Behind the Whistle: Chris Foy explains latest EFL decisions including Birmingham and Preston | Football News

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

Although many decisions made on the pitch are of a subjective nature, 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, starting with the below.

Birmingham City 0-1 Luton Town

Incident: Potential red card (Birmingham City)

Decision: Yellow card awarded (Birmingham City)

Foy says: “I believe this tackle should have resulted in a red card being shown to the Birmingham City defender, as it clearly endangered the safety of the opponent.

“While there is slight contact made with the ball, the challenge results in a high, full and forceful contact with the opponent. Had these considerations been recognised in real-time, the referee would have shown a red card for serious foul play.”

Preston North End 2-1 Wigan Athletic

Incident: Potential red card – second caution (Preston North End)

Decision: Second caution awarded (Preston North End)

Foy says: “I don’t think there will be too many complaints over this one. The Preston attacker, in his eagerness to win the ball back late in the game, has missed the ball and made clear contact with the Wigan Athletic player. The contact is reckless. As such, the threshold for a second yellow card is met in this incident.”

Exeter City 2-0 Cambridge United

Incident: Potential goal (Exeter City)

Decision: Goal disallowed – foul (Exeter City)

Foy says: “I think this is a good decision by the referee. While there is no intention to make a challenge from the attacker, his actions are careless and clearly impact the ability of the defending player to play the ball, which then leads to the goal being scored.”

Crewe Alexandra 1-1 Rochdale

Incident: Potential red card for DOGSO (Crewe Alexandra)

Decision: Yellow card awarded (Crewe Alexandra)

Foy says: “In circumstances such as this one, the referee has to decide if this is a denial of an obvious goalscoring opportunity (DOGSO). There is a defender in a central position tracking back when the foul is made, so the referee has to consider are they too far from the play to impact the decision?

“I think on this occasion I would agree with the referee, as on balance a yellow card is the best outcome as there is not an obvious goal-scoring opportunity.”

Hartlepool United 3-3 Walsall

Incident: Potential penalty (Hartlepool)

Decision: Penalty awarded (Hartlepool)

Foy says: “This was the first of two penalties that were awarded in this game. Watching this back, I certainly wouldn’t put the awarding of this penalty in the ‘clear and obvious’ error category – there is evidence of a pull on the attacker, however, I’m not sure if it is sustained and sufficient in terms of consequence to warrant the award of a penalty.

“Is it clearly an incorrect decision? That is subjective, but I do think allowing play to continue would have been the better choice.”