In Behind the Whistle, former Premier League referee Chris Foy goes through a selection of key match decisions from the latest Sky Bet League One and League Two action.
Although many decisions made on the pitch are of a subjective nature, 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, starting with the below.
Sky Bet League One
Fleetwood Town 2-1 Lincoln City
Incident: Potential penalty (Lincoln City)
Decision: Penalty not awarded (Lincoln City)
In this incident, the Fleetwood Town defender gets his right leg in front of the attacker and plays the ball. Despite there being contact, it's unavoidable given their body positions and best considered as normal football contact.
The referee was correct not to award a penalty here, especially given the higher threshold in place and the preference not to penalise minimal contact.
Portsmouth 2-2 Port Vale
Incident: Potential penalty - 42nd minute (Portsmouth)
Decision: Penalty Awarded - 42nd minute (Portsmouth)
Foy says: This decision relates to the award of the first penalty in this fixture, and typically of competitive matches there is a lot to keep an eye on inside the box, but ultimately, I think the decision to give a penalty is spot on.
The Portsmouth #20 is the wrong side of the Port Vale defender and is being pulled throughout his run. This sustained holding impacts his ability to challenge for the ball in front of the goalkeeper and therefore a penalty is the correct decision in my view.
Sky Bet League Two
Barrow 2-1 AFC Wimbledon
Incident: Potential 2nd caution (AFC Wimbledon)
Decision: Advantage played; no caution awarded (AFC Wimbledon)
Foy says: The referee has to determine if the actions of the AFC Wimbledon player are either a careless or reckless foul. Having identified the foul the referee plays advantage, if a determination that the challenge was, indeed, just careless, the referee is unable to go back and caution the player.
On this occasion, I think the official has made the right call. I don't think the challenge meets the threshold for a clear reckless challenge, and therefore a yellow card. Advantage being played and no caution awarded was the most sensible option here.
Swindon Town 0-1 Stockport County
Incident: Potential red card - DOGSO (Swindon Town)
Decision: Red card awarded - DOGSO (Swindon Town)
Foy says: When an incident such as this one occurs, it is important the referee judges the decision on its own merits, rather than at what stage of the fixture it takes place.
On this occasion, the Swindon Town player hasn't made an attempt to play the ball, and in bringing down the Stockport County attacker in a non-footballing action, the awarding of a penalty and a red card for a denial of a goalscoring opportunity (DOGSO) was the correct call to make.