Richmond coach Damien Hardwick has demanded the AFL immediately inform clubs whether it intends to cap interchange rotations next season because the futures of veteran players are at stake.

Hardwick nominated his club's own controversial veteran in Ben Cousins as one player whose future could be directly affected by the AFL's plans to cut the number of interchange moves.

Collingwood coach Mick Malthouse and the Bulldogs' Rodney Eade have led the charge against the AFL's plans by saying their teams used the interchange bench the most last year and yet recorded the fewest number of injuries.

The pair believes there is a direct link between giving players more and more rest via increasing use of the bench and keeping them healthy.

However the AFL's injury report released earlier this season showed an overall increase in the number of injuries at the same time as the use of the interchange bench has exploded in recent years.

Hawthorn set a record with 156 interchange rotations last Friday night against St Kilda with the AFL believed to be considering introducing a cap of possibly 100 interchanges per match.

Essendon's Matthew Knights, North's Brad Scott and Melbourne's Dean Bailey also spoke against the AFL's plans on Thursday.

In contrast, the coach of all-conquering Geelong in Mark Thompson has already begun to ease back on his interchange rotations after receiving feedback from his players that being taken constantly on and off the ground to freshen up was instead affecting their ability to build momentum in their performance.

However Hardwick said on Thursday that regardless of whether the AFL capped interchanges or allowed the clubs to continue using the bench as often as they liked - the most important thing was coming to a final decision quickly.

Hardwick said this is the time of year clubs begin to plan their playing list for next season and admitted it would be tougher for the game's older players to continue on in 2010 if they were forced to spend more time on the ground and less time on the bench.

"There is no doubt it's a possibility," he said when asked if capping the number of interchange rotations could bring careers of players such as Cousins to a premature end.

"It may be that is something we may have to weigh-up and that is why we would like to know (the AFL's decision) earlier rather than later."

Hardwick said any restrictions on the bench could also affect the types of players clubs decided to select in this year's national draft.

"I don't have a strong opinion one way or another but what I do want to know is what the result is going to be for next year because we have an opportunity to start putting things in place (for next year) now."

Bailey believes there is no need to tinker with the game.

"I've always had the opinion of allowing the market to determine what it is," he said

"But I don't think capping it or putting in restrictions is the way to go."

However Bailey differed from Hardwick on the issue of older players, saying they would adapt if forced to spend more time on the ground with clubs able to compensate by lightening their training loads between games and throughout the pre-season.

Knights, meanwhile, agrees with Malthouse and Eade that more rotations means players become less fatigued and prone to injury despite the AFL's injury report appearing to confirm the opposite earlier this season.

"I don't believe rotations should be capped," said Knights.

"There is an element of strategy in rotations but there is also an element of player wellness."

"There is a natural level of rotations that will sort itself out over time and whether that's around about the 130s or 140s which seems to be about the average, I'm comfortable with that."

Scott described the evidence in favour of an interchange cap as "flimsy at best" and said there was no correlation that he was aware of between rotations and a greater risk of injury.

He said managing a cap on interchanges would be a "complete circus".

"If we take an arbitrary figure of 80 rotations per game which is 20 a quarter, and we get to the 25-minute mark of the quarter and we've had our rotations and there's a guy limping around in the forward pocket, what do we do?"

"If we take him off, what penalty do we get for going over our 20 (rotations)."

"If they allow for an injury, what's an injury?"

"It would be an absolute nightmare for clubs and officials."

Scott said he's confident the high number of rotations will eventually settle down and appealed to the AFL to "take a deep breath".

He conceded however that, despite his misgivings, the AFL has the power to introduce changes and that clubs and coaches must abide by them.