Torres/Friedel - Why refs disagree?

[Karl]

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

You have not been following for a long time!

[Mosiah]

Not sure who has followed your line(s) of reasoning/rationalisations, Karl. They just not mekking any sense.

A clearer penalty has not been called in years!

[Karl]

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

I say it does!

Torres had already played the ball with his RIGHT LEG, not his LEFT!

Agreed!

Had he played it with his left, you could try and pull this fast one.

I would never try pulling a 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!

Agreed! ...dead straight in Friedel's hands path...trajectory of ball dead straight down Friedel's throat!

...and I have been saying that all along.

Yuh tek people fi eediat?!?!

No!
Extremely stubborn reluctance to see and process the facts of the play!

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

You are going to wait a long, long time as my answers will consistently state - No foul! No penalty! No expulsion!

....btw - Check the old posts...you should see I claimed in 'the earlist...no expulsion! You can draw the conclusion - no Foul...therefore...no penalty...therefore no expulsion!

[Karl]

Proves Brad turned to protect himself?

[Mosiah]

okay. so what's the point? once you try to protect yourself you cannot be committing a foul?!?!?!

who was arguing that immaterial point? oh, YOU!

[Mosiah]

You are going to wait a long, long time as my answers will consistently state - No foul! No penalty! No expulsion!

....btw - Check the old posts...you should see I claimed in 'the earlist...no expulsion! You can draw the conclusion - no Foul...therefore...no penalty...therefore no expulsion!

We are clear on your consistent position, Karl. What we are totally befuddled about is/are your rationalization(s) for it.

[Mosiah]

Torres had already played the ball with his RIGHT LEG, not his LEFT!

Agreed!

Karl, how can you agree with me that he had already played the ball with his right yet, yet talk nonsense about Torres taking the ball from under Brad's armpits?!?!

How long are Brad's armpits, anyway?!?!

Take another look at this and forget this armpit trash!
http://www.eplmatches.com/index.php/...la-highlights/

[Karl]

It appeared to me that Torres' right may have come into contact with the ball 3' to 5' before Friedel! That in my book is 'under Friedel's arm pits'!

[Bricktop]

It appeared to me that Torres' right may have come into contact with the ball 3' to 5' before Friedel! That in my book is 'under Friedel's arm pits'!

A 5' armpit?

[Mosiah]

bomb-baat!! Okay, still trying to wrap my head around a 5' armpit (hmmmm...not sure I should have said that) but the other thing is, why didn't di fool-fool goalie just grab di damn ball?

[Paul Marin]

Karl - this photo actually proves that Friedel had to have fouled Torres. IF (as you contend) Friedel had stayed motionless (i.e. in the EXACT POSITION HE IS IN IN THIS PHOTO) Torres would have EASILY beaten him, BUT, Friedel ROLLED TO IS RIGHT, and in doing so, impeded the striker. I don't know what you are drinking, but please dash it whey!!

[Bricktop]

[SIZE=2]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.

The balls path to goal was a straight line through FRIEDEL? So not only does FRIEDEL have 6 foot long armpits but solid objects can also pass straight through him?