In Behind the Whistle, former Premier League referee Chris Foy goes through a selection of key match decisions from the latest action in the Sky Bet Championship.
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…
Bristol City 2-1 Sunderland
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Was the referee right to send off Sunderland’s Trai Hume during his side’s 2-1 clash against Bristol City
Incident: Possible red card, DOGSO (Sunderland)
Decision: Red card awarded (Sunderland)
Foy says: “In my eyes, this situation requires the referee to take into account a number of key factors to reach the right outcome of a red card being awarded for a denial of an obvious goalscoring opportunity (DOGSO).
“The Bristol City No 21 gets goalside of his opponent and is carelessly tripped whilst running at full speed, and without the foul the attacker would very likely gain possession of the ball and have an obvious opportunity to score a goal.
“Therefore, the referee correctly shows a straight red card.”
Norwich City 3-5 Portsmouth
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Norwich City were denied a penalty for a potential handball during their Championship clash against Portsmouth
Incident: Possible penalty, handball (Norwich City)
Decision: No penalty (Norwich City)
Foy says: “Because three Portsmouth players slide in for the ball simultaneously here, it becomes difficult for the referee to identify and be certain whether or not the contact with the ball comes from a hand or a body.
“Although I can sympathise with the referee here, I do believe he has missed a handball offence with the replays confirming that the ball strikes the left hand of Portsmouth’s No 7, which is clearly extended away from his body making him bigger. The correct decision here would be a penalty kick.”
Stoke City 2-0 Sheffield Wednesday
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Stoke were awarded a goal, despite some controversy around the positioning of one of their players in front of the Sheffield Wednesday goalkeeper
Incident: Goal scored, possible foul (Stoke City)
Decision: No foul (Stoke City)
Foy says: “This is an interesting incident and one which we see very rarely in football, yet one which is good to explain from an educational perspective.
“Sheffield Wednesday’s goalkeeper has the ball safely in his hands and then attempts to play it down the pitch, and in doing so he inadvertently plays it against the back of a Stoke City player and into his own goal.
“Although the Stoke City player does jump up, the goalkeeper is in full control of his actions and is not prevented from releasing the ball from his hands by any action of the attacker. The decision to play the ball was purely made by the ‘keeper and the referee correctly allows the goal to stand.”
