What club bosses told Andrew Dillon about opening round, and how it could ‘evolve’

AFL clubs have escalated their frustration about the league’s “opening round” concept, with several bracing for more teams to be involved as soon as next season.

The issue came to a head on Wednesday when AFL chief executive Andrew Dillon met with the chief executive officers of all 18 clubs.

The league’s controversial season launch was a central point of the discussion. Five industry sources with knowledge of the discussion said clubs forcefully expressed concern, not only about the current model but also its potential expansion.

Several clubs left the meeting with the understanding that opening round could be broadened to include more teams — and potentially all 18 clubs — within the next two years. While the AFL has not committed to that structure, the possibility has heightened unease among club leaders who are already questioning the merits of the concept.

Opening round was introduced in 2024 as a marquee standalone start to the AFL season, designed to showcase the game in NSW and Queensland. The format is designed to kick the season off with Sydney, GWS, the Brisbane Lions and Gold Coast all hosting home games against Victorian clubs, while those clubs not included join the competition the following week in round one.

One match in Melbourne was added this season, between St Kilda and Collingwood on the Sunday night before the Labor Day public holiday.

The AFL has consistently framed the initiative as a strategic push to grow the code in rugby league heartland, capitalising on exclusive broadcast windows and reduced competition in the sporting calendar.

When contacted by this masthead, the AFL would not comment. Privately, there is a view at AFL headquarters that opening round will continue to evolve, and that ground availability is a crucial factor.

But club executives are increasingly questioning whether the benefits justify the disruption.

A primary concern raised with Dillon relates to competitive integrity. Clubs forced into an early bye have argued it creates an uneven start to the season, interrupting their pre-season planning and leaving some teams inactive while others build continuity and match fitness.

Hawthorn have just begun an 18-day break after defeating the Swans in a highly entertaining Thursday night contest. Their next game isn’t until their clash with Geelong on Easter Monday.

Carlton players are midway through a 17-day break after being part of opening round and then a Thursday night round one win over Richmond.

There is also unease about the flow-on effects later in the year, when the staggered start could lead to compression of the fixture.

Fremantle chief executive Simon Garlick didn’t hold back when asked recently about his views on the league’s start to the season.

“There’s performance implications of opening round,” he told The West Australian.

“There’s no doubt there’s an advantage for the teams that have played in opening round when they play against teams who don’t in round one.

“I think it’s served a purpose, I think it’s got real momentum in those northern markets for that period of time. But, if we are now opening it up to St Kilda and Collingwood, then to my mind I think we should go back to starting round one with all teams on a more even keel.”

Commercial implications have also been a flashpoint. Victorian clubs, in particular, are frustrated at being excluded from the opening weekend, which traditionally delivers strong attendances, corporate opportunities and heightened member engagement.

Even the prospect of expansion has not alleviated concerns. Some club officials indicated that a full 18-team opening round could introduce new logistical challenges, including venue availability, travel demands and further scheduling complexity — without necessarily resolving underlying issues about clarity and fan engagement.

Broadcast performance has added another layer to the debate. While the AFL has pointed to solid ratings in northern markets, several clubs believe the novelty of the concept is waning.

Fan confusion has also been raised. The split start to the season — where some teams play in opening round and others do not feature until round one — has been criticised for lacking cohesion and diminishing the sense of a unified competition launch.

Despite the dissent, the AFL remains committed to the concept as part of its national growth strategy.

Wednesday’s meeting did not produce any formal resolution, but it has sharpened the focus on opening round as a key issue for clubs ahead of upcoming fixturing decisions.

For the AFL, the challenge now lies in balancing its ambition to expand the game’s reach with the concerns of clubs who believe the current system — and any potential expansion — risks undermining competitive fairness and commercial opportunity.

Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.