After the whistle, the former Premier League Judge Chris Foy passes a selection of major match decisions from EFL weekend action.
After the whistle, it aims to give EFL club supporters an overview of decision -making considerations and also clarifying certain calls to provide an understanding of how the laws of the game are interpreted.
As part of a regular feature in Sky Sports after completing a match myth, Foy will be here to direct you through some issues of trial at EFL…
Swansea 0-2 Coventry
Incident: Scored goal, potential handball (Swansea)
Decision: Purpose is not allowed, handball
Foy says: “Good to see the speed of response and determination shown by the judge to identify this handball work.
“As the ball enters the corner, it clearly hits the swansea no 5 wing before its team starts it in the back of the net. The main judgment here is whether handball is an insult, as an accidental handball would not be penalized as Swansea’s No. 5 does not score the goal.
“Because the arm is an unnatural and elevated position, making the body larger, the goal is precisely excluded for a handball work.”
Watford 0-1 Norwich
Incident: Possible Punishment and Red Card (Norwich)
Decision: Free kick and care
Foy says: “The referee has some important decisions to make here.
“First, he has to decide whether the foul in Norwich City 9 is out of the box or not. Thanks to his movement and positioning, he is able to correctly identify that the contact is made out of the box and therefore gives a free -kick to Norwich.
“He must then decide whether or not the foul has denied a noticeable scoring option (dogso). From reproduction, we can see that Norwich forward has the ball under control while he moves towards goal, and that he has an obvious option for a goal kick.
“Therefore the judge should have told Watford Player a red card for Dogso.”
Crawley 1-2 Wrejam
Incident: Possible Fat in Goal Building (Wrexham)
Decision: The intention i tuned
Foy says: “Wrexham were lucky for this purpose to stand, as their No. 38 clearly damages his opponent before going into the net.
“While the ball is widely played, the judge must scan in the middle to see what’s going on inside the crowded box.
“Focusing on the player crossing the ball, he lacks the stable holding by Wrexham’s No 38 on his opponent. The withdrawal was influential and meets the threshold for a foul. Therefore, a free defensive blow had to be given.”
Reading 1-0 Bolton
Incident: Possible punishment, handball (reading)
Decision: The sentence given
Foy says: “Although this seems a little innocent, it is the correct decision by the judge to give reading a handball penalty.
“While the ball is sailed in the area, Bolton’s No. 29 goes to run the ball away, and makes contact with the ball with his lying arm.
“The arm is in an unnatural and unjustified position, so the punishment is the correct result.”
Doncaster 2-1 MK DONS
Incident: Goal scored, possible offside (Doncaster)
Decision: The intention i tuned
Foy says: “Offside decisions in which defenders grow and try to play offside attackers can be difficult for auxiliary judges to judge, but he gets this place.
“While Doncaster’s No. 9 makes a goal, MK DONS ‘No 26 tries to play that offside. Although he is narrow, the assistant takes it in place and leaves his flag correctly.
“When the picture passes up and at such a pace, it makes it harder to judge, but he does well here.”