Torres/Friedel - Why refs disagree?

[Bricktop]

So in other words you switched your story. That's all I needed to hear. Proceed.

[Paul Marin]

Intervention? Lobotomy maybe.

[Paul Marin]

He he he he...lawd...this is amazing...I am sitting here in wonder asking myself how I could possibly be following this madness...

[Paul Marin]

Karl - Friedel's arm? Are you kidding me? i am sure brad friedel (being the excellent goalie that he is) would tell you 'bout you r**s if he heard you say that...how could he have the ball "under his arm" and he not get a hold of it? Jesu fada, help dis bwoy.

[Bricktop]

Karl - Friedel's arm? Are you kidding me? i am sure brad friedel (being the excellent goalie that he is) would tell you 'bout you r**s if he heard you say that...how could he have the ball "under his arm" and he not get a hold of it? Jesu fada, help dis bwoy.

Funny how we never heard Karl say that the ball was "under Friedel's arm" previously. Tomorrow we can expect hear his "new" version of events, I mean we are on about version 4 now

[Mosiah]

Fiedel was stationary...

Is that the same thing as motionless?

[Mosiah]

It's a like a freaking train wreck, with limbs mangled betwixt old iron, you can't stop staring at the bloody mess. You want to help but it is hopeless, the survivors are going to bleed to death.

That's what this discussion is like. Karl is the train wreck. You trying to help him but you can't find his legs, and half his brain is under someone's armpit, a fellow by the name of Brad. What can you do but stare at the bloody lot!

It's really sad.

[Mosiah]

HAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH! Mi cyaan tap laff!

[Karl]

You should be a politician. The truth is not your strong point

Clear path to goal?
If anyone wrote that Torres had a clear path to goal that person is mad.

Read this and try to decide which section applied in that ref's mind. Let me hasten to remind you I do not agree with the ref.

121

Denying a goal or a goal-scoring opportunity

There are two sending-off offences that deal with denying an opponent
an obvious opportunity to score a goal. It is not necessary for the offence
to occur inside the penalty area.

If the referee applies advantage during an obvious goal-scoring
opportunity and a goal is scored directly, despite the opponent’s
handling the ball or fouling an opponent, the player cannot be sent
off but he may still be cautioned.

Referees should consider the following circumstances when deciding
whether to send off a player for denying a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity:
• the distance between the offence and the goal

• **the likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball

• ***the direction of the play

• the location and number of defenders

• the offence which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity may be an offence that incurs a direct free kick or an indirect free kick

No clear path thought could come to mind when those two collided unless you think the ball's path to goal (also Torres' path) was not along a straight line through Friedel...that is, the trajectory of ball having it go through the area Friedel was positioned.

Friedel was legimately in line with the ball thus there was no clear path. Somehow you seem to think Friedel should have become a matador ...and simply should have stepped out of the path of the ball?

You entire series of arguments seem to be based on that ludicrous premise. Friedel's job is to block the path of the ball to goal. Torres arrived behind the ball.

[Mosiah]

i'm wondering misself!

[Mosiah]

Did the man who hit over the goalkeeper get the ball before the goalkeeper?

[Karl]

Did the man who hit over the goalkeeper get the ball before the goalkeeper?

You really believe that getting to a ball before the goalkeeper means you cannot commit a foul?

...
Have you not seen many instances where the person getting to the ball first is sometimes the one who commits the foul? Getting to the ball first does not by itself absolve a player of any wrong doing.

[Mosiah]

Did he get the ball, Karl?
Focus!

[Karl]

Karl - Friedel's arm? Are you kidding me? i am sure brad friedel (being the excellent goalie that he is) would tell you 'bout you r**s if he heard you say that...how could he have the ball "under his arm" and he not get a hold of it? Jesu fada, help dis bwoy.

Come on now, Paul?
You do know that was meant to say 'under Friedel's arm'! ...go back and take a look at how many times I used that 'under arm' term?

...and it relates to when Torres ran into Friedel! That is what we are discussing - foul or no foul? ...penalty or no penalty? ...and if the following expulsion was correct?
Thank you!

[Mosiah]

Karl, that picture does not prove the ball was under Friedel's arm!

Torres had already played the ball with his RIGHT LEG, not his LEFT! Had he played it with his left, you could try and pull this fast one.

So, the ball must have been at least where his right foot is placed right now in your pic when he kicked it around Friedel, goalward!

Yuh tek people fi eediat?!?!

Try again Karl. Can't wait to see your next flawed angle.