Add articles to your saved list and come back to them any time.<\/p>\n
The controversial non-goal from Geelong\u2019s Georgie Prespakis grabbed headlines after the opening round of the AFLW season.<\/p>\n
It highlighted the glaring issue that faces the competition \u2013 there is no score review system.<\/p>\n
The Geelong midfielder had a running shot on goal in the second quarter, against the Bulldogs, deemed a behind by the goal umpire. It bemused Prespakis, who was celebrating with her teammates.<\/p>\n
Fortunately for the Cats it had no bearing on the result, as they won the contest by 48 points. The AFL has since confirmed the goal should\u2019ve been awarded to Prespakis.<\/p>\n
Over the same weekend, Sydney\u2019s AFLW side celebrated its maiden win, after a winless 2022 debut season. However, if a score review system had been in place, they may have been able to notch up a win last season, after a goal from Molly Eastman during the third quarter against the Bombers was incorrectly judged as a behind. The Swans lost the game by four points.<\/p>\n
It begs the question, does the AFLW deserve a score review system?<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Georgie Prespakis was denied a goal.<\/span>Credit: <\/span>Getty Images<\/cite><\/p>\n It\u2019s an issue I\u2019m sure new footy boss Laura Kane is working through with the AFL. As a player and a fan, I don\u2019t want to see results influenced by goal umpire errors. Mistakes will happen, that\u2019s part of the game, but if we can eliminate the obvious decisions that\u2019s a great thing for our competition.<\/p>\n Due to the large number of games played at community grounds, as well as the added costs of cameras at venues and internet connection to the AFL\u2019s ARC, I\u2019m proposing a different score review system than the one used in the men\u2019s competition. That system involves the umpires referring their decisions to the ARC to be reviewed.<\/p>\n But I\u2019m suggesting in the women\u2019s competition it should be the responsibility of the players to review the decision, not too dissimilar to the review in cricket or a challenge in tennis.<\/p>\n In situations like those of Prespakis and Eastman, when both players were certain of scoring a goal, they would have the option to ask the field umpire for a review. The decision can then be reviewed by the emergency goal umpire at the ground, who can make the final decision.<\/p>\n There would need to be consequences for team reviews that were incorrect, to avoid teams using a review as a stalling tactic or to stop momentum. So any incorrect goal reviews could incur a 50-metre penalty. Where reviews, such as touched off the boot, are inconclusive due to blurry vision, it goes to umpires call, as it does in the men\u2019s competition, and there would be no consequences for the reviewing team. The only decisions that wouldn\u2019t be reviewed are the goals that are touched on the line, as games don\u2019t have the appropriate camera angles to assess whether the ball was touched before crossing the line.<\/p>\n For the most part, the goal umpires get the decisions right. The idea behind this review system is to eradicate any of the howlers, like the Prespakis call we saw on the weekend, and to ensure we are getting the best teams playing finals.<\/p>\n We\u2019ve already seen how tight the finals race was in the men\u2019s season and given the season length makes the competition so cutthroat for the women, percentage plays a huge part in whether teams make the top eight or finish top four. We saw it with Adelaide and we don\u2019t want history repeating itself.<\/p>\n Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. <\/i><\/b>Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter<\/i><\/b>.<\/i><\/b><\/p>\nMost Viewed in Sport<\/h2>\n
From our partners<\/h3>\n