AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan is pushing fixture reform as a way around teams making mass changes in round 23.
Fremantle and North Melbourne are resting large groups of their best players to freshen them up a week before the finals.
They have AFL approval to do so and McLachlan says they are operating within the rules.
Adelaide have voiced their concern, given the result of Friday’s Richmond v North Melbourne match can impact on whether the Crows host an elimination final.
“I don’t like it any more than anyone else does instinctively,” McLachlan told ABC Radio.
“But it is within the rules.
“You try and change the rules, people will exploit different avenues.
“This is a problem the world over.
“The rules haven’t been broken here.”
McLachlan has put forward the 17-5 model, which was discussed earlier this year, as a potential solution.
Each team would play the others once – 17 games – and then the league would split into three groups of six based on their ladder positions.
The conferences would then play each other once – five games – before the finals.
Turning the last week before the finals into a wildcard round, or even making it a bye, are other suggestions.
“The fixture is the best chance of a solution – whether that’s the 17-5 fixture, whether everyone gets a week off, whether there’s a wildcard round,” McLachlan told Triple M.
“We have to look at the fixture as the best way out of here, that’s my instinctive response.”
Clubs so far have not been keen on the 17-5 model.
“It hasn’t been thrown out,” McLachlan said.
“The feedback from the clubs is that the issue is in the bottom (group).
“It’s still on the table.”
McLachlan noted the rules were reviewed two years ago when Fremantle also rested a large group of players a week from the finals.
Adelaide chief executive Andrew Fagan said the AFL had been sympathetic to the Crows’ situation, but he maintained the club’s stance that the issue needs to be properly addressed.
“My issue is not with North Melbourne, but because they’ve done it there’s a consequence to other teams and that’s something that the AFL should have taken issue with,” Fagan told Melbourne radio station SEN.
“I presume they’ve been tangled up by their own rules which don’t allow them to, so they’ve got to change the rule.”
Michael Steel
Roar Pro
Gillon McLachlan has shown t o be quickly reactive to a few happenings which aren't really big issues. Like Lachie Henderson and now the resting of players. Time for the CEO to act like a CEO and look at issues from all aspects.
NeverTearUsApart
Guest
How is that Hawks(1) and Sydney(2) had an easier fixture than Port(3)? What team in the top 4 or 5 have the Crows beaten this year to deserve being in the race? WC Eagles when they didn't need a win away to hold their spot? The fixture as it is is far from fair!
jax
Guest
Pass me the band-aids please - it's time for another patch job on that pesky little R23 resting rule. Have we reached our rule change quota for this year yet? - Gill
Brian
Guest
The 17-5 makes a lot of sense. I applaud the afl here because they're promoting the fairer option and are copping criticism for it.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
Yes, perhaps, although having something to say is not necessarily the same thing as being the final arbiter.
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
Although I dare say the people who paid the scratchy couple of billion might have a thing or two to say about "blockbuster" fixtures.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
An alternative view is: having tied up a $418 million per annum TV deal for the next six years, perhaps now is precisely the time to forego the extra revenue from bigger games (which, in the context of total annual revenues, is pretty marginal). The idea of turning the final round into a wild card fixture, e.g. 8th plays 9th for the final spot in the finals, means finals-bouind clubs would not be mucking around too much in the last home and away round of the season because players would not benefit from a two week break.
Bert
Guest
17-5 model would mean big clubs may not play each other twice. That would cost the league $. Since when have the AFL been interested in anything but the $ ?