Behind the whistle: former Premier League Judge Chris Foy explains the latest decisions about EFL

Behind the whistle, former Premier League Judge Chris Foy is through a selection of key decisions on the Action Weekend EFL Action match.

Behind the whistle, he aims to provide supporters of the EFL clubs insight into considering decisions, and also clarify certain calls to provide an understanding of how the laws of the game are interpreted.

As part of a regular feature on Sky Sports after the end of the day of the match, Foy will be here to guide you through some supine things in EFL …

Bristol City 1-1 Hull City

Incident: Possible red map, serious game (Hull City)

Decision: Red card (Hull City)

Foy says: “For me, this straight red is shown based on a lack of control in this air challenge, threatening the safety of opponents at the entrance end of the accessories.

“Although at the first look, he looks like Hull City No. 12 is just wrong in the fight and catching his opponent late, reproductions suggest that he is actually worse than that.

“While referring to the challenge, the hull No. 12 is in the air and floats with both legs. At that moment it is not controlled over his body. The speed and force of the challenge also threaten the safety of the opponent.

“The referee correctly identifies that this challenge is a serious game and covers a red card.”

Norwich City 1-1 Oxford United

Incident: Goal reached, possible offze (Oxford United)

Decision: Awarded goal (Oxford United)

Foy says: “This is excellent official, because the judge and the assistant are communicating great to understand what happened exactly.

“Although it is clear to see that the scorer is Oxford United, No. 9, in the offside position, there is no insult if the attacker receives the ball directly from the insertion.

“Since the insertion does not directly go to the attacker, the judge and the assistant work effectively work to determine that, first Oxford United No. 47, does not touch the ball, and the second is Norwich No 3, which plays the balls that then decisively refuse from the second defender, Norwich No 20.

“Therefore, Oxford United NO 9 does not commit an offside crime, and the goal is properly assigned.”

Peterborough United 1-1 Wycombe Wandirers

Incident: Possible sentence (Peterborough United)

Decision: No Penalties (Peterborough United)

Foy says: “It is good to see that the judge correctly identified any contact here on Peterborough United no.

“Although it is a very good judge’s judgment to make it clear that the goalkeeper does not make contact with his challenge, the Peterborough United Action, but 17 simulations, so the judge should have been awarded to Wycombe’s defense free kick and warned the attacker”

Transmere Rovers 2-1 Bromley

Incident: Possible punishment, offense (Bromley)

Decision: No Penalties (Bromley)

Foy says: “Although I have compassion for a veteran in this kind of incident, for me, Transre Rovers were fortunate to have not been assigned a video here.

“While Tramere No. 2 leaves to clean the ball directly inside the penalty area, the bromley striker inserted him to the ball. The tranmere man grabbed the attacker’s foot instead of playing the ball, he was carelessly stunned.

“I think the contact is enough to guarantee the player to fall, and in my eyes the correct verdict here would be a sentence.”