Former Premier League referee Chris Foy examines decisions in League One games between Bolton Wanderers and Fleetwood Town & Reading and Cheltenham, and in League Two between Crewe Alexandra and Newport County & Crawley Town and MK Dons
Friday 18 August 2023 14:40, UK
It’s a midweek special in Behind the Whistle, with former Premier League referee Chris Foy going through a selection of key match decisions from Tuesday’s Sky Bet 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: Potential red card - second caution (Bolton)
Decision: Red card awarded - second caution (Bolton)
Foy says: When an attacking player makes a clear and deliberate action that impacts the ability of the goalkeeper to release the ball quickly, he runs a risk of being penalised and cautioned, as we see on many occasions goalkeepers releasing the ball to commence promising counter-attacks.
As such, in the final analysis, the Bolton player can't have too many complaints at being cautioned in this situation. However, because the goalkeeper was quickly able to move away from the attacker and a quick release was still possible, I feel there is sufficient flexibility in this situation for the attacker to be given advice regarding his future conduct rather than a yellow card.
As we can see, because the goalkeeper was able to initially progress despite the contact from the attacker, I understand why the referee decided not to penalise immediately, but this resulted in a further clash between the attacker and the goalkeeper, meaning the referee had to step in at that point to penalise the initial offence. The referee decided to caution the attacker for the initial action but the decision to do so took too long, lowering the credibility of that sanction.
In my opinion, the better outcome would have been offer advice to both parties and give a free-kick to the defending team.
Incident: Potential red card - DOGSO (Reading)
Decision: No foul awarded (Reading)
Foy says: There are two aspects to this decision: should a free-kick have been awarded, and if so, does it then constitute an obvious denial of a goal-scoring opportunity and therefore a red card?
I think it's quite clear from the footage that a free-kick should have been awarded for a holding offence by the defender, however, there would be doubt as to whether the attacker would gain possession or control of that ball before the goalkeeper.
Therefore, I would suggest that this is not an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, more a promising attack, which should have resulted in a yellow card.
Incident: Potential penalty (Crewe)
Decision: Penalty awarded (Crewe)
Foy says: There are two really good pieces of refereeing in this sequence which result in the correct decision to award a penalty to Crewe.
The defender making a challenge does not play the ball and makes clear contact with the attacker on the ankle, with the consequence of tripping him, but the referee delays his whistle for a split second in case of an opportunity for a goal to be scored before then bringing it back to point to the spot. A very good decision.
Incident: Potential penalty (MK Dons)
Decision: No penalty awarded (MK Dons)
Foy says: Similar to the above decision at Crewe, this was a good piece of officiating that results in the right call being made at a potentially decisive moment in the fixture.
While there is some upper-body contact, this is minimal and normal football contact - a good example of the high threshold being applied.
