The AFL is facing increasing legal and reputational pressure around player safety, with eight more former players joining the growing concussion class action while the league also introduces stricter on-field rules aimed at reducing dangerous contact.

Together, the developments show a competition at a critical point as it tries to balance the physical nature of the game with growing expectations around long-term player welfare.

Eight More Players Join Concussion Class Action

The class action led by former Geelong player Max Rooke has taken another major step, with eight additional former AFL players now named as plaintiffs in proceedings lodged in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The case, brought against the AFL and multiple clubs, alleges that the players suffered permanent, life-altering injuries due to concussions sustained during their football careers, and that the league and clubs were negligent in their duty of care.

The new plaintiffs include former players such as Jack Fitzpatrick, Nick Stevens, Gary Frangalas, Michael Richardson, Ian Fairley, Rod MacPherson, Dylan Roberton and Brendan Littler.

According to the claim, the long-term effects of concussion have had devastating impacts on players’ lives long after their careers ended, including serious physical and psychological harm.

BigFooty discussion: Can the AFL actually beat concussion class actions?

Claims of Long-Term Harm

Lawyers acting for the former players say the medical evidence linking repeated head knocks to long-term damage is now clear.

Jack Fitzpatrick said he felt “duty bound” to support other former players suffering concussion-related effects connected to their AFL careers.

Former defender Michael Richardson said the AFL should have introduced stronger modern concussion protections far earlier, while Dylan Roberton said the possible long-term consequences, including chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), were deeply concerning.

The class action was originally launched in 2023 and covers VFL-AFL players who allegedly suffered concussion-related injuries while training or playing between 1985 and 2023.

A trial is currently being targeted for May 31, 2027, and could run for up to four months if the matter is not resolved earlier through mediation.

The AFL’s Position

The AFL has previously said it has introduced more than 30 changes over the past decade aimed at reducing concussion risks and improving how potential head injuries are identified and managed.

Those changes have included tighter concussion protocols and, this season, a rule allowing independent ARC concussion spotters to have players removed from the field.

That context matters because the legal action is focused not just on what happened to players, but on whether the league and clubs acted soon enough and strongly enough in response to the risks.

AFL Toughens Its Stance on Gut Punches

At the same time, the AFL has moved to strengthen penalties for intentional physical acts on the field, including gut punches.

Under new Match Review Officer guidelines for the 2026 season, players who intentionally strike an opponent in the stomach can now receive a one-match suspension rather than just a fine.

The tougher stance reflects a view inside the league that fines were not stopping the behaviour.

The AFL has described gut punches as unnecessary, easily avoidable and damaging to the image of the game. The league’s football department believes they need to be stamped out, particularly because actions seen at AFL level are often copied in junior football.

BigFooty discussion: The AFL, concussions & suspensions — more to it than it seems

Why the Rule Change Matters

The change means incidents that may once have been dismissed as “tummy taps” are now far more likely to lead to suspension.

It is part of a broader tightening of AFL disciplinary settings in 2026, including:

  • greater flexibility for the Match Review Officer when grading careless acts that cause concussion
  • continued scrutiny of repeat umpire contact offences
  • the ability to charge players for rough conduct when they forcefully push opponents into dangerous situations

Some players are understood to have concerns about where the line will now be drawn, particularly in physical contests around stoppages, but the AFL is expected to provide clubs with clearer explanations throughout the season.

Two Developments, One Bigger Story

Viewed together, the concussion class action and the tougher 2026 rule changes point in the same direction.

The former players’ case is about the game’s past and whether enough was done to protect players from the consequences of repeated head trauma. The AFL’s latest rule changes are about the future and whether the modern game can reduce avoidable harm before more players suffer lasting damage.

That does not mean the league has resolved the issue. Far from it. The class action has the potential to become one of the biggest legal challenges in AFL history, while the ongoing debate around physicality, punishment and player safety is unlikely to go away.

Final Word

The AFL is being forced to confront two realities at once.

First, a growing group of former players are demanding accountability for the lasting effects of concussion. Second, the league is under pressure to prove that the modern game is safer, smarter and more serious about preventable injury.

How the AFL handles both fronts will shape not only the outcome of this legal fight, but also how the sport is judged by future players, families and supporters.

For the AFL, this is no longer just a medical issue or a legal issue. It is a credibility issue.

Join the discussion on BigFooty

Embed from Getty Images

MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA – MAY 07: Dale Thomas of the Blues punches Alex Fasolo of the Magpies in the stomach during the round seven AFL match between the Collingwood Magpies and the Carlton Blues at Melbourne Cricket Ground on May 7, 2016 in Melbourne, Australia. (Photo by Scott Barbour/Getty Images)