The AFL aims to put pressure on players through their wallets to curb on-field misbehaviour.
A key feature of the wide-ranging tribunal overhaul is the greater use of fines for low-level offences.
Suspensions will still be an option for repeat offenders of lower-grade offences during a season, but the league hopes that hitting the hip pocket more will be a strong enough deterrent.
“Our players have had a history of being motivated by avoiding their hip pocket being hit,” said AFL chief executive Gill McLachlan.
“It’s also a reflection that (with) the increased scrutiny of our game, we think there were players missing games for incidents that we don’t think are worthy of missing a game.
“Therefore (they are) ineligible to win the Brownlow.
“We think that progression – hitting the hip pocket before suspension – is the right one and it’s sensible.”
The changes announced on Wednesday represent the biggest overhaul of the tribunal since the introduction of the current system in 2005.
While then-AFL football operations manager Adrian Anderson brought in a setup that has meant far fewer tribunal hearings, it has also been controversial and often confusing to fans.
Anderson’s successor Mark Evans has introduced changes such as the elimination of carryover points and the simplifying of the “bad record” provision.
“What it did was create confusion for our supporters,” McLachlan said.
“Some of the aberrations and things that people didn’t think seemed to add up, (we want to) get them as best we can out of the system.
“It’s a pragmatic, simple and sensible approach.”
The new system also clarifies that a player is only ineligible for the Brownlow Medal if he misses a match or more through suspension.
McLachlan called out the votes for the first time at this year’s Brownlow, where West Coast midfielder Matt Priddis was a surprise winner.
McLachlan revealed on Wednesday that a preliminary check of the votes early on the night showed Fremantle’s Nat Fyfe finished one vote ahead of Priddis.
Fyfe was ineligible because of suspension.
Priddis ended up being the outright winner, one ahead of Fyfe.
“I’m not going to deny there was a level of relief there,” McLachlan said.
Gr8rWeStr
Guest
I'm not a fan of the changes. Its unnecessary over reaction to me, not saying the older system didn't need tweaking but, for me, this is over kill. Can anyone point me to this proclaimed '... players ... history of being motivated by avoiding their hip pocket being hit ...'? How is a player receiving a fine ever going to be a bigger deterrent than possibly missing a match?
Dogs Of War
Roar Guru
It probably should be a set percentage of salary. The other question is where does that money go? For me it should go straight to charity. I'm sure the AFL has partner charities where the money could be divided up equally.
Franko
Guest
Say two players commit an identical offence. Player A is earning $1m per season Player B is earning $100k per season Do they get fined the same amount? Does it hit them equally? Will it be like Bomber Thompson where ultimately the club pays the fine?