KERRY PACKER in 1991 - in the ultimate role reversal - challenged a federal Senate inquiry to explain why governments keep adding legislation to their statutes but never clear away redundant laws.

Same could be said of AFL rules and policy.

The week off before AFL top-eight finals was introduced in 2016. It was designed to stop those teams already guaranteed of a finals appearance from "resting" players on the last weekend of home-and-away football. Such "tanking" did challenge the integrity of the competition - or its look when as many as 11 were parked, as coach Ross Lyon did at Fremantle in 2015 for the home-and-away season closer against Yartapuulti (which won by 69 points at Adelaide Oval).

But did the AFL then recognise that the "floating fixture" for that closing round to home-and-away football - introduced in 2011 - was suddenly redundant? No.

With a guaranteed week off before the major round, the need for a floating fixture to give teams more time to prepare for their first-up finals seems excessive.

And what of the substitute, the 23rd man on the team sheet who is now a "tactical" rather than a "medical" reserve? 

As Essendon - and former North Melbourne - coach Brad Scott said recently: "I don't know why we have a sub. I've got absolutely no idea.

"We brought back the rule everyone hated."

Scott's key point is the substitute is not relevant in the debate on dealing with concussed players. And as a tactical weapon, the substitute is somewhat blunted by the cap on interchange rotations.

Time for a history lesson.

The AFL added the medical substitute in 2011, putting one of the four interchange players into a vest. He was reduced to a spectator until the coach - just as was the case in the pre-interchange days - decided to take a player out of the game to try the fresh legs of the reserve on the bench.

In 2013, coaches were allowed to activate the substitute - temporarily - while doctors checked a player for concussion.

In 2016, the much-disliked substitute system was scrapped to restore the four interchange players - but with a catch. Interchange rotations were limited to 90 for each team in any game. As Packer would say, legislation being loaded onto other legislation.

In 2021, the rotation cap was cut further to 75 - and teams were given a fifth reserve, the "medical substitute" who could be activated on the proviso he was replacing an injured player who was most likely to miss at least one match by his injury or concussion.

And last year, the "medical" substitute became the "tactical sub" who could be put into action - replacing any team-mate - at any time.

"We brought back the rule everyone hated," says Scott who served as the AFL's football boss before returning to senior coaching at Essendon two years ago.

Kerry Packer would note having a tactical substitute and a cap on interchange rotations is Australian football's version of an oxymoron. The two themes defy each other.

Generally, the AFL coaches have preferred to have five (some would call for six in case of multiple concussions in a game) interchange players and no substitute. The cap on rotations ensures no team works a numerical advantage on a rival.

Yartapuulti coach Ken Hinkley is part of this group.

"Clearly as a coach it is easier to have all the players ready to use any time you like," Hinkley said on Friday. "The sub is there for player health. It came in with the right intentions. It is now a matter of whether we need to free it up or not?"

Right intentions ... poor in its execution and results. 

As Yartapuulti premiership player and assistant coach Chad Cornes notes there also is an issue with how the tactical substitute feels on match day.

"It is a hard position for that player - there is that sense you are not quite part of the team," Cornes said. 

There is the uneasy thought of asking a player to start his AFL record as a substitute.

"I would much rather five on the bench," adds Cornes.

"I don't think there is a coach I have ever spoken to who likes the sub rule but they all prefer the option of five on the bench."

And let's open the Pandora box with a hypothetical on the usual game put up for any debate on rules in Australian football. It is grand final day. The substitute never gets to take the field. He is credited with playing the game on his record - and he gets a premiership medal for his sitting as a spectator.

Now how does that change the debate on handing premiership medals to every player in a squad rather than just the 23 chosen for the grand final?