Players say they are confused by the AFL’s adjudication of dangerous tackles and have called for the league to be more consistent in its application of rules at a time when fines are set to surge to another record this year.
The lack of understanding among players over what constitutes a dangerous tackle was laid bare in data collected by the AFL Players Association for their annual Insights and Impact Report, released on Wednesday night.
Paul Curtis was suspended for this tackle on Port Adelaide’s Josh Sinn in round seven.Credit: Fox Footy
While support has increased among players for the AFL’s intent to reduce head knocks, only 12.5 per cent of player delegates surveyed rated their understanding of the dangerous tackle rules as high, according to the AFLPA data.
The surveys were conducted last July around the time Brisbane’s Charlie Cameron and Greater Western Sydney’s Toby Bedford had bans for dangerous tackles overturned. The issue has remained a talking point this season after North Melbourne’s Paul Curtis was suspended for three games for a run-down tackle which left Port Adelaide’s Josh Sinn concussed.
The Kangaroos chose not to appeal the tribunal finding despite their disappointment with the decision. However, North players were bemused, including veteran Luke Parker – who clipped the league in a social media post suggesting the game had become touch football, accompanied by the hashtag “nomoretackling”.
Parker’s response was consistent with the feedback given by his peers to the AFLPA. More than 60 per cent of respondents said they had low belief the match review officer or tribunal showed consistency in assessing a dangerous tackle.
A score of one to three out of 10 was considered “low”, four to seven as “moderate” and eight to 10 as “high”.
“Players expressed confusion about what constitutes a legal tackle, and concern that rulings are increasingly based on the outcome of the action rather than the action itself,” the report said.
“Many felt that expectations of what was being asked of them were unreasonable, especially in fast-moving contests where intent and technique are difficult to control.”
Former North Melbourne star turned pundit David King said players were “clearly confused” and the MRO process was “hit and miss”.
“Tackling is problematic,” King wrote in the AFLPA’s report. “Concussions are the biggest issue in the game, but interpreting individual incidents is almost impossible.
“Was that a sling tackle, a dump tackle, were the arms pinned or not, did the player hit their head, what was the tackler’s intent, could they have slowed, should they have known contact was coming, and did they show a duty of care? Now imagine wrapping all of that up and trying to play the game.
“I feel for the players because they clearly have no idea what they can do. The rules have never been greyer around what is and isn’t acceptable, and it shows.”
The players’ capacity to learn and adjust in season was displayed two weeks after the Curtis incident when Richmond’s Tom Brown executed the perfect run-down tackle on West Coast’s Tom Gross.
The AFL was contacted for comment.
There remains angst among players over the sum of fines and the system used by the AFL.
Players this year are on track to be fined a record amount. As of round 11, players have been docked $361,000, including $44,625 from last weekend, after a record total of $560,000 in 2024. In 2023, players were fined $284,000.
Port Adelaide star Zak Butters and Greater Western Sydney skipper Toby Greene are in a race to be the first player to accrue $50,000 in fines.
“Following increases to the quantum of fines in 2023, players were vocal in their opposition – arguing that the penalties were often disproportionate to the incident and lacked transparency in how they were determined,” the report said.
Players told the AFLPA that changes in rule interpretations, made during the season or “too close to the start of the season”, happened “without clear education, communication or consultation”.
“Many expressed concern about inconsistent application, with some describing a sense of week-to-week unpredictability – referring to this as a ‘rule of the week’ dynamic,” the report said. “Some players also felt that umpires appeared less willing to explain decisions or respond to on-field questions.”
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
