Some shocking decisions but having Rioli in is nothing short of staggering....I'm not worried about the possessions (he got about 10 in the 2008 GF and was brilliant) but the fact that he's missed about 5 games and wasn't consistent. Pavlich not being in is only slightly less staggering....

NikNat is a truly terrible decisiIon. If he had red hair and freckles would the panel have still put him in

NikNat is a truly terrible decisiIon. If he had red hair and freckles would the panel have still put him in

Hard to respond to that.

Wait until Hitler sees this one!

My money's on a very much changed AA selection panel in 2013.

The AA squad has 'political correctness' stamped all over it...

Cyril and Natanui should not be there , all bells and whistles and no consistent performance or high possesions.

Two best forwards ,in Riewoldt and Pavlich who have kicked the most goals for the year not in the forward line????

Jacobs not in the Ruck?? He was clearly the standout ruckman for the year.

Mitchell had a far better year than Cyril.

It boils down to Bartlett and Healy, they both think Nik Nat is the best player in the comp, and in choosing Rioli, its obvious that the flashy low possesion players are what they are into.

Why would anyone be surprised by the AFL. A complete joke.

Gerard Healey & the media's love for Nik Nat is unjustified and frankly sickening.

Dempster, Rioli (avg 9 kicks and 6 HBs), Franklin (ordinary year and averaging 3 goals) should not be in the side on this year's performance. Milne finished 12th on his clubs' B&F - that's what they think of him.

Glass as Captain is a joke.

Two ruckmen is a joke and I think unprecedented.

And whenever we were stiffed for the AA (Yze, Woey, Neitz etc) it was always said that the team rewarded consistent performance over a couple of years. Now there are 15 newly minted AAs - great if this is the new 'policy' but again totally inconsistent.

As usual conflicts abound with media and the AFL. Pathetic.

Two ruckmen is a joke and I think unprecedented.

You do remember Jamar's selection in 2010?

And whenever we were stiffed for the AA (Yze, Woey, Neitz etc) it was always said that the team rewarded consistent performance over a couple of years. Now there are 15 newly minted AAs - great if this is the new 'policy' but again totally inconsistent.

As usual conflicts abound with media and the AFL. Pathetic.

Speaking of Melbourne players being ‘stiffed’ by the AA selectors over the years, how would Russell Robertson feel today? 73 goals in 2005 wasn’t enough to get him in the side as a small forward (Johnson got in with 41 or 42 from memory), Rioli gets in this year with 35. I know Rioli’s meant to apply a lot of defensive pressure in the forward fifty, but he’s been awfully inconsistent this season in a forward line that has been red hot all year. Geez, 73 goals would’ve won the Coleman Medal this year. Robbo was more than stiff in 2005 – he was robbed.

The second ruckman should be on the bench, not in the forward pocket.

Wait until Hitler sees this one!

He won't be happy.

You know, for all his faults - the man knows footy and that is something to be admired.

They chose the 22 based on who they would pick to "lace up the boots" in a game tomorrow. Who are they playing?

I thought AA was about picking the 22 best players for the season - six forwards, six backs etc. etc.

And now it's suggested Naitanui got in because of him being one-half of that formidable ruck combination. I thought they were chosen based on individual merit?

This thing's gone to the dogs.

You do remember Jamar's selection in 2010?

What about Spider Everitt taking Robbo's spot in the forward pocket?

I wouldn't have had Naitanui in the squad of 40, but for him to be named first ruck is the worst decision in AA history. It's very much a populist vote and borders on reverse racism.

If one dismisses those ruckman with less than 10 games he averages equal 14th in hitouts. Maric and Jacobs average more possessions, more hitouts and more marks. Jacobs has the most hitouts to advantage in the league. Naitanui kicked more goals because he played forward so much. Which is another reason he should never have been number one ruck. Will Minson had a better year.

Disgraceful.

Couldn't agree more.

This AA team is an absolute farce and demeans the entire process. Being AA from now on will mean so little.

Naitanui and Rioli have not even had 'good' years.

How NikNat got in ahead of Jacobs is beyond me, an absolute joke. NikNat and Cox the best ruck combo? Perhaps. AA selection is an INDIVIDUAL honour, Jacobs was the best ruckman in the competition this year, period. Cox was NOT a forward this year, Pavlich was for most of the year and DOMINATED.

On AFL360 Mark Thompson, a recently retired senior coach and still in the game was asked how he rated the hitouts to advantage stat, and he said it was one of the most important in the game. They have gone with NikNat because everyone gushes over how much of a freak he is, he may be worthy (in fact he probably will be at some stage) of AA selection, but not this year.

The selectors have blinkers on this year.

Gerard Healy's interview concerning Nik Nat last night was pure stand up comedy. Ivan the Mullett clearly deserved the number 1 Ruck position.

Is KB on the selection panel for the AA? He has a major hardon for Nik Nat.

Watch Nik Nat win the mark of the year too. You heard it here first

Could happen. Isn't the MOTY voted on by the fans on the web? One sure-fire way to diminish all credibility for an award...

How NikNat got in ahead of Jacobs is beyond me, an absolute joke. NikNat and Cox the best ruck combo? Perhaps. AA selection is an INDIVIDUAL honour, Jacobs was the best ruckman in the competition this year, period. Cox was NOT a forward this year, Pavlich was for most of the year and DOMINATED.

Agreed. It seems as if they have taken to its extreme this concept of selecting players with consideration to how they actually perform as a team, whereby combinations are being given weight at the expense of, you know, who was the BEST in that position over the season? That old chestnut. Combinations should be a distant secondary consideration to who was the best performed player.

For the record I think NicNat would've been AA eventually over his career, and have stated so on here before, but selection at this stage has cheapened the whole process. For someone who has played less than 50% in the ruck to be first choice, and then to name Cox in the forward pocket just cements what a mockery it has become.

They need to get rid of KB and Darcy immediately, and probably Healy as well. His crush on NicNat is frankly weird.

I also have little faith in Jakovich's objectivity. Selecting Glass as captain has his fingerprints all over it.

Edited September 18, 201212 yr by P_Man

Why is the standard of our journalists so deplorable. Half of them are semi literate, others are muckrakers, and some just disingenuous. I saw this headline on Sportsnewsfirst and the subsequent article comes from AAP: "Jacobs hits out at AA snub". Then the first line states: " ADELAIDE ruckman Sam Jacobs has slammed his snub from the AFL's All-Australian selectors."

You judge for yourself if either statements are true.

http://www.sportsnewsfirst.com.au/articles/2012/09/18/jacobs-hits-out-at-all-australian-snub/

Why is the standard of our journalists so deplorable.

Because what they write is what the bogan uneducated masses (Collingwood supporters) like to / can actually read.

Because what they write is what the bogan uneducated masses (Collingwood supporters) like to / can actually read.

I've said it before, but there's got to be a market out there for a sports news site that delivers purely factual, thorough, well-reasearched articles. I don't know about anyone else, but I'd much rather read a handful of good articles a week than wade through dozens of shitty ones every day. By and large when reading or watching footy media these days I feel my intelligence is being insulted.

I've said it before, but there's got to be a market out there for a sports news site that delivers pure;y factual, thorough, well-reasearched articles. I don't know about anyone else, but I'd much rather read a handful of good articles a week than wade through dozens of shitty ones every day. By and large when reading or watching footy media these days I feel my intelligence is being insulted.

There is Nasher

It's called Demonland - best value going around

Trying to balance brilliance, consistency and skill to find the best 22 from 40 -payers is difficult enough, but they didn't even start with the best 40. Three glaring errors though:

No Sam MItchell in the best 22, but they include Rioli

No Pavlich in the best 40

Including Natanui at all.

Honestly, I am simply not interested in the All Australain awards any more, it has become too tainted. What I mean by this is that it feels as if they want the fans clicking on websites, downlaoding apps, tweeting and Facebook-ing, and create subject matter to fill the media pages, internet and radio call-back sessions, rather than actually selecting the best 22 players IN THEIR RELEVANT POSITIONS.

Why is the standard of our journalists so deplorable. Half of them are semi literate, others are muckrakers, and some just disingenuous. I saw this headline on Sportsnewsfirst and the subsequent article comes from AAP: "Jacobs hits out at AA snub". Then the first line states: " ADELAIDE ruckman Sam Jacobs has slammed his snub from the AFL's All-Australian selectors."

You judge for yourself if either statements are true.

http://www.sportsnew...ustralian-snub/

What an outburst, chill out Sam, just calm down, slamming people like that will get you nowhere.