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

In Behind the Whistle, former Premier League referee Chris Foy reviews a selection of key match decisions from the latest action in the Sky Bet Championship, League One and League Two.

Behind the Whistle aims to give supporters of EFL clubs an insight into decision-making considerations as well as clarify some of the calls to provide an understanding of how the Laws of the Game are interpreted.

As part of a regular feature on Sky Sports after matchday, Foy will be here to guide you through some of the EFL refereeing matters…

Queens Park Rangers 3-0 Norwich City

Incident – possible penalty, handball (Norwich City)

Decision – No penalty (Norwich City)

“In my view, QPR were lucky not to award a penalty here, as the ball clearly hit the arm of the number 20 who makes his body bigger when the ball is played into the box,” Foy says.

“It is clear that the right arm of QPR player No. 20 is extended away from his body and is in an unnatural and unjustified position. The action and movement is to deliberately block the ball, as it makes his body larger, preventing it from being played through goal.” “The square goes towards the goal, so the correct decision was to award a penalty kick.”

West Bromwich 2-2 Sheffield United

Incident – Possible penalty kick, foul (Sheffield United)

Decision – No Penalty, Simulated (Sheffield United)

“The referee makes a very good decision here to book the Sheffield United number 11 for a challenge in the box,” says Foy.

“The Sheffield player exchanges the ball, moves inside the penalty area, and passes the ball past the West Bromwich Albion number 8, before falling without any contact.

“The player’s speed and rapid development of play make it difficult for the referee to make this decision. However, his movement and positioning allow him to assess the situation and determine this simulation process.”

Cambridge United 4-1 Shrewsbury Town

Incident – possible penalty, foul (Shrewsbury Town)

Decision – Penalty awarded, foul (Shrewsbury Town)

“Although the decision to award a penalty here seems straightforward, the referee’s anticipation means it creates a very good angle of view,” says Foy.

“As you can see from the replay, the referee moves away to the left of the image as soon as the Shrewsbury Town number 9 enters the penalty area, ensuring his vision is not obstructed and giving him a clear line of sight to the challenge.

“From here, the referee can clearly determine that the Cambridge goalkeeper made contact with the striker while circling him, and the penalty kick was correctly awarded.”

Harrogate Town 0-3 Wimbledon

Incident – possible penalty with continuation (Harrogate Town)

Decision – No Penalty (Harrogate Town)

“I think Harrogate Town should have had a penalty here, as the No. 12 was clearly dragged to the ground before he had a chance to get on the end of the ball across the box,” says Foy.

“Although the holding starts outside the box, it is important that it continues inside the box. The holding is constant and influential, and is clearly preventing the progress of the Harrogate striker.

“The correct decision in this case is to award the penalty kick to Harrogate and issue a yellow card to the defender.”

Port Vale 0-1 Walsall

Incident – Possible goal, goal-line decision (Port Vale)

Decision – No goal (Port Vale)

“This is good refereeing from both the referee and his linesman,” says Foy, as Port Vale’s No.9 hit a shot that went past the goalkeeper but didn’t go past the defender on the goal line.

He added: “The assistant referee is in a very good position on the goal line to make the ruling, and without the benefit of goal-line technology, there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that the ball crossed the goal line, and therefore the goal simply cannot be awarded.”

“The referee boards are still in play, which is absolutely right in the circumstances.”