Some of Collingwood’s biggest names have been accused of playing for “selfish reasons”, as questions have emerged over the club’s management of its veteran players.

Eyebrows were raised on Friday night when veteran star Scott Pendlebury was started as the sub during the team’s loss to Gold Coast, with many thinking it was strange not to give the 37-year-old veteran a proper week off (if they thought he wasn’t up for a full game).

Stream The Agenda Setters for free, live or on-demand, anytime at 7plus

Know the news with the 7NEWS app: Download today

Of course, Pendlebury watched on as Collingwood went goalless in the first half, but helped give the Pies a healthy pulse when he was eventually injected into play.

Collingwood have been applauded for the management of some of their players, but leading AFL commentator Kane Cornes has noted that there are seemingly different strokes for different folks.

Elliott, 32, is having a sensational year and sits joint third in Coleman Medal race with 44 goals (along with Ben King, nine behind leader Jeremy Cameron).

Crisp, 31, broke the consecutive games record of 245 this year and his streak is still going eight games later (at the time of writing).

“I’ve got a theory that some players are playing for selfish reasons,” Cornes said on Monday night on Channel 7’s The Agenda Setters.

“I put this on the agenda with Jack Crisp last week, and the fact that he’s nearly 32 and the only player — along with Jamie Elliott — not to have a rest above the age of 30. (I think that’s) because of the consecutive games record.

“So (Crisp) continues to play and Elliott’s the other one, I question whether Elliott is playing for an All-Australian blazer and ... Coleman, or is he playing for a premiership?

“Why hasn’t he had a rest?”

Cornes pointed to Elliott’s past with the star forward having some lengthy battles with injuries and back issues.

“So why are others resting? Why are others getting managed but those two aren’t?” he asked.

He also thought the decision to start Pendlebury as a ‘sub’ was a strange.

“Pendlebury is the other one. If you if you’re playing Pendlebury, you’re playing him, if not, he’s staying at home with his family on the couch,” Cornes said.

“Now is that because there’s a game’s record to be broken in time, and you still get the game as sub?

“And then there’s Nick Daicos. Nick is sore, clearly sore and has been throughout the year.

“Is he playing for a Brownlow?

“My theory is that those players are not being managed to get themselves right to win a second or a third premiership in Pendlebury’s case. Are they playing for individual reasons more so than getting themselves right when they need to be right (in September)?”

AFL great Nick Riewoldt, however, did not subscribe to the “theory”, calling it a “bad take”.

“The Crisp one, he is the guy that has thrived with continuity ... that’s why he’s continued to play, because of the continuity. So, OK, so he gets a tick,” Riewoldt said.

“Jamie Elliott has never had continuity. Now he has it, why would you not try and milk it?”

Cornes was quick to respond, saying it could be a risk to keep playing him as it had been in the past.

But Cornes wanted to know why some veterans such as Steele Sidebottom, Brody Mihocek and Dan McStay had been managed throughout the year, and others hadn’t.

Riewoldt said he agreed with the take on, Pendlebury, however.

“Pendlebury is the one that I tend to agree with where, you know, do you really need to travel and be the sub,” he said.

Host Craig Hutchison said Pendlebury may not have played, even if he was the sub, if Collingwood were comfortable ahead throughout the game.

“They would have preferred to get some rest in,” Hutchison said.

“I don’t think Scott Pendlebury is a guy that says you can’t rest me because I’m going after a record. He’s gonna get the record anyway.”

Riewoldt said this was a selfless group that had “oozed team” more than any other in the competition, and Hutchison said Cornes’ “theory” might just add to their “hungry”, “ruthless” resolve.