Behind the Whistle: Latest EFL decisions analysed

In Behind the Whistle, former Premier League referee Chris Foy goes through a selection of key match decisions from the latest action across the EFL..

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…  

Stoke City 0-2 Sheffield United

Incident – Possible penalty, foul (Sheffield United)

Decision – No penalty, simulation (Sheffield United)

Foy says: “When looking at potential penalty situations, a key consideration is the attacker’s motivation.

“In this instance, as the Sheffield United attacker goes around the goalkeeper, he makes a clear movement that suggests his motivation is to instigate contact, rather than attempting to play the ball or continue the attacking move.

“Because the Stoke goalkeeper refrains from committing to a challenge, it highlights the attacker’s clear action to instigate contact, in an attempt to deceive the referee. The referee does well to spot this and correctly shows a yellow card.”

Preston North End 1-2 Plymouth Argyle

Incident – Goal scored, possible offside (Preston North End)

Decision – Goal awarded (Preston North End)

Foy says: “There are two phases to this attack that the officials needed to make decisions for and, although they get the first one spot on, the ultimate outcome of allowing the goal to stand is incorrect, due to an offside offence.

“At the moment the ball is delivered into the penalty area, several Preston attackers are in an offside position. However, Ched Evans is not. Had he scored from his initial involvement, the goal would have been allowed to stand.

“However, after controlling the ball, Evans allows it to run on to Preston forward Emil Riis, who was clearly in an offside position when Evans played the ball. Therefore, the correct decision here would be to disallow the goal for an offside offence by Riis.”

Wigan Athletic 1-1 Blackpool

Incident – Possible penalty, foul (Blackpool)

Decision – Penalty awarded (Blackpool)

Foy says: “Once Blackpool’s CJ Hamilton gets goal side of his opponent and progresses into the box, it becomes difficult for the defending player to avoid making contact.

“However, it is still crucial that the referee remains focused and does not default to awarding a penalty without being certain that the contact is careless and has consequences.

“In this case, Hamilton feels contact on the back of his calf, which is both impactful and significant enough to impact his ability to make any further progress. As a result, the decision to award a penalty kick is, in my view, correct.”

Milton Keynes Dons 0-0 Grimsby Town

Incident – Goal scored, possible foul (Grimsby Town)

Decision – Goal disallowed, foul (Grimsby Town)

Foy says: “This is an interesting clip, as the immediate reaction of the Grimsby Town forward suggests that he believes the goal should be awarded, but the decision the officials make is spot on.

“Once the MK Dons goalkeeper has the ball in his hands, he is considered to be in possession of the ball and cannot be challenged until he releases possession himself. Any attempt to dispossess the goalkeeper when in possession like this is an offence specifically referenced in the Laws of the Game.

“In this scenario, the Grimsby Town forward makes contact with his arm in an effort to dislodge the ball from the keeper’s grasp. This action is not only a foul due to the challenge on the keeper, but it’s also a handling offence and, accordingly, the decision to award a defensive free-kick is correct.”