In Behind the Whistle, former Premier League and EFL referee Chris Foy goes through a selection of key match decisions from the latest 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…
Blackpool 4-0 Shrewsbury Town
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Blackpool’s goal stood following a melee in the box, but Shrewsbury players believe that there was a handball
Incident: Goal scored – Potential handball (Blackpool)
Decision: Goal awarded (Blackpool)
Foy says: This particular incident is in relation to a potential handball against the Blackpool goalscorer directly before the goal is scored.
If the ball goes directly into goal or the attacker scores immediately after the ball has made contact with their arm, even if accidental the goal will be disallowed.
It is a difficult decision to make in real time. Even with the benefit of looking at the replays, I don’t believe there is any conclusive evidence to show whether the ball actually makes contact with the arm, accidentally or otherwise, and therefore the referee was correct to award the goal.
Harrogate Town 1-1 Swindon Town
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Swindon Town had a goal disallowed following a foul on Harrogate Town’s goalkeeper. Were they hard done by?
Incident: Goal scored – Potential foul (Harrogate Town)
Decision: Goal disallowed – foul on the goalkeeper (Harrogate Town)
Foy says: There is certainly contact between the attacking player and the goalkeeper, initially when the ball is making its way into the box and then further contact when jumping for the ball.
I think given that the attackers’ arms are in an upward position and impeding the goalkeeper’s ability to take the ball, the decision to disallow the goal is one I believe is the correct call.
Notts County 4-2 Bradford City
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Notts County’s goal against Bradford City was awarded following an offside shout
Incident: Goal scored – Potential offside (Notts County)
Decision: Goal awarded (Notts County)
Foy says: A really good decision from the assistant referee to keep his flag down on this occasion, with the goal being awarded the correct call.
On this occasion, the six-yard line gives us a clear indication that a defending player is slightly deeper into the box than the goal scorer.
Stockport County 2-0 Colchester United
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
A Stockport County player demanded a penalty following a shirt pull in the box in their clash with Colchester
Incident: Potential penalty (Stockport County)
Decision: No penalty awarded (Stockport County)
Foy says: The referee has to judge in this situation if it is normal football contact between the defender and the attacker, but I think this exceeds that threshold.
I believe the shirt pull is clear and sustained holding that directly impacts the attacker’s ability to get his shot away, therefore I think the better outcome would have been to award a penalty kick in this instance.
