It's become clear that some of the rules in AFLW are being heavily monitored by umpires, none more so than the holding the ball rule.
A few weeks before the beginning of season 2025, the AFL announced that they would be amending the interpretation of this rule to be stricter on "no genuine attempt to dispose of the ball when tackled with no prior opportunity."
At the time, Executive General Manager of Football, Laura Kane said: "Data shows us that secondary stoppage rates are higher when the ball up is close to the boundary and scoring rates are lower, so the introduction of the on-field rule change is aimed at opening up space around stoppages close to the boundary line where the stoppage is denser.
"This change and subsequent umpire interpretation changes have been implemented to help create more flow and offensive play in AFLW and mitigate the increasing rise in density levels over the last two seasons."
Stoppage numbers have significantly decreased but the flow of the game overall is less so.
In the first two rounds this year, stoppages fell from an average of 67 per game (2024) to just 45, according to AFLW stats guru Gemma Bastiani, which proved that the tightening of the rule was doing what it was supposed to.
But in recent weeks, the rule has sparked frustration across the competition, and it's beginning to change the way the game is played.
Under the current interpretation, too often it's beginning to look as though players are being punished simply for being first to the contest, with players who take clean possession being immediately wrapped up and penalised before they have any realistic chance to dispose of it.
Instead of encouraging attack on the footy, the rule is inadvertently rewarding those who hang off the contest and wait for an opponent to make a mistake. Players are hesitating, second-guessing themselves, and in some cases, choosing not to pick up the ball at all for fear of being pinged. It's a perturbing trend, one that feels detrimental to the very fabric of the sport.
The confusion lies in the inconsistency of interpretation. What now constitutes 'prior opportunity'? How long does a player have to make a 'genuine attempt' to dispose? For players and fans alike, it's become almost impossible to tell what the adjudicating is based on. Two identical tackles can produce completely different outcomes depending on the umpire.
That lack of clarity isn't just affecting the players; it's also putting immense pressure on developing umpires in the league.
Many of the AFLW's officiating pool are still learning the nuances of elite-level adjudication. Asking them to apply an ever-shifting interpretation without clear benchmarks only adds to the confusion.
Geelong coach Dan Lowther spoke on it in his post-match press conference on the weekend.
"I think it's really, really confusing. It's frustrating, to a degree," he said. "The holding the ball conversation has forever been discussed from AFL men's to AFLW.
"Even watching the games over the weekend, like you got commentary around, 'no one knows what's going on', and it felt the same today. You weren't too sure what was going to get paid."
However, it's become clear that players are too worried to actually touch the ball for fear of being penalised, hurting the game in the process.
One aspect of this is whether the AFL is investing enough in having umpires with the appropriate experience to judge the game at an elite level.
It has long been known that the women's game is used to 'train up' officials for the men's league, but at what point do AFLW games reserve the right to demand established umpires?
One side of the argument would be that at this stage in the season, if umpires were full-time employees of the AFL, the best of the best would now be freely available for the back half of the women's season, with the men's having concluded last weekend.
While the debate continues to rage on, it's becoming evident that it's not a sustainable way to run the league, and something -- umpire training or rule tweaks -- has got to give.