Nothing in the AFL seems to generate conjecture, quite like the annual announcement of the All-Australian team, and when the AFL extended the squad to 40 men in 2007, it gave further recognition to players who might not necessarily make the final team.
The squad is selected, based on how well players perform during the year, with the criteria somewhat arbitrary, with no set game threshold, nor a team’s ladder-position being taken into account.
With every squad announcement however, the inevitable debate arises, as to whether a player deserves to take their place in the team, regardless as to whether they even played in that position during the year at all.
For instance, Barry Hall was selected in the forward pocket in the 2010 All-Australian team, even though he was the Western Bulldogs’ full forward.
Furthermore, Jonathan Brown was named in the forward pocket of the 2009 team, even though the Brisbane spearhead played most of his football as the Lions’ centre half forward.
Brown and Hall were entitled to their spot. But contention arises when you have a man in Mark LeCras, who missed out on selection in 2009, after kicking 58 goals as a small forward – the very position Brown was selected in – but never actually lined up in throughout the year for Brisbane.
So what’s the solution?
Do players who have had a great year deserve a place in the All-Australian team, regardless of their position, or should best players for their position be selected?
The proposal is this: each position should have four to five players nominated and unless they are selected in the said position or on the bench, they cannot make the team.
For instance, if we take the players selected for the 2011 squad, who have played full back this year: Matthew Scarlett, Darren Glass, Josh Gibson and Luke McPharlin and if the proposed selection criteria comes in, only one of these four players can assume a place on the field, with the other three in contention for a bench spot.
However, the 2011 squad threw up several players, who actually played several positions in the ground.
Adam Goodes and Steve Johnson were two players that played both, midfield and forward in 2011, which is where the idea can get somewhat complicated.
In the situation that a player who does play two positions arises, the player would be eligible to be selected as a midfielder or as a half forward flank; the typical rotating midfielder/forward spot.
The All-Australian team should be the AFL’s best team; each player selected in the best position that they have played that year.
When the team has players selected in a spot they wouldn’t normally line up at, it cheapens the accolade and alienates the players who have made the position their own.
So, the AFL needs to change the criteria as soon as possible, before the All-Australian team becomes more redundant than it already is.
Andrew Leonard
Roar Pro
Certainly agree with TomC on this one. The selectors suggest they pick a team loosely on positions but ultimately they pick the team that they would pick if playing an international against someone. For example, I have no issue where on the ground Adam Goodes - based on this year - is named in the team so long as he is in the team. The major problem I think is the perception that selectors reward a player for 2 good years rather than pick the outstanding player of the past season.
TomC
Guest
I think this article demonstrates more how the positions on the AFL field have evolved, rather than any problems in the All-Australian team. After all, we don't really differentiate between a 'full-forward' and a 'forward pocket', but between marking forwards and crumbing forwards. Even then, you have marking forwards who specialise in pure goal-kicking (Franklin and Riewoldt) and others who break up packs and set up their teammates (Podsiadly, Brown). Crumbing forwards can specialise in defensive pressure (Rioli) or be designated goal-kickers (Steve Johnson). Ideally you'd want a mix of those players. The 2009 All-Australian team is a strange example to pick. Brown, Fevola and Riewoldt were the three tall-forwards selected, and I doubt anyone would have swapped any of those players out for LeCras, as good as he was that season. Possibly you could have made a case for LeCras ahead of Leon Davis, but you'd be splitting hairs and it doesn't really support the article's argument. Perhaps it is our way of displaying selected teams that is the problem, more so than how the AA team in particular is selected. Perhaps we should move to the system that soccer uses, with a simple list displayed, without allocating players into positions.