AFL commission chair Craig Drummond has issued a second statement within 48 hours as Geelong's secret concussion deal continues to rock league headquarters. In his second statement, Drummond apologised for the secret waiver with Jake Kolodjashnij and admitted the club went "too far".
Drummond steps aside from deliberations
Drummond also revealed he would not be involved in any "deliberation in relation to this matter and its assessment under the AFL rules and regulations" as the league considers sanctions for Geelong.
AFL CEO Andrew Dillon also spoke on Saturday morning, revealing the commission had been further updated and Drummond "wasn't part of the discussions". Dillon faced a burning question about Drummond and whether his position at the AFL was now untenable.
Dillon on governance and mistakes
"I think when you look at governance, governance is about a whole lot of things, and also mistakes are made, and then I think it's actually about owning them," Dillon said.
Dillon said Geelong could face sanctions over the waiver — and, in particular, why it wasn't lodged with the AFL — but did not want to speculate until he heard back from the club.
Potential penalties and lodgement failure
"Under the AFL rules and regulations, agreements that affect contracts are required to be lodged with the AFL," Dillon said on SEN. "So we've written to Geelong asking them why the document wasn't lodged with the AFL. We've heard from the current chairman of Geelong and also the CEO yesterday saying that was a fail or a misstep and so a mistake in the process.
"So we're waiting to hear back from Geelong and we'll hear back from them early in the week. In terms of the lodgement, there's some (penalties) that have got a maximum on them of 20,000, but there's other provisions that have got sanction at large. But I don't want to get into sort of speculating about where that might go until we hear back from Geelong formally."
Waiver deemed void
Asked if Geelong could also be sanctioned on grounds of "conduct unbecoming" or "potential harm to the game", Dillon said the league was currently looking at "the breaches in relation to the lodgement".
"That's important because that captures what's included in the agreement," Dillon said. "I don't want to get ahead of where the sanction or the rules might go, but anything that looks to be inconsistent with the collective agreement, it would have to be at least lodged with the AFL. And Geelong have acknowledged that by saying not lodging it with the AFL, and ultimately the AFLPA being across it, has been a failure."
Dillon also revealed the "waiver" was actually void.
"There's statutory obligations that you can't contract out of, regardless of what a waiver says, when you're an employer, and you've also got common law rights as a non-delegable rights that you can't contract out of. So they were always protecting Jake as he was playing," Dillon said.
Questions on the waiver's purpose
In an interview with Gerard Whateley, Dillon was asked if the waiver would have been rejected had it been lodged. "Well, I mean, you can't sort of go into hypotheticals, but I know what would have happened is that there would have been questions asked, and the AFLPA would have been involved. I know that for sure," Dillon said.
Whateley asked if it was deliberately not lodged to avoid scrutiny. "Again, I don't want to speculate. I don't think so, but I mean ... I don't want to get ahead of where we were. I think what we'll do is hear from Geelong in relation to, we know how the agreement was signed, it's just why the next step wasn't taken, and we'll hear from Geelong on that," Dillon said.
Whateley also asked if the waiver was a 'sign this or retire' scenario. "I haven't spoken to the player himself. I spoke to his manager this morning, but his manager John Meesen at the moment and Peter Lenton (from Kapital Sports Group), who oversees that, they weren't looking after Jake at that time. I don't know whether it actually got to that level. And again, I don't want to speculate because I don't have all the answers, I wasn't in the room. I do know that it was a process that took place over a couple of months from when the concussion panel met as he worked through with different independent medical experts, the club doctors, as well as having oversight from his insurance advisor as well," Dillon said.
Adriana Oreskov was the independent insurance adviser who was the support person for Kolodjashnij in 2024, in lieu of his manager, throughout the discussions about the waiver. She had earlier represented Jake's brother Kade on a successful insurance claim.
Dillon defends initial response
Whateley asked if the AFL downplayed its messaging on Thursday and whether it was an error in the way the statement went out, given Drummond had to give two statements in 48 hours. "No, I don't think we downplayed it. But what we were doing was working at pace in a really complicated issue, and ... the first thought goes to the player and how is he. And at that stage, the player didn't want to be identified, so that adds a layer of complexity. We worked with the AFLPA and to be able to have a joint position, I think was really important to the industry, and we worked with them on that," Dillon said.
Full statement from Craig Drummond
"I was president of the Geelong Football Club in 2024. This was an extremely complex and sensitive matter, and obligations to both the player and the club were very carefully considered by the Geelong board.
"Jake's welfare was central to all discussions and I have been thinking of him particularly over the past few days. While the player was medically cleared to play, the club engaged in lengthy discussions including with him, his family, doctors, and insurers about his future and the potential risks of returning to play.
"Regardless of the player's agreement, the club went too far in adding a waiver into an informed consent document and it will be removed. The waiver did not remove the player's protections under statutory health and safety laws.
"As the club has also acknowledged, there was also a process failure in relation to lodgement of the agreement with the AFL and the AFLPA. I have not and will not be involved in any deliberation in relation to this matter and its assessment under the AFL rules and regulations.
"I apologise for the mistakes made in this very complex situation."
