Opinion AA overhaul

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

I’ll start off by stating I don’t plan this thread to become a discussion about why a certain player from my club wasn’t selected over a certain player from your club debate..

but is it time the selection process for the AA team is overhauled and clear selection parameters are put in place when deciding the team?

When we look at most awards, there is clear quantitative data used in their selection. The Coleman, MVP, Coaches Votes, Brownlow, B&F ect. And the list goes on.

What would be some appropriate parameters put in place when selecting the AA squad?

I believe if a team was selected on the below basis, it would make for a much fairer selection process and remove bias and media love childs.

All these are also based on a player playing a minimum of 80% of the season as well. Find it ridiculous a player whose missed 1/4 of the season can be selected at times.

Full Back Line/Key Defenders: Play Atleast 75% of the game in their defensive half and be a leading player in spoils, intercepts and one on one wins amongst other defenders

Other Defenders: Play Atleast 65% game time in defensive half. Leading player in rebounds, one on one wins and effective disposals amongst defensive players

Midfielders: Play Atleast 75% of their TOG in the midfield. Leading players in disposals, efficiency, contested ball and score involvements amongst other midfielders.

Wings: Play Atleast 65% of their TOG playing though the middle of the ground (between the arcs). Leading players in their position in disposals, marks, disposal efficiency and score involvements.

Half Forwards: Play Atleast 65% game time in the forward half of the ground. Leading players in inside 50s, score involvements, goals and disposals amongst other half forwards.

Full Forward Line/Key Forwards: Play Atleast 75% of their game time in the forward half. Leading players in goals kicked, shots on goal and score involvements amongst other key forwards.

Then the bench places can be left for one Defender, Mid, Fwd and then anyone else.

Using stats and data to select players and comparing them only against others who have actually played in the same positions clearly removes bias and provides accurate parameters in selecting the squad.

What’s the point in having player rankings and stats from champion data or whoever they use is they are not actually used for anything?

What would be a better way in selecting the AA squad and making it more about the best in their positions over the year compared to the media favourites?

 

[mike123]

Wingers that don’t spend the majority of their time on the ball and in centre bounces.

 

[RUNVS]

Should be based on the idea that we are going to be playing another country next week, and the AFL is selecting the team to play against that other country.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

Wingers that don’t spend the majority of their time on the ball and in centre bounces.

My bad, thought i forgot something! Wingers are definitely a position on their own to assess

 

[mike123]

Should be based on the idea that we are going to be playing another country next week, and the AFL is selecting the team to play against that other country.

With no actually rep football it’s hard to tell though. Would a team full of fun inside mids actually win everything chucked at it and bulky opponents away or would a more balanced squad be able to expose them.

With no rep football it’s all theoretical.

 

[Hot Diggity]

I’ll start off by stating I don’t plan this thread to become a discussion about why a certain player from my club wasn’t selected over a certain player from your club debate..

but is it time the selection process for the AA team is overhauled and clear selection parameters are put in place when deciding the team?

When we look at most awards, there is clear quantitative data used in their selection. The Coleman, MVP, Coaches Votes, Brownlow, B&F ect. And the list goes on.

What would be some appropriate parameters put in place when selecting the AA squad?

I believe if a team was selected on the below basis, it would make for a much fairer selection process and remove bias and media love childs.

All these are also based on a player playing a minimum of 80% of the season as well. Find it ridiculous a player whose missed 1/4 of the season can be selected at times.

Full Back Line/Key Defenders: Play Atleast 75% of the game in their defensive half and be a leading player in spoils, intercepts and one on one wins amongst other defenders

Other Defenders: Play Atleast 65% game time in defensive half. Leading player in rebounds, one on one wins and effective disposals amongst defensive players

Midfielders: Play Atleast 75% of their TOG in the midfield. Leading players in disposals, efficiency, contested ball and score involvements amongst other midfielders.

Half Forwards: Play Atleast 65% game time in the forward half of the ground. Leading players in inside 50s, score involvements, goals and disposals amongst other half forwards.

Full Forward Line/Key Forwards: Play Atleast 75% of their game time in the forward half. Leading players in goals kicked, shots on goal and score involvements amongst other key forwards.

Then the bench places can be left for one Defender, Mid, Fwd and then anyone else.

Using stats and data to select players and comparing them only against others who have actually played in the same positions clearly removes bias and provides accurate parameters in selecting the squad.

What’s the point in having player rankings and stats from champion data or whoever they use is they are not actually used for anything?

What would be a better way in selecting the AA squad and making it more about the best in their positions over the year compared to the media favourites?

Thanks for kicking this off with a sensible set of points.

I agree that there needs to be some metrics that drive selection. What these are I am not sure. However, the selection panel needs to be a better mix than there is currently. McLachlan and Hocking need to be off it, as should anyone who holds a position within the AFL or one of its clubs.

Personally, the coaches should choose it. Not flogs like Darcy and Lingy.

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

If it were to truly reflect a "team", perhaps it's wise the AA coach is selected first and can have input into the final side.

Actually think that’s a great idea. Or perhaps the coaches from the top 4 teams can decide the team at the end of the season based on actual data

 

[Hot Diggity]

Thanks for kicking this off with a sensible set of points.

I agree that there needs to be some metrics that drive selection. What these are I am not sure. However, the selection panel needs to be a better mix than there is currently. McLachlan and Hocking need to be off it, as should anyone who holds a position within the AFL or one of its clubs.

Personally, the coaches should choose it. Not flogs like Darcy and Lingy.

Personally Hocking needs punting full stop - he's a biased, a-hole who looks after his mates.

 

[Chaisa]

Should be based on the idea that we are going to be playing another country next week, and the AFL is selecting the team to play against that other country.

The funny thing is that the AA team does feel like they're trying to do that as a real international team would shunt midfielders up forward.

Yet it still causes controversy.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

They should format it as 7 defenders including 2 talls, 8 mids including 1 or 2 ruckmen, 7 forwards including 2 talls.

They've shown they can't handle the constraints of the "team format" where players are meant to be picked in position.

You can't pick 10 mids and 2 rucks in the 22. But no wingmen. Basically 3 forwards got picked this year. It's too skewed.

The defence and the first-choice onballers were fine. Then it got weird.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Should be based on the idea that we are going to be playing another country next week, and the AFL is selecting the team to play against that other country.

No, it should acknowledge the best performed players in their position. Why do we need some weird thought experiment? Pick the players according to position or abandon the concept of a 22.

 

[Schauermann]

Should be based on the idea that we are going to be playing another country next week, and the AFL is selecting the team to play against that other country.

Will that change anything? Players like Dangerfield are even more likely to be named as forwards. And probably be more judged on whole career as well. To stay with Danger: 40+ goal forward who can win a brownlow in the midfield will most likely beat a 50+ goal forward on most days when it comes to team selection.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Will that change anything? Players like Dangerfield are even more likely to be named as forwards. And probably be more judged on whole career as well. To stay with Danger: 40+ goal forward who can win a brownlow in the midfield will most likely beat a 50+ goal forward on most days when it comes to team selection.

I have no problem with Dangerfield being picked on a HFF in a year he's kicked 40. That would be fair acknowledgement of an outstanding year as a goal-kicking midfielder. But he didn't do that this year. Nor did Bontempelli or Martin.

They should have picked 1 or 2 more forwards (Butler, Gunston) and if they thought Bontempelli and Martin were the best of the rest, they have to make that decision when it comes to the bench. You can't just shoehorn them into wrong positions. Or, you can, but it undermines the concept.

 

[The Prosecutor]

Should be pretty simple.

An AA squad of 44 is selected comprising of

14 Defenders
14 forwards
14 midfielders
2 ruckman

A player is categorised by where they played the majority of their season according to Champion Data.

From that, you announce an All Australian First Team and an All Australian Second Team, each comprising of

7 Defenders
7 Forwards
7 Midfielders
1 Ruckman

 

[tropicaltiger]

I’ll start off by stating I don’t plan this thread to become a discussion about why a certain player from my club wasn’t selected over a certain player from your club debate..

but is it time the selection process for the AA team is overhauled and clear selection parameters are put in place when deciding the team?

When we look at most awards, there is clear quantitative data used in their selection. The Coleman, MVP, Coaches Votes, Brownlow, B&F ect. And the list goes on.

What would be some appropriate parameters put in place when selecting the AA squad?

I believe if a team was selected on the below basis, it would make for a much fairer selection process and remove bias and media love childs.

All these are also based on a player playing a minimum of 80% of the season as well. Find it ridiculous a player whose missed 1/4 of the season can be selected at times.

Full Back Line/Key Defenders: Play Atleast 75% of the game in their defensive half and be a leading player in spoils, intercepts and one on one wins amongst other defenders

Other Defenders: Play Atleast 65% game time in defensive half. Leading player in rebounds, one on one wins and effective disposals amongst defensive players

Midfielders: Play Atleast 75% of their TOG in the midfield. Leading players in disposals, efficiency, contested ball and score involvements amongst other midfielders.

Wings: Play Atleast 65% of their TOG playing though the middle of the ground (between the arcs). Leading players in their position in disposals, marks, disposal efficiency and score involvements.

Half Forwards: Play Atleast 65% game time in the forward half of the ground. Leading players in inside 50s, score involvements, goals and disposals amongst other half forwards.

Full Forward Line/Key Forwards: Play Atleast 75% of their game time in the forward half. Leading players in goals kicked, shots on goal and score involvements amongst other key forwards.

Then the bench places can be left for one Defender, Mid, Fwd and then anyone else.

Using stats and data to select players and comparing them only against others who have actually played in the same positions clearly removes bias and provides accurate parameters in selecting the squad.

What’s the point in having player rankings and stats from champion data or whoever they use is they are not actually used for anything?

What would be a better way in selecting the AA squad and making it more about the best in their positions over the year compared to the media favourites?

only way to make it fair would be 18 on the selection committee - they are the coaches and each coach nominates 5 players from the other teams and not his own team....write down the 90 names......go and get 9 slabs and go for it 6 hours to sink the grog and pick the all australian 22 with 3 emergencies.

 

[Cleanupsoup]

I think there is a bit of a grey area in putting statistical benchmarks for positions, in a game that it is remarkablely hard to tell the story of while only looking at stats

Minimum game time in a position/area of the field is certainly something that should be looked at tho

 

[powerrrrrrrrrrrr]

As much as the AA selection process is flawed, so is the traditional AFL positions (6 forwards, 6 mids and 6 defenders). These positions only exist for a fleeting moment for a centre square bounce.

It would make more sense rather than to list actual positions, to categorise players into groups (forwards, mids and defenders) with a 5-8-5 split representative of a true AFL team

That is exactly why I think it’s important that metrics and quantitative data is needed when selecting the team.

Now that starting positions are more or less meaningless once the ball is bounced, using % of TOG in selected parts of the ground is a clear metric to use when deciding positions.

The fact that a player could spend let’s say 40% game time in the forward line and get a position as a forward over a permanent player who spends say 75% game time there shows it is a broken system.

If we have metrics in place to compare instead of the typical “starting positions” then we have the available parameters to compare like for like players in their areas of the ground.

 

[WCE_phil]

It's pretty ******* simple that it needs an overhaul. 3 forwards out of 22 players is a ******* joke.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I think there is a bit of a grey area in putting statistical benchmarks for positions, in a game that it is remarkablely hard to tell the story of while only looking at stats

Minimum game time in a position/area of the field is certainly something that should be looked at tho

We have data that tells us how much time players spend in certain parts of the ground. We know exactly how many times players are in at centre bounces or at either end.

Don't pick 3 midfielders in the forwardline and it won't be an issue.

The selectors undermine the concept at every turn so tighter criteria should be established.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

Forwards to be selected as forwards could be a good start

 

[doppleganger]

Traditional positions are almost redundant in modern football.

Once the game rolls, you often have more than 30 players just swarming over the ground within one kick of the pill.

Dusty and Danger were top2 for inside 50s, and top10 for score involvements so no real drama with them slotted in as forwards

 

[Shane Heard]

let’s be honest and realistic...no one really sits around the table over a few beers discussing past AA selections.

It’s a token thing and very subjective.


Apart from any given season’s top 5 or 6 superstars...the rest is a lotto draw of opinion.

Means f-all really.

 

[Patty_vanda]

McRae totalled 4% game time on the wing this year - Guthrie 17%
Meanwhile Danger bont & Martin rotate forward. The award has been a joke for a long time now. The same players that are overhyped by media year in year out named in the wrong positions. I can’t take it seriously

 

[Sweet Jesus]

let’s be honest and realistic...no one really sits around the table over a few beers discussing past AA selections.

It’s a token thing and very subjective.


Apart from any given season’s top 5 or 6 superstars...the rest is a lotto draw of opinion.

Means f-all really.

Of course it's subjective and of course it means SFA.

But if the AFL is going to promote it as a big deal and the criteria derives from the concept of picking a "team", with players picked in positions, they should abide by the criteria implied by that concept.

This year, the team doesn't do what it says on the tin.

You can argue about one defender over another or one ruckman over another but picking 3 mids in the forwardline is farcical. They also picked 10 mids but no wingmen. The concept should be scrapped if this is the outcome, if they ignore their own criteria.

 

[puppy_dog7]

If they don’t want to make the team properly why don’t they just change the format.. no actual team, but just AA’s Based on position.

Example:
8 mids (including wings)
8 Defenders
6 forwards
2 Rucks
1 Ruck/FWD