AFL coaches are in collective agreement to push for a change to the contentious substitute rule, as the current team structure and rendition of the tactical sub enters its third season.
The polarising rule was introduced in 2011, reducing the interchange bench from four to three, but was abolished at the conclusion of the 2015 season.
It returned in an adjusted manner in 2021 as a medical substitute, however, farcical usage of the sub and commentary objecting against the genuineness of 'injured' subbed-off players led to the AFL amending the rule back to a tactical choice, and has remained since 2023.
However, the rule has been heavily scrutinised by AFL players and coaches alike.
Star Collingwood veteran Scott Pendlebury said last year he didn't care for the solution so long as the rule was abolished, while Essendon coach Brad Scott admitted he attempted to get rid of the role while he worked for the AFL.
โI couldn't imagine playing your first game and being the sub. Like, I think it's ridiculous," Pendlebury said in 2024.
โI'd love to make it five or four on the bench, I don't care, as long as it goes.โ
"I don't think a player in the competition that enjoys the sub-rule or being the sub or being subbed off," Scott said.
"I don't think it adds anything to the game. I tried to get rid of it at the AFL.
"There are people who think it adds intrigue and I'm not sure how it does that."
The AFL Coach's Association's (AFLCA) CEO Alastair Nicholson said that at the AFLCA's annual general meeting on Monday, there was a strong consensus from coaches against the rule.
"There's a strong collective view on (abolishing the sub rule)," Nicholson told AFL.com.au.
"It's a good time to engage on that and work through it on the season and both sides can understand where the other one is coming from in regard to it.
"It's healthy if the senior coaches have a really strong point of view on something, that we have the channels and the process and everything like that to review that and have as much input as possible."
What remains up in the air is the solution to the sub's removal, with the AFL's senior coaches varied in opinion.
Also discussed at the union's AGM was the potential for coaches to earn money through a marketing fund similar to the players' pool.
According toย AFL.com.au, coaches are keen to make an arrangement this year that will see coaches earn money above the soft cap through commercial opportunities.
AFL players currently have a marketing fund worth $35 million that allows the high-profile players to earn money outside their salary.
Nicholson said the coaches are striving for their own pool to be introduced as soon as this year.
"It's something that can be looked at. We've got a very rigid soft cap and we've got very high-profile and marketable people in the game being the senior coaches," Nicholson said.
"I definitely think because it does exist for players it's something that could exist for senior coaches.
"It can go both ways โ it could be for commercial or media purposes over and above what they do in their soft cap and coaching role, as well as in the right areas for game development.
"It was certainly discussed in the past and is something we were keen to push, but it hasn't become a part of an agreement, so we're keen to revisit that.
"We think it is a way to reward senior coaches over and above what they do outside of a rigid soft cap where they're probably caught in their ability to expand and earn while they have their time in the role."
Senior coaches earned $750,000 on average in 2024.
An intelligent answer (that means one that will not be implemented) is:
The bench to be extended to 6.
6 interchanges (using any player/s) per quarter.
Extra interchange permitted in that quarter when a doctor rules that an injured player can no longer play.
Reduces congestion.
Disables the “flood” (it’s just not called that anymore)
Enables more 1 on 1 contests.
Rewards those players who naturally have – or have worked hard on attaining – elite running capacity (remember Craig Bradley?)
Removes the purported “need” (LOL) for the netball inspired 6-6-6 “rule”.
Much easier to keep track of.
Removes (or greatly mitigates) advantage to a team when an opponent goes down.
Placates those who think being a “sub” is terrible (regardless of the fact two ‘reserves” – who’s position” was almost exactly the same – were used for over a century and almost every great player during that time started as a “reserve”).
“marketing money” should not be included in the “cap”…. it’s not for the vfl executive, is it?
The cap should be extended to a individual limit too.