The Roar
The Roar

AFL
Advertisement

Which clubs are snubbed by the AFL's All-Australian selectors?

Troy Wheatley new author
Roar Rookie
13th October, 2013
10

Since its modern day inception in 1991, the AFL All-Australian team has been a recurring source of debate for football followers everywhere.

Some footy fans feel aggrieved whenever their particular club’s star players miss the cut.

Clubs that have had modest years at best have been known to have two or three representatives, while clubs that have made the finals have sometimes had no representatives at all.

This can lead some fans to suggest that the All-Australian selectors are unfairly overlooking their club’s players.

In theory, over time, such anomalies should even out.

In 2005 for example,  Hawthorn had three representatives in the All-Australian team despite winning only five games. Yet in the first All-Australian team in 1991 Hawthorn had no representatives, despite winning 16 games and going on to win the premiership.

But is this the case for every team?

The list below shows the average number of All-Australian representatives each club has had per season since 1991, and their average winning percentage per home-and-away season over the same period.

Advertisement

Theoretically, clubs that have higher average winning percentages should have higher average numbers of All-Australian representatives.

Of course there are some reasons, apart from selection ‘bias’, why this might not hold, which we’ll get into further below.

Geelong: 56 All-Australian selections, 2.43 AA selections per year, 64.3 average winning percentage in H&A seasons

West Coast: 44, 1.91, 56.4

St Kilda: 43, 1.87, 51.3

Adelaide: 40, 1.74, 52.7

Carlton: 38 , 1.65, 48.9

Advertisement

Collingwood: 35, 1.52, 53.8

Sydney: 32, 1.39, 50.4

Western Bulldogs: 32, 1.39, 49.8

Hawthorn: 31, 1.35, 54.1

Port Adelaide: 20, 1.18, 50.7

Essendon: 26, 1.13, 55.0

Brisbane: 25, 1.09, 46.7

Advertisement

North Melbourne: 24, 1.04, 54.9

Gold Coast: 3, 1.00, 21.2

Fremantle: 13, 0.68, 43.4

Melbourne: 15, 0.65, 39.3

Richmond: 15, 0.65, 41.8

Greater Western Sydney: 1, 0.50, 6.8

Fitzroy: 3, 0.50, 24.2

Advertisement

Based on the list above, Adelaide, Carlton and St Kilda appear to have a much higher average number of representatives in the All-Australian team than their win-loss records would suggest, and look to have been over-represented.

This becomes clearer if you graph each team’s average number of representatives against its average winning percentage. I have discounted those teams that have not played enough seasons for their figures to be meaningful.

On the other hand, Essendon and North Melbourne appear to have been significantly under-represented.

Although a club can be over-represented or under-represented in the All-Australian team based purely on their winning percentage, there could be other factors at work here.

For example, clubs that look to be over-represented may have been uneven, in that the differences between their best player(s) and other players have been greater than for other clubs – a current example would be Gold Coast).

Similarly, clubs that look to be under-represented may have been more even in terms of their playing talent.

Alternatively, clubs may have over-achieved or under-achieved given the talent on their list.

Advertisement

Then again, maybe the All-Australian selectors have just really liked Carlton and Adelaide?

Of course, there is no guarantee that such patterns will continue. When I looked at this topic back in 2006, Geelong and Port Adelaide had been under-represented to that point, and Sydney had been over-represented.

In the very long run, perhaps all that fans will really have to feel aggrieved about if their players consistently miss out is the inability of their clubs to win enough games.

close