Drew Petrie believes the AFL industry must decide between enhancing the supporter’s spectacle by speeding up the game, or reducing rotations to decrease impact collisions.

In an editorial piece written for The Age, Petrie said it’s currently ‘a bet each way’.

"While collisions in the marking contest are as old as the game itself, the number of other high-impact incidents and injuries around the ground are becoming more frequent," he said.

"With players getting regular rest on the bench due to high rotations, there's more burst energy available to players and the ability to accelerate into a contest."

Jack Ziebell was hospitalized after catapulting himself into opponent Ollie Wines on Saturday night and while Petrie admits less interchange rotations may have meant his teammate didn’t make the contest, he said it’s somewhat of a ‘catch 22’.

"Many experts suggest that collisions like that could be avoided because players would be more fatigued and less likely to have the energy to contest the ball as fiercely. But who says Jack wouldn't have pulled a hamstring trying to get the contest because he couldn't come to the bench for a break because we'd used up our rotations for the quarter?

"If we continue to play at breakneck speed, the chances for high-impact collision injuries increases, but by increasing fatigue levels in players, you run the risk of causing soft-tissue injuries, such as hamstrings and calves. So you can't have your cake and eat it too."

Petrie said demands on players continue to increase, with the days of midfielders resting in a forward pocket a thing of the past.

"While we are running the same distances as players did 10 years ago, we're now doing it in much less time.

"I'm told the average midfielder has always covered about 14 to 15 kilometres a game, but with the amount of rotations we have nowadays, the current players are running those distances in just three-quarters of game time as opposed to the full four quarters. Top-end efforts indicate how often we are reaching our maximum output (i.e. sprinting) and that data is also through the roof."

The North veteran believes going in ‘one direction’ is the only answer.

"A few years ago, the AFL moved to enhance the spectacle of the game by, you guessed it, speeding things up. The umpires now throw the ball up straight away when there's a stoppage, full-backs don't have to wait for the goal umpire to wave the flag before kicking in, boundary umpires toss the ball back into play within seconds of it rolling over the line and play-on is called much faster after a mark is taken. So the game got a lot quicker and the players had less time to rest between breaks in play. The changes were supposed to fatigue us, but our ability to interchange frequently and recover meant we just trained harder and adapted.

"As an industry, we need to decide what's more important; slowing the game down or keeping it fast and spectacular. Whichever way we go, we need one direction and we must stick to it because right now, we're having a bet each way."