In Behind the Whistle, former Premier League referee Chris Foy goes through a selection of key match decisions from the latest action in the Sky Bet Championship, League One and League Two.
Behind the Whistle aims to give supporters of EFL clubs an insight into the decision-making considerations and also clarification of certain calls to provide an understanding of how the laws of the game are interpreted.
As part of a regular feature on Sky Sports following the conclusion of a matchday, Foy will be here to run you through some refereeing matters in the EFL…
Burnley 2-1 Portsmouth
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Was it right that this Portsmouth goal was given against Burnley?
Incident: Goal scored, possible offside (Portsmouth)
Decision: Goal awarded, no offside (Portsmouth)
Foy says: “This is an excellent decision made by the assistant referee, highlighting great judgement and awareness.
“Due to his close proximity to the line as the ball is crossed, it could look as though Portsmouth’s goal scorer, number 49, is in an offside position. However, we can see that Burnley’s no. 5 and Burnley no. 2 who slides in to block the cross are actually playing him onside.
“The assistant referee is able to identify this in the quickly developing picture and he correctly keeps his flag down. The goal is rightfully awarded.”
Stoke City 1-3 Hull City
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Were Stoke City unlucky to have conceded a penalty against Hull City?
Incident: Possible penalty, possible offside in build-up (Hull City)
Decision: Penalty awarded (Hull City)
Foy says: “From an educational point of view, this clip offers some valuable learnings as to whether an attacker in an offside position should be penalised following the ball being touched by an opposition player.
“As the ball is crossed into the box and headed up into the air by Hull City’s no. 9, Hull’s no. 33 at the back-post is in an offside position prior to the awarding of a penalty.
“Although Stoke City’s no. 17 does get a touch on the ball before bringing down Hull no. 33 moments later, this is not a controlled action by the defender. Therefore, this is not considered a deliberate playing of the ball and Hull no. 33 remains active from an offside perspective, therefore he should be penalised for an offside offence when he challenges the opponent and plays the ball, before being fouled by the defender.”
Queens Park Rangers 1-1 Millwall
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Should the QPR player have received a caution for deliberately trying to keep the ball out of the net with his hands?
Incident: Possible caution, handball (Queens Park Rangers)
Decision: No caution given (Queens Park Rangers)
Foy says: “This is another interesting clip from an educational point of view as it highlights the different levels of action needed to be taken for a handball offence.
“Millwall’s no. 19 shoots and, just before it crosses the goal line, A QPR defender deliberately handles the ball, in an attempt to keep the ball out of goal.
“Had this action prevented the ball from going into the net, then this would have to be a straight red card for Denial of an Obvious Goal.
“However, as his attempt was unsuccessful, the correct decision would have been to award the goal and show a yellow card to the QPR player for unsporting behaviour.”
Stockport County 1-4 Leyton Orient
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Should Leyton Orient have been given a penalty for this challenge against Stockport County?
Incident: Possible penalty, foul (Leyton Orient)
Decision: No penalty, and yellow card for simulation (Leyton Orient)
Foy says: “This is decisive refereeing here as a yellow card is correctly shown for simulation.
“Leyton Orient’s no. 2 takes the ball inside the box and then goes down when he feels contact from Stockport’s number 33.
“We can see from the replay that the contact was very minimal and not enough to warrant the player going down, therefore the attacker’s action is an attempt to deceive the referee. The referee’s positioning allows him to identify this and he correctly shows a yellow card for a clear act of simulation.”
Bradford City 0-0 AFC Wimbledon
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Was offside the correct decision here in the match between Bradford City and AFC Wimbledon?
Incident: Goal scored, possible offside (AFC Wimbledon)
Decision: No goal, offside given (AFC Wimbledon)
Foy says: “This clip highlights the importance of good communication between the match officials, as it is correctly identified that AFC Wimbledon’s no. 14 commits an offside offence before he puts the ball in the net.
“AFC Wimbledon’s no. 11 latches onto the header from Bradford City’s no. 17 and, if he had continued the run himself and scored the goal, there would have been no issues.
“However, when AFC Wimbledon’s no. 11 touches the ball, his teammate no. 14 is in an offside position. Therefore, when no. 14 becomes actively involved in play by collecting the ball after the touch by no. 11, he is correctly penalised for an offside offence and the goal is correctly disallowed by the referee.”
Milton Keynes Dons 1-1 Doncaster Rovers
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Did MK Dons deserve to go down to 10 men after this tackle on a Doncaster Rovers player?
Incident: Possible red card, serious foul play (MK Dons)
Decision: Red card shown, SFP (MK Dons)
Foy says: “For me, the challenge of MK Dons no. 9 is a lunging challenge. Leading with raised studs and made with excessive force, it meets the threshold for serious foul play.
“The excessive force used to make the tackle leaves the referee with no choice but to show the straight red.”