Former Premier League referee Chris Foy examines decisions from the Championship and also in League One games between Forest Green Rovers and Oxford United, Ipswich Town and Exeter City, and in League Two between Rochdale and Sutton United
Wednesday 3 May 2023 23:21, 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.
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.
Incident: Goal scored - potential foul (Reading)
Decision: Goal awarded (Reading)
Foy says: "I think the referee has called this decision correctly; the attacking player and the goalkeeper are both competing for the ball, and there is inevitable contact between the two players.
"It's what you might describe as a typical 50/50 challenge in the area, and on this occasion, I think it was the correct decision to allow the play to continue and award the goal.
Incident: Goal scored - Potential offside (West Brom)
Decision: Goal awarded (West Brom)
Foy says: "There are two aspects to this decision: the initial awarding of the free-kick and a potential offside offence by an attacking player for being in the line of vision of the goalkeeper.
"First of all, the free-kick awarded is one that you can argue either way - it's very difficult to judge in real-time who made contact with the ball as both players went into the challenge similarly.
"Once the free-kick is awarded, although an attacking player is in an offside position, when the free-kick is taken he isn't clearly obstructing the line of vision of the goalkeeper, so on balance the goal is correctly awarded.
"That being said, typically in these situations, the refereeing team are proactive ahead of the free-kick being taken, particularly when an attacking player stands in an offside position, advising of the risk of being penalised."
Incident: Goal scored - Potential offside (Oxford United)
Decision: Goal awarded (Oxford United)
Foy says: "This is an extremely tight decision to make, and even with several replays it's very difficult to be completely sure of a certain decision without the benefit of using offside line technology.
"I do think the decisive factor in the decision could be that the defender is leaning forward in an attempt to chase the ball and therefore the attacker would appear level with second last defender in real-time. In short, I would agree with the on-field decision."
Incident: Potential penalty (Ipswich Town)
Decision: Penalty awarded (Ipswich Town)
Foy says: "I think the key factor in this decision is that the Exeter City defender touches the ball, and whilst there is upper body contact between the attacking player and the defender, it doesn't meet the threshold required for foul to be awarded.
In this particular incident, I think the better outcome would have been to allow play to continue and not award the penalty kick."
Incident: Potential red card - DOGSO (Sutton United)
Decision: Red card awarded - DOGSO (Sutton United)
Foy says: "Similar to a number of decisions reviewed in previous weeks, once the goalkeeper leaves the penalty area and commits to a challenge like this, and then doesn't win the ball, there is always a risk they could be 'in trouble' for denial of an obvious goalscoring opportunity (DOGSO).
"The referee has judged on this occasion that the direction of the attacking player would lead to an obvious goalscoring opportunity - which I would agree with. Therefore, the awarding of a red card for DOGSO is correct in this instance."
