Why did Yamaka have wrong view in SN 22.85? In Yamaka Sutta, this was wrong view:


  As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more (mental) effluents, on the break-up of the body, is
  annihilated, perishes &amp; does not exist after death.


In Yamaka Sutta, this was right view:


  Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: A monk, a worthy one, with no more mental effluents: what is he on the
  break-up of the body, after death?
  
  Form is inconstant... Feeling... Perception... Fabrications... Consciousness is inconstant. That which is inconstant is
  unsatisfactory (dukkha). That which is unsatisfactory has ceased and
  gone to its end.


Most Buddhists believe an arahant has ended the cycle of reincarnations. If so, what made the view of Yamaka wrong view? 

Also, what makes the right view here right view?
The first view is wrong because ven. Yamaka thought that there is a self that ends at Nibbana. In other words, he thought that the five aggregates is a self.

The seconds view is right because it doesn't  take the five aggregates as a self. 

Also the second view is talking about an Arahath. Not an ordinary being. So this has nothing to do with Annihilationism.