In Behind the Whistle, former Premier League referee Chris Foy picks out a number of key match selections from the most recent fixtures within the Sky Guess Championship, League One and League Two.
Behind the Whistle goals to offer supporters of EFL golf equipment an perception into decision-making concerns and make clear sure calls on how the foundations of the sport are interpreted.
As a part of Sky Sports activities’ common protection after matchday, Foy is right here to information you thru some officiating points within the EFL…
Burnley 2-1 Portsmouth
Please use Chrome browser for a extra handy video participant
Was this Portsmouth purpose scored in opposition to Burnley?
occasion: Aim, potential offside (Portsmouth)
Determine: Aim, no offside (Portsmouth)
Foy stated: “This was a wonderful choice by the assistant referee which highlighted glorious judgment and consciousness.
“As he was passing very near the purpose line, it appeared like Portsmouth’s No. 49 purpose scorer was in an offside place. Nevertheless, we will see that Burnley’s No. 5 and Burnley’s No. 2 slipped Fell down.
“The assistant referee was in a position to acknowledge this within the fast-developing image and accurately stored the flag down. The purpose was right.”
Stoke City 1-3 Hull City
Please use Chrome browser for a extra handy video participant
Was it unlucky that Stoke Metropolis conceded a penalty in opposition to Hull Metropolis?
occasion: Attainable penalty, build-up potential offside (Hull Metropolis)
Determine: Penalty awarded (Hull Metropolis)
Foy stated: “From an academic perspective, this footage offers some helpful classes on whether or not an attacker in an offside place ought to be penalized after the ball has been touched by an opposition participant.
“When the ball was handed into the penalty space by Hull Metropolis’s No. 9 participant and he headed the ball into the air, Hull Metropolis’s No. 33 participant was in an offside place on the again put up earlier than the penalty kick was awarded.
“Though Stoke Metropolis’s No. 17 did contact the ball after which introduced down Hull Metropolis’s No. 33, this was not an motion managed by the defender. Due to this fact, this was not thought-about intentional possession of the ball, nor was Hull Metropolis’s No. 33 intentional. of.
Queens Park Rangers 1-1 Millwall
Please use Chrome browser for a extra handy video participant
Ought to QPR gamers be warned for intentionally holding the ball out of the online with their arms?
occasion: Attainable warning, handball (Queens Park Rangers)
Determine: No warning given (QPR)
Foy stated: “That is one other attention-grabbing episode from an academic perspective because it highlights the totally different ranges of motion required for a handball foul.
“Millwall’s No. 19 shot, simply earlier than the ball crossed the purpose line, a QPR defender intentionally dealt with the ball in an try and hold it out of the purpose.
“If this motion prevents the ball from coming into the online then will probably be a direct purple card for denying a transparent purpose.
“Nevertheless, as his try was unsuccessful, the right choice would have been to award a purpose and subject a yellow card for the unethical conduct of a QPR participant.”
Stockport County 1-4 Leyton Orient
Please use Chrome browser for a extra handy video participant
Ought to Leyton Orient be punished for the problem in opposition to Stockport County?
occasion: Attainable penalty, foul (Leyton Orient)
Determine: No penalty, simulated yellow card (Leyton Orient)
Foy stated: “It was the referee who was decisive as a result of the yellow card was proven accurately through the simulation.
“Leyton Orient’s quantity 2 picked up the ball within the field after which fell to the bottom when he felt contact from Stockport’s quantity 33.
“We are able to see from the replay that the contact was very small and never sufficient to carry the participant to the bottom, so the attacker’s actions had been an try and deceive the referee. The referee’s positioning allowed him to acknowledge this and accurately present the yellow card.” to get clear simulation conduct.
Bradford City 0-0 AFC Wimbledon
Please use Chrome browser for a extra handy video participant
Was offside the precise choice through the recreation between Bradford Metropolis and AFC Wimbledon?
occasion: Aim, potential offside (AFC Wimbledon)
Determine: No purpose, offside (AFC Wimbledon)
Foy stated: “This footage highlights the significance of fine communication between match officers as AFC Wimbledon’s No. 14 was accurately recognized as offside earlier than placing the ball into the online.
“The AFC Wimbledon quantity 11 caught the header from the Bradford Metropolis quantity 17 and if he had continued his run and scored the purpose there would have been no downside.
“Nevertheless, when participant No. 11 of AFC Wimbledon touches the ball, his teammate participant No. 14 is in an offside place. Due to this fact, when participant No. 14 actively participates within the recreation and receives the ball after participant No. 11 touches the ball, he’s The penalty for offside was right and the referee accurately disallowed the purpose.
Milton Keynes 1-1 Doncaster Rovers
Please use Chrome browser for a extra handy video participant
Ought to MK Dons scale back their numbers to 10 males after this deal with on a Doncaster Rovers participant?
occasion: Attainable purple card, critical foul (MK Dons)
Determine: Crimson card proven, SFP (MK Dons)
Foy stated: “For me, the MK Dons No. 9 problem was a lunging problem. Guided by raised studs and overexerted, it reached the brink of a critical foul.
“The deal with was made with an excessive amount of drive and the referee had no selection however to offer a straight purple card.”
