sensitive and private information.

“Further to this, it would not be appropriate to provide additional public comment while a WorkSafe enquiry remains ongoing.”

When asked about Hollands’ future, Dillon said any return to football would rest with the player, himself, but added the AFL would support that pathway back.

“He’s a young man with a lot of his life to lead … I hope he plays again, if that’s what he wants to do,” Dillon said.

It is the clearest articulation yet of how the AFL reached a finding that has hovered over the competition for the past fortnight – that Carlton’s response on the night fell short, not because of a single missed call, but because multiple indicators were not acted upon quickly enough.

Through the club, Carlton CEO Graham Wright said the Blues’ support of Hollands “comes from a place of genuine care and understanding of him, and the challenges he has been experiencing”.

“Our club stands in unwavering support of its medical and wellbeing staff, who continue to conduct themselves with the highest level of professionalism, integrity, and genuine care for all our players and staff,” Wright added.

“We accept the outcome in the interest of enabling all parties to move forward, while continuing to ensure the health and wellbeing of our people remains a priority.

“While our process with the AFL is now concluded, throughout this time we have not lost sight of ensuring Elijah and his family continue to receive all the support and care they need. The messages of support our club has received on their behalf have been significant, and we thank everyone who has taken the time to do so.

“Elijah is taking the necessary time to prioritise his health and wellbeing right now, and he will continue to do so with our full support.”

The league’s head of health, safety and football operations Laura Kane said the case had exposed a critical gap in their match-day systems: while physical injuries are governed by rigid, well-understood protocols, mental health episodes remain more fluid — and, in this case, harder to manage in real time.

“Whilst our physical injury protocols are strong and well understood, mental health presentations can be variable and are complex,” Kane said.

“What transpired during the game was something we haven’t seen before … and it shouldn’t have been left for that period of time.”

The investigation, which was technically run by Carlton but overseen by Kane and the AFL, stopped short of identifying individual culpability within the club, instead framing the breach as a collective failure across the club’s match-day environment.

The $75,000 fine, which will be donated to Headspace, was announced on Tuesday with further detail around how the league assessed the incident and why it landed where it did on its findings.

Dillon confirmed the AFL was comfortable Hollands was cleared to start the match, but drew a firm line at what unfolded thereafter.

“We found that he shouldn’t have been on the field for as long as he was,” he said.

The AFL declined to detail specific medical information, including the precise nature of Hollands’ condition, citing confidentiality. But Dillon made clear the investigation leaned heavily on observable factors available to those inside the game.

“There was a broad audience who observed that – the visual cues that Andrew mentioned,” Kane added, suggesting concerns extended beyond the immediate medical team.

The case has quickly become one of the most confronting welfare issues of the AFL’s modern era, not just for what unfolded at the MCG, but for what it revealed about the limits of existing systems.

Kane said the incident would now drive a significant overhaul of mental health governance across the AFL, with the league announcing a raft of reforms designed to standardise how clubs respond to similar scenarios.

These include the establishment of a dedicated AFL health and wellbeing governance committee, the mandating of full-time psychologists across AFL and AFLW programs, and the development of industry-wide standards around “psychological fitness to play”.

The league will also review football department soft-cap settings as they relate to healthcare staffing – an acknowledgement that resourcing, while deemed sufficient in Carlton’s case, remains a broader pressure point.

“We have to make sure we have the right resources to support our players, and we’ll review that,” Kane said.

The AFL also plans to expand mental health literacy among club staff and convene a roundtable with media organisations, alongside the Black Dog Institute and the Danny Frawley Centre, in the lead-up to Spud’s Game.

“This has to be about care, clarity and action – and this is bigger than one club and one night,” Kane said.

The AFL stopped short of criticising individuals at Carlton, a decision Dillon defended as consistent with the nature of the breach.

“It’s a collective responsibility, and that’s the right place for it,” he said.

The league also confirmed Carlton had sufficient resources available to manage the situation, both in the lead-up to the game and on match day – a conclusion that shifted the focus squarely onto decision-making under pressure.

“Carlton have had resources available to support Elijah … well before the round six match,” Kane said.

“Did they have enough on game day? Yes, they did.”

Dillon acknowledged the separate WorkSafe investigation is underway, but would not confirm how that process was initiated.

The AFL boss conceded there were “mixed views” internally when reflecting on the saga, but said the league’s priority had been to respond in a way that improved the system, rather than simply punish the outcome.

“When you have an incident like this, it’s how you respond and how you become better,” Dillon said.

That response, he argued, must also ensure the game remains a place where players feel safe to seek help – not one where mental health challenges become a barrier to participation.

“Mental health is a challenge that the whole community faces,” Kane said.

“We have an opportunity to be advocates for what makes good mental wellbeing.”

Hollands experienced a mental health episode on the field against the Magpies on April 16. He was later admitted to hospital.

Carlton, after an extensive internal probe, submitted to the AFL their review into the decision to allow Hollands to play against Collingwood. The Blues’ view is that decisions were made during the unprecedented situation in good faith, with Hollands’ health and wellbeing at the forefront.

Carlton coach Michael Voss made an impassioned defence of club staff, and the Blues engaged lawyers with workplace expertise to navigate the complex issue.

The AFL is also keen to use its findings to assist in dealing with such issues in the future.

Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.