Will Schofield column on what we’re all missing in wildcard resting debate, ‘cooked’ MRO matrix and Zak Butters-Geelong links

You can’t have an honest debate about resting players when the AFL can’t even tell fans who’s actually injured.

The AFL’s inaugural Wildcard round has created the perfect storm for resting players. Collingwood this weekend should have the right to manipulate and manage workloads as it sees fit, while it’d be in the best interest of minor premiers Fremantle – which has nothing to play for against Carlton – to sit a few players who need a week off.

Watch every match of every round of the AFL Premiership Season LIVE and ad-break free during play on FOX FOOTY, available on Kayo Sports | New to Kayo? Join now and get your first month for just $1.

But the discussion around legitimate “resting” – and how many is too many to rest – for mine ties back to how clubs treat their injury reports.

As part of the AFL media and broadcast guidelines, clubs are asked to provide fans and media with a clear understanding of injury return timeframes. The league in May last year reminded clubs of their need to be transparent with injury.

But very few – if any – clubs follow it.

In general, we’re not open and honest enough with our injury information as an industry. Some clubs do it well, but others completely bamboozle fans and anyone else involved.

Just look around the AFL in any given week and someone’s injury report isn’t telling the full story. That’s for a variety of reasons, whether it’s to protect the player, protect contract discussions happening at the time or gain a selection advantage.

I really don’t like when we get sudden late changes, because there’s usually some smoke and mirrors involved and a selection benefit to be gained.

Until we clean that up, I don’t think you can clean the end-of-year stuff up – because there’s no clarity to start with.

A calf injury has marred tough defender Brandon Starcevich’s first season with the Eagles. But it felt like he was “four to five weeks away” for a long time there before eventually making his Round 13 Eagles debut.

I like what the NFL does in this space. They’ve got a grading system where you know gameday if players are 50-50 to play or whether they’re ‘more than likely to play’. You get told if they train – if they fully train or half train – and what they’re doing with rehab.

We need to get to that stage in the AFL, because then there are no questions around integrity as we know what the players are doing. There’s no injury that then comes out of nowhere – because they have to report it.

People in the AFL world just try to find the grey and not let people know what’s going on – and I don’t understand it. Some clubs are completely open, others you wouldn’t know until your final breath.

It’ll cloud some of the build-up to the Wildcard round, which I’m a big fan of. It’s made this season more enjoyable because there’s that group of teams that probably can’t win a premiership, but at least they’re fighting for finals – if you want to call it. It means we get an extra week of finals footy.

That’s what we somewhat keep forgetting, because without this Wildcard round, we don’t get this first round of finals fixtures where every game is a knockout. Knockout games at any level of any sport are the best type – and that’s what AFL fans are getting this year.

If the AFL wants to police resting players, first make clubs accountable for accurately reporting who is actually available.

TERRIBLE OUTCOME DOESN’T NECESSARILY MEAN TERRIBLE ACT

The MRO matrix is cooked.

Melbourne is facing the prospect of a significant finals blow, with leading goalkicker Jacob van Rooyen handed a three-week ban for striking Port Adelaide star Aliir Aliir on Saturday night.

The strike, which left Aliir with concussion, was graded as careless conduct, high contact, severe impact.

Under the matrix, it’s the correct call. But the matrix is flawed.

It’s why I’m glad the Dees are challenging at the tribunal, because the outcome-based suspensions we’re seeing at the moment, especially with head knocks, are not the way to go.

When you watch replays of the incident, you can see van Rooyen’s intention is to mark the ball. In the split-second van Rooyen is in the air, you see his eyes go to Aliir and his hand move from trying to mark the ball to an open palm. He’s trying to get the ball, but misses it.

It’s a terrible outcome. Van Rooyen hits him in the head, Aliir’s head hits the ground – it’s a shocking look.

But you can’t be banning players for three weeks because it ‘looks bad’. The action is either bad or it’s not.

The AFL has got to find a way with its matrix – which sucks – to be able to grade these incidents that isn’t outcome-based. It needs to be action-based, otherwise you’re just ruling on a flip of the coin. If van Rooyen just misses Aliir, he gets zero weeks and nothing happens whatsoever.

The action was fine. He was genuinely contesting the ball in the air.

I’m glad Melbourne is challenging, given the fact that his season could be over if they don’t get it done. But I don’t know if he gets off.

CATS’ PULL IS GETTING RIDICULOUS

Is there any free agent that Geelong isn’t linked to? Is there anyone the Cats can’t bring to the football club?

It was hard not to think that on Sunday night when the Herald Sun reported Geelong, not the Western Bulldogs as many thought, was now considered the team best placed to secure Butters.

The Cats have got a really good winning culture and environment. It’s not Geelong as a place, it’s not secret deals under tables – outside of the waiver stuff that’s emerged in recent weeks.

You want to play for the Cats because they always contend. And if you’re a player in free agency, of course you’d consider Geelong.

The Cats should have salary cap space, especially if a couple of players don’t go around next year. But if you’re Butters, you’re really thinking: “Who’s more likely to win a premiership in the short-term: The Bulldogs, Geelong, Richmond or Collingwood?” You’d have to say Geelong.

I just don’t know how many AFL players are motivated by the pure money or pure playing location. Winning trumps everything – and Butters is going to make the decision where he thinks he can win. Otherwise, he’d just stay at Port Adelaide and get paid heaps of money.

DOCKER DILEMMA

The Dockers have sewn up the minor premiership. Now come the selection issues, which aren’t ‘helped’ by a really healthy list.

If you look at the way the Dockers played on the weekend, the only way that Adelaide looked dangerous was when the ball hit the deck in their forward 50. They looked a ‘short short’. They looked like they needed another small defender.

There are two options: Judd McVee can come back in or they can go back to Corey Wagner, who’s been out of the side for a fair amount of time but played that exact role for a number of weeks this year and over his career. I think one of those has got to come back into this side with one week remaining before finals.

It’s a big call, but it means one of Oscar McDonald or Brennan Cox will need to make way. Now Alex Pearce mightn’t play this week anyway due to a knee knock, so both will probably face Carlton. But come that first qualifying final, I think they need some movement in their backline and should bring in a shorter player.

McDonald had been Freo’s best defender for three weeks running before the Adelaide game. He was close to their best player on the ground for a number of those games. So they couldn’t not pick him.

They’ve been really consistent with their selection this year, none more evident than in the Mason Cox-Sean Darcy ruck situation. The Dockers aren’t picking on ‘names’ – they’re picking on form.

And if they’re going to do that, dropping McDonald isn’t an option for them.

They’re in a really tough spot with it. It might be a little niche – given the backline is my area of expertise – but I think it’s a significant one, given the way Fremantle defend behind the footy.