More timely match review panel decisions and a revised appeal process are being considered by the AFL as it looks to update the way the MRP and tribunal operates in 2018.
Having decided on Tuesday to retain the bounce for 2018 and beyond, the AFL Commission is expected to consider potential changes to the system in its last meeting for the year in December.
Fairfax Media understands the AFL is looking at how to strengthen the existing system and hopes to take a proposal to the AFL Commission next month.
New AFL football operations manager Steve Hocking has made no secret of his desire to tinker with the system to ensure it keeps pace with the game, although he has also been supportive of the existing system.
One potential change already canvassed would see match review decisions made sooner after games than they have been.
The match review panel has met every Monday to judge incidents in all games, including those played on Thursday or Friday nights, however fixture changes and the increased scrutiny of incidents has increased the importance of efficient decisions.
The existing system meant clubs playing the previous Thursday night had to wait until Monday afternoon to know whether a player was suspended for an incident, while those scheduled on an upcoming Thursday only found out if a player was suspended 72 hours before the game.
If the matches are reviewed in a more timely manner next season that may have implications for the way the panel is set up, with current panel members all having jobs outside football.
The players have called for the appeal system to be addressed and the AFL is expected to examine how issues that arose in 2017 in relation to appeals might be resolved.
The gathering of club CEOs and AFL coaches in Sydney ahead of the national draft this week presents a perfect opportunity for Hocking to canvas views on the issue.
Geelong's Patrick Dangerfield was the highest profile player to decide against appealing a match review panel decision to suspend him for two weeks after he laid a tackle in round 19 that knocked out Carlton ruckman Matthew Kreuzer.
Dangerfield pleaded guilty to accept the one-match ban because the risk of appealing was too great.
Another case that caused controversy involved Western Bulldogs' forward Jack Redpath, who was suspended for three matches after unsuccessfully challenging a two-week suspension for striking Greater Western Sydney's Phil Davis.
Most observers considered a fair penalty may have been one week but the system delivered a three-week ban when Redpath's record and appeal was taken into account.
The clubs' reluctance to appeal decisions meant the number of tribunal hearings reduced again this season and the AFL is expected to consult clubs and players to determine how to strike the right balance so the disincentive to appeal is not too high when a tribunal hearing appears justified.
Consistency was also an issue last season, particularly after the AFL cracked down on jumper and stomach punches mid-season and there was double the number of games lost to suspension.
Hocking told 3AW on Tuesday the MRP system had done a good job but it was time to adapt the system to keep pace with the game.
"All of those things need to be considered over time to make sure we keep up with the evolution of the game," he said.
