Personally, I’d be perfectly happy, thrilled even, if they simply nailed Bauer to the wall and then let everyone else slide.
5 Likes
I’m happy for Joe Musgrove throwing the first Padre no-no ever.
9 Likes
It was Musgrove’s first career complete game.
Happy for him. Always nice to see a special night, and even better when it’s against the Rangers.
Fairy tale stuff there!
Grew up a Padres fan in El Cajon, iirc, about 20 mins from the stadium.
Another controversial finish in the NL East tonight, Alec Bohm “scored” the winning run without ever touching home plate and unlike the Machete one, video clearly shows him never touch it. If replay can’t fix a play like that, get rid of it. Actually just get rid of it period, looking at you too basketball.
Maybe didn’t touch. Probably didn’t touch. Clear and convincing to overturn the call? Hmmm…eh… So bad a call as to get rid of the whole process? Not even close.
I knew Manfred sucked giant donkey balls but I didn’t realize he had eliminated touching the plate
2 Likes
It was pretty clear to me. There is no angle that even looks close enough for doubt. I’m not a fan of replay in general so it doesn’t take much for me to want to get rid of it
Yeah, we’re seeing different things then.
And I’m still not understanding how you can want that call overturned then argue for eliminating any mechanism to do so.
Because if replay can’t get the call right or can’t be reviewed like the Conforto one, what’s the point of replay then? If there is no replay, you say “damn that sucks” and move on with the game.
So I’m against replay in general but if you have replay then actually get the call right
Weird logic. Why not advocate expanding replay to include this play, instead of eliminating it entirely?
MLB thinks they got this one right. I get that you disagree, but to suggest it wasn’t close and there’s no way that it should not have been overturned is just not accurate, IMO. The Conforto call is not reviewable. I get why balls/strikes call are not reviewable. I think the Marlins had a case on the improper application of a rule, but only because Kulpa called it a strike and then awarded Conforto 1B anyway. That’s kind of a different deal, I think.
The point of replay, IMO, is to get the obvious mistakes corrected. When we’re arguing about whether or not a guy’s spike clipped a base or not, that’s not the spirit of replay. Go with the call on the field. But that doesn’t mean the whole idea of replay is a bad one.
1 Like
I’m sorry, Matt. But you are flat out wrong about the call at the plate.
He never came close to touching it: MLB gets replay review wrong in Phillies vs Braves game, a breakdown - YouTube
1 Like
I don’t watch that penis wrinkle, so I’ll take your word that he disagrees with me.
1 Like
I do not like Jomboy’s treatment of the Astros either, but his biased hatchet jobs on sign-stealing do not taint the rest of his channel for me. His video breakdowns are outstanding, and the video Mark linked is undeniable, irrefutable proof the runner never touched the plate. There was absolutely no way for replay umpires to confirm the safe call. The video disagrees with you, not Jomboy.
1 Like
Paul Lo Duca is a major fuck wad. I’m glad that West sued him. Also West is too shitty for the HoF regardless of how many more games than anyone else he has worked.
I read on a law site West got a default judgment. I wonder if that is true.
To be clear, my argument is not that Bohm was safe, or that MLB got it right. It’s that MLB reviewed the play, thought it was close enough to not overturn the call on the field, and most importantly that there are always going to be very close and controversial plays. The job of replay is not to satisfy everyone, or to stop the game and dissect those plays for 15 minutes (thought it feels like that sometimes). It’s to quickly correct the obviously missed calls. And I do not agree with eliminating the replay system because it can’t eliminate those still controversially close calls. You’ll still have those, AND you won’t be able to fix the easy ones.
2 Likes