THE WESTERN Bulldogs will table their concerns about the Match Review Panel at the end of the season, with president Peter Gordon declaring the system should change in 2018.

The AFL Players Association is also set to seek a meeting with the AFL after forming its own concerns about an "over-correction" on penalties for jumper and gut punches in the second half of the season.

Players have lost 63 games through suspensions this season (including the JLT Community Series) compared to 45 in 2016 and 57 in 2015, with the Tribunal hearing five cases since round 14.

Bulldogs forward Jack Redpath was suspended for three matches on Tuesday night for striking Greater Western Sydney defender Phil Davis after his Tribunal challenge failed.

Redpath's strike would normally have attracted a one-match ban, but his bad record and decision to challenge the charge meant an extra two weeks were applied, once the challenge failed.

Gordon said the Bulldogs would be making a submission to the AFL at the end of the season about their own experiences with the system and ways they believe it could be improved.

"I've got a number of concerns from a legal point of view about the system," Gordon told SEN.

"We will at the end of this season be communicating with the AFL about our concerns, and our concerns go both ways.

"We are concerned sometimes about penalties being too harsh, but we are also concerned about the need for players to be protected.

"I hope that when the AFLPA goes to the AFL, as they propose to do, they will remember that their foremost concern is for the health and safety of their members."

Gordon said he would prefer an MRP system without a table of offences, which sees every offence graded as either careless or intentional before impact and contact are assessed in specific categories.

"What I think we need is some judicial officers with commonsense and experience in football who can look at it and make a decision … not in accordance with some pre-imposed paradigm about gradings," he said.

"I would prefer a system where you've got experienced people, both in terms of the law and adjudicating decisions and in football, who simply look at a case on its merits."

After a flurry of punches escaped suspension early in the season, the AFL announced a crackdown on intentional strikes following round nine, with the League warning players if they "take the action of punching a player they do so at their own risk now … we won't tolerate it".

There were no changes to the MRP's guidelines, but the bar was lowered when grading impact, causing unrest among clubs and players.

"We need to have a conversation because it’s an issue. There’s a view the penalty doesn’t necessarily fit the crime," AFLPA boss Paul Marsh told the News Corp.

"Whether it’s been an over-correction, however you want to put it, we have had a conversation about it.

"We’ve also started a discussion about how difficult it is to appeal a decision.

"In a number of cases, players have felt quite strongly they should appeal."

Marsh acknowledged Redpath's three-match suspension was the result of a bad record and his decision to challenge, but said: "I don’t think that sits comfortably with anyone".

"We’re combining two issues. Are we going over the top with jumper punches? (And) the disincentive to appeal because of that extra week is something we need to have a conversation about."