Exclusive Insights: Unveiling the Intriguing EFL Decisions with Referee Chris Foy

In this week's edition of Behind the Whistle, former Premier League referee Chris Foy delves into crucial match decisions from Tuesday's Sky Bet League One and League Two matches. The aim of Behind the Whistle is to grant EFL club supporters a glimpse into the decision-making process and offer explanations for specific calls. This provides a greater understanding of how the laws of the game are interpreted.

As part of a regular feature on We following the conclusion of a matchday, Foy will be here to run you through some refereeing matters in the EFL…

Sky Bet League One

Bolton Wanderers 3-1 Fleetwood Town

Incident: Potential red card - second caution (Bolton)

Decision: Red card awarded - second caution (Bolton)

Foy explains that when an attacking player intentionally disrupts the goalkeeper's ability to release the ball quickly, there is a chance of being penalized and cautioned. This often occurs when goalkeepers are trying to initiate promising counter-attacks.

Overall, considering this, the Bolton player doesn't have much room to argue against being cautioned in this particular situation. However, since the goalkeeper was able to quickly move away from the attacker and still make a swift release, I believe there is enough flexibility to offer the attacker advice for their future behavior rather than giving them a yellow card.

Due to the goalkeeper's ability to continue despite being contacted by the attacker, it is understandable why the referee initially chose not to penalize. However, this led to a subsequent clash between the two players, prompting the referee to intervene and penalize the initial offense. The referee ultimately decided to caution the attacker for their actions, but the delay in making this decision undermined the credibility of the penalty.

In my view, a more satisfactory resolution would have been to give advice to both players and award a free-kick to the defending team.

Reading 1-0 Cheltenham Town

Incident: Potential red card - DOGSO (Reading)

Decision: No foul was given (Reading).

According to Foy, there are two considerations regarding this decision: firstly, whether a free-kick should have been granted, and secondly, if the incident qualifies as a clear obstruction of a potential goal and thus warrants a red card.

Based on the footage, it appears evident that the defender committed a holding offence, indicating that a free-kick should have been awarded. However, there is uncertainty regarding whether the attacker would gain control of the ball before the goalkeeper. Consequently, I propose that this scenario does not qualify as a clear goal-scoring opportunity, but rather a hopeful attack that warrants a yellow card.

Sky Bet League Two

Crewe Alexandra 4-2 Newport County

Incident: Potential penalty (Crewe)

Decision: Penalty awarded (Crewe)

Foy says: There are two really good pieces of refereeing in this sequence which result in the correct decision to award a penalty to Crewe.

The defender, instead of playing the ball, forcefully makes contact with the attacker's ankle, resulting in him being tripped. However, the referee wisely waits a split second before blowing the whistle, considering the possibility of a goal being scored. Eventually, the referee points to the spot, making a commendable decision.

Crawley Town 2-1 MK Dons

Incident: Potential penalty (MK Dons)

Decision: No penalty awarded (MK Dons)

Foy commends the officiating in this situation, comparing it to the previous decision at Crewe. The call made at a crucial point in the match was accurate, indicating a well-handled situation. Despite some minimal upper-body contact, it falls within the realm of typical football interaction and exemplifies the strict standards being upheld.