In Behind the Whistle, former Premier League referee Chris Foy looks at key match-day decisions from recent games across Sky Bet’s Championship, First Division and Second Division.
Behind the Whistle aims to provide supporters of EFL clubs with insight into the decision-making considerations and to understand how the Laws of the Game are interpreted through explanations of specific calls.
As part of Sky Sports’ regular post-match coverage, Foy will explain some of the things he knows about refereeing in the EFL.
Burnley 2-1 Portsmouth
For a more accessible video player, please use the Chrome browser.
Was it right for Portsmouth to award this goal against Burnley?
case: Goal goes in and there is a possibility of offside (Portsmouth)
decision: Goal awarded, no offside (Portsmouth)
Foy says: “This is a great decision by the referee, showing great judgement and awareness.
“It may appear that Portsmouth’s goalscorer, number 49, is offside as he is close to the line when the ball is crossed. However, Burnley’s number 5 and Burnley’s number 2, who slide to block the cross, are actually flagging him offside.
“The referee noticed this in the rapidly unfolding picture and correctly lowered his flag. The goal was rightly awarded.”
Stoke City 1-3 Hull City
For a more accessible video player, please use the Chrome browser.
Was it unlucky for Stoke City to concede a penalty to Hull City?
case: Potential penalty, possible offside during build-up (Hull City)
decision: Penalty awarded (Hull City)
Foy says: “From an educational perspective, this clip provides a valuable lesson on whether an attacker who is in an offside position after the ball has been touched by an opposing player should be penalised.
“When the ball was crossed into the box and headed in by Hull City’s number 9, the number 33 at the back post was in an offside position before the penalty was awarded.
“Stoke City’s number 17 touched the ball moments later before bringing down Hull’s number 33, but this was not a controlled action by the defender. It is therefore not considered a deliberate play of the ball and Hull’s number 33 remains active from an offside perspective and should therefore be penalised for an offside offence when he challenges an opponent and plays the ball before being fouled by the defender.”
Queens Park Rangers 1-1 Millwall
For a more accessible video player, please use the Chrome browser.
Should a QPR player have been booked for deliberately trying to keep the ball out of the goal with his hand?
case: Caution, Handball (Queens Park Rangers)
decision: No Attention (Queens Park Rangers)
Foy says: “This video is another interesting one from an educational perspective, as it highlights the different levels of action that should be taken in response to a handball foul.
“Millwall’s number 19 took a shot and just before it crossed the line, a QPR defender deliberately handled the ball to try and stop it going into the goal.
“If this action had prevented the ball from going into the goal, it would have been a clear goal-stopping offence and should have resulted in an immediate red card.
“However, as his attempt was unsuccessful, the correct decision would have been to allow the goal and show the QPR player a yellow card for unsporting behaviour.”
Stockport County 1-4 Leyton Orient
For a more accessible video player, please use the Chrome browser.
Should Leyton Orient have been penalised for this challenge against Stockport County?
case: Penalty, foul possibility (Leyton Orient)
decision: No penalty, yellow card for simulation (Leyton Orient)
Foy says: “Here the referee was the deciding judge, correctly giving a yellow card for simulation.
“Leyton Orient’s number 2 receives the ball in the box and falls when he feels contact with Stockport’s number 33.
“If you look at the replay, the contact was very minimal and not enough to cause a player to go down, so the attacker’s actions were an attempt to fool the referee. The referee’s position allowed him to identify this and he correctly showed a clear yellow card for simulation.”
Bradford City 0-0 AFC Wimbledon
For a more accessible video player, please use the Chrome browser.
Was offside the right call in the Bradford City vs AFC Wimbledon match?
case: The goal is in, there is a possibility of an offside (AFC Wimbledon)
decision: No goal, offside (AFC Wimbledon)
Foy says: “This footage highlights how important good communication between match officials is, as it correctly flags down AFC Wimbledon’s No. 14 for offside before he put the ball into the net.
“If AFC Wimbledon’s No. 11 had received a header from Bradford City’s No. 17 and run to score, there would have been no problem.
“However, when AFC Wimbledon’s number 11 touches the ball, his teammate number 14 is in an offside position. Therefore, if number 14 collects the ball after number 11 touches it and actively participates in the play, he is correctly penalised for an offside offence and the referee does not correctly award a goal.”
Milton Keynes Dons 1-1 Doncaster Rovers
For a more accessible video player, please use the Chrome browser.
Should MK Dons have been reduced to 10 men after this tackle on a Doncaster Rovers player?
case: Possible red card, serious foul play (MK Dons)
decision: Red card presented, SFP (MK Dons)
Foy says: “For me, the MK Dons No. 9 challenge is a rushing challenge. Leading with high studs and with excessive force, it reaches the limit of serious foul play.
“The referee had no choice but to issue a red card because he used excessive force to tackle.”
