Behind the Whistle: Former Premier League referee Chris Foy explains the latest EFL decisions | Football News happymamay

Behind Safra, Chris Voy passes the former English Premier League referee with a choice of the main match decisions from EFL work on the weekend.

Safra aims to grant supporters of EFL clubs an insight into decision -making considerations and also an explanation of certain calls to provide an understanding of how to explain the laws of the game.

As part of a regular feature on Sky Sports after the end of the match, FOY will be here to run you through some issues in EFL …

Bristol 1-1 Hull City

incident: A possible red card, a dangerous unpleasant play (Hull City)

resolution: The red card (Hull City)

Foy says: “For me, this straight red color is displayed based on the lack of control in this air challenge, which displays the integrity of the opponent on the recipient side of the treatment.

“Although viewers first seem as if the Hull City No 12 is only, its treatment and holding his opponent late, the return indicates that it is actually worse.

“With his entry into the challenge, Hull No 12 is air -based and feed with both feet. He does not control his body at that stage. The speed and strength of the challenge is also exposed to the integrity of the opponent.

“The judgment correctly determines that this challenge is dangerous play and determines the red card.”

Norwich City 1-1 Oxford United

incident: The goal scored, potential infiltration (Oxford United)

resolution: The target was granted (Oxford United)

Foy says: “This is an excellent part of the messages, as the ruling and the auxiliary judgment continues brilliantly to understand exactly what happened.

“Although it is clear that we see that the top scorer of Oxford United goals, No. 9, in infiltration mode, there is no infiltrator crime if the striker receives the ball directly from throwing.

“Since throwing does not go directly to the attacker, the referee and the referees work effectively to determine that, first, Oxford United No. 47 does not touch the ball, and secondly, Norwich No. 3 who plays the balls that rise decisively from another defender, Norwich No. 20.

“Therefore, Oxford United No. 9 does not commit an infiltrator crime, and the target is granted properly.”

Peteroro United 1-1 Wycombe Wandorers

incident: Possible penalty kick (Peterpuro United)

resolution: No penalty (Peterpuro United)

Foy says: “It is good to see that the ruling here did not correctly specify any contact with Peterpuro United No. 17.

“Although it is very good to determine clearly that the goalkeeper does not communicate with his challenge, Peterpuro United’s actions No. 17 are a simulation, so the ruling should have gave Wikomb a free defensive kick and warned the attacker.”

Tranrere Rovers 2-1 bromley

incident: Possible penalty kick, error (bromali)

resolution: No penalty (Bromali)

Foy says: “Although I sympathize with the defender in this type of accident, Tranre Rovers was lucky because no immediate kick was given against them here.

“Since Tranree no 2 goes to remove the ball away directly inside the penalty area, it was photographed to the ball by the Bromley striker. Tranrere man holds the striker’s foot instead of playing the ball, and reflects it indifferently.

“I think the contact is sufficient to ensure that the player is going down, and in the eyes of the right referee here it will be a penalty that he gave.”