The AFL Laws of the Game committee will look at a range of options aimed at curbing the number of interchanges from next season amid concerns the ever-increasing number of rotations is leading to more collision injuries.
The Collingwood coach, however, argued the welfare of the players has remained the primary focus despite the rise of the interchange bench as a strategic tool.
“Certainly it has become a tactic, but we’ve never lost sight of the fact that our greatest assets at any football club are in fact the players,” Malthouse said on Wednesday.
“It would be a total dereliction of duty if we flaunted that rule for our own needs and forgot that we’ve got 40-odd players on our list that we want to see maximise their abilities and also their ability to play for a long career.
“We are not in the industry to make rash moves, multiple moves, to reduce [neither] the effectiveness nor the longevity of the playing group.
“No one looks after the players better than the clubs - no one - because that’s our bread and butter. We go out of our way to make sure that our playing group is looked after to the ‘nth’ degree and beyond.”
Ratten feared the imposition of a cap designed to protect players would, in fact, have the opposite effect.
“If we’re asking them to do extra work out there and they can’t recover from that week in, week out - what’s the longevity of a Chris Judd, a Gary Ablett, the Alan Didaks of the world and those types in the game?” Ratten asked.
“We want these players to play into their thirties. It’s very critical to make sure that we keep the best players out on the park because we’re going to an 18-team competition too so the talent pool is getting less.
“If we’re going to ask the players to do more it’s going to be fairly taxing on them. Their long-term longevity has to be affected so I think we need to be really mindful of that.”
Malthouse described his stance on the issue as “very strong” but felt his position, and those of like-minded clubs, had not been taken into account by the AFL in formulating the proposed change.
“It’s a waste of time [talking about it] ... because none of our recommendations or considerations or data has been considered,” he said.
“If that is denied then we would still be in debate over it, but we are clearly going to be told from a long way back what to expect from next year so the only thing you can do is prepare for next year’s change.”
Geelong coach Mark Thompson holds an opposing viewpoint to those held by his Collingwood and Carlton counterparts, but Malthouse said that was part of the beauty of the game.
“When you’ve got no cap it’s each to their own. If you want to make one a quarter or 100 a game then so be it - no one’s saying that’s right, no one’s saying that’s wrong,” he said.
“It’s just what we believe personally is best for our football club. The last thing we want to do is hinder the progress of a football club by hindering the health of our players.”
