LEADING player agents have expressed surprise that West Coast midfielder Adam Selwood has demanded a get-out clause in his new contract if the club is again punished by the AFL for bringing the game into disrepute.

Player manager Ricky Nixon said several of his charges had called him yesterday asking if such individual contract clauses were now "the way of the future" for AFL players.

"I found it quite extraordinary," Nixon said, "given he (Selwood) has been the subject of misbehaviour himself. It's the pot calling the kettle black, isn't it?"

Selwood was widely scrutinised last year after an incident in which he sledged Fremantle's Des Headland, allegedly directing sexual remarks at a tattoo of Headland's daughter. Controversy over the incident dogged the club, contributing to claims that West Coast had an unsavoury culture. Selwood was ultimately found not guilty by the tribunal of using insulting language.

Nixon could not understand why the Eagle requested the unusual stipulation in his three-year contract. "If you didn't want to be at the club, why wouldn't you just leave?" he said.

"Not too many players are contracted for more than two years and if there was a massive disruption in the middle of the season then you can't leave then anyway.

"This is a classic case of overreaction."

The veteran player agent said extenuating contract clauses had been part of football for many years.

"There's been plenty of clauses and I probably created most of them but mostly not to do with behaviour," he said. "It's usually more to do with mergers and relocations; it's contingency planning."

But with speculation that Carlton had considered requiring forward Brendan Fevola to include a good behaviour clause in his new contract, the presence of a similar clause in wayward Magpie Alan Didak's contract and now the Selwood instance, the issue keeps cropping up.

Few doubt that if and when Nixon client and recovering addict Ben Cousins makes his AFL comeback, he will do so under a playing contract vastly more onerous than the standard AFL agreement.

Nixon said that in the 1980s Geelong placed clauses in Gary Ablett's contract requiring him to carry out set amounts of community work for the club.

Another with special requirements was Wayne Carey. In the 1990s, Nixon said, Carey had a contract clause stating that if North Melbourne went bankrupt, relocated or merged, his contract would be paid out in full and he would be guaranteed an equivalent contract at whatever club he went to.

"When the Kangaroos were going to merge with Fitzroy they then forgot they'd have to pay him out his contract and then give him a new one … it would have cost them a million dollars or more," he said.

When North Melbourne contemplated relocation to the Gold Coast last year, some players coming out of contract looked into clauses covering such an eventuality.

One of them was Daniel Pratt, from Nixon's stable. Ultimately, the club backed away from relocation before the contract was negotiated.

Nixon believed clauses governing specific misconduct by players or clubs were unnecessary, given the strict conditions already imposed by the standard AFL player agreement.

"The day I have to say to a club that if they can't run themselves I want my player out of there then we have got a bit of a problem with the competition," he said.

Another player agent, who asked to remain anonymous, said that he was "blown away" by news of the clause obtained by the young Eagle and thought it might prove unworkable.

"It's very complicated. He wants a promise that they'll trade him to the club of his choice. What if it's, say Collingwood, and they won't give up a first-round draft pick?"

The agent said extra clauses were extremely rare.