Former Premier League referee Chris Foy examines decisions from the latest Sky Bet Championship, League One and League Two action; Blackburn vs Cardiff, Preston vs Millwall, Fleetwood vs Lincoln, Stevenage vs Port Vale, Sutton vs Morecambe all analysed
Tuesday 24 October 2023 12:45, UK
In Behind the Whistle, former Premier League referee Chris Foy goes through a selection of key match decisions from the latest Sky Bet Championship, League One and League Two action.
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…
Incident: Goal scored - potential offside.
Decision: Goal disallowed - offside.
Foy says: The decision in this particular incident is in relation to Cardiff City's Karlan Grant, who is in an offside position when the initial effort is headed towards the goal.
I think this is an example of good teamwork and communication between the officials, with the referee and the assistant identifying that not only is the Cardiff City attacker in an offside position, but that he is also in the line of vision of the goalkeeper and makes an obvious action that impacts the ability of the goalkeeper to save the ball.
A good call to disallow the goal.
Incident: Potential penalty (Preston)
Decision: No penalty awarded (Preston)
Foy says: Having the benefit of a replay, there is no doubt that the ball into the box hits the hand of the Millwall defender, and at that point the referee has to judge if the arm is in an unnatural position.
I think the defender seems to have misjudged the flight of the ball, and clearly extends his right arm, and in my opinion his arm is in an unnatural position, therefore making his body bigger, and stops the ball dropping to an attacking player.
I would suggest a penalty being awarded would have been the better outcome.
Incident: Potential red card - DOGSO (Fleetwood)
Decision: Red card awarded - DOGSO (Fleetwood)
Foy says: Once the attacking player gets in front of the Fleetwood Town defender, they inherit the responsibility when making any challenge.
This incident would tick all the boxes for a DOGSO decision. There is clearly no other defender near the play, and the attacker is in full control of the ball and heading towards the opponent's goal, so once a foul is committed the awarding of a red card for the denial of an obvious goalscoring opportunity is the correct outcome.
Incident: Potential penalty (Port Vale)
Decision: No penalty awarded (Port Vale)
Foy says: In this situation the referee awards a goal kick; however this should have resulted in a penalty to Port Vale.
The defender has committed to a sliding challenge inside the area, and has not made any contact with the ball and has clearly tripped the attacking player. Given the high standards match officials hold themselves to, I think looking back it is a decision where the referee will be disappointed to have misread the situation.
Incident: Potential penalty (Morecambe)
Decision: Penalty awarded (Morecambe)
Foy says: This is a really good spot by the referee, who identifies that while the ball is coming into the area from the corner kick, the Sutton United defender is clearly holding the attacking player.
The attacking player has attempted to bring the ball down, however the actions of the defender are clear and sustained holding, pulling the attacker to the ground. The official is decisive in awarding the penalty - a correct decision.
