Cain pitched a really good game so far.
That was fun. I don’t get to watch whole games like that, but had a day off today.
Think what either of these teams could do if they had any hitting at all.
They announcers are all talking Cody Ross.
Ross is the MVP so far, but it seems obvious to me that the bats the Phillies most have to worry about are the ones in their own bat rack.
100% agreed. I wholly support instant replay but it needs to be done right, which means whole hog.
To be honest - and I may be showing my ignorance here - it seems to me an easy thing to get right. Surely MLB can have a half dozen professional umps and six big hi-def TVs there in the stadium? 90% of the time the replay the fans see at home will deliver the truth by the third angle; with a half dozen guys and TVs you can have the same info almost instantly and make a decision faster than the manager can scream for a reply call.
Oh man, the commentary on this broadcast is gonna be horrible. They’ve already referred to Derek Jeter, the leadoff hitter, as “the cleanup hitter.” Then one of the commentators just informed me that, to get out of the first inning, Hunter needs to get three outs. No shit?
We’re five hitters into the game and I think it’s taken like nine pitches.
These are the idiots that are clueless to what a Bronx Cheer is.
Idiots, the glove was not touched until after the ball bounced already.
Isn’t this a boundary call? Isn’t this what we’re supposed to already have replay for?
The pushing-down of the glove itself may not have been what prevented the play from being made, but it’s certainly indicative of an attempt to interfere.
The first home run looked to me like it landed out of the field of play. Nonetheless, it should have been reviewed to make sure; there’s no way Reynolds can have a clear view. Why not review it to make sure?
The Berkman shot was foul, and the Yankees aren’t arguing the call being taken back.
Review used correctly on that one. Look foul to me live.
It was ruled a home run. The only way to overcome that call is by what they call “conclusive evidence.” You cannot conclusively determine that the ball did not subtly kiss the “foul” pole. There might not necessarily be a dramatic change of direction when a round object barely contacts another round object. Regardless, it was not conclusive, at least not by the video shown on TBS; and they did have an enhanced, slow-motion replay.
Berkman’s hit was definitely foul and I was surprised they called it a home run. Cano’s hit was out of Cruz’s reach but it was close and they could have reviewed it.
You don’t know that. You only presume it because the ball did not visibly change trajectory. Unless you’ve seen some video I haven’t (I’m watching TBS), there is no way you could determine that it didn’t barely kiss the foul pole. The only indication would have been “space” between the ball and pole, and there was none of that in any replay TBS has shown. Maybe you have access to a more conclusive replay; I don’t know.
The replay officials disagreed with you.
And they’re always correct, of course. Marley23 was making a claim formed from viewing the replay shown by TBS, which is inconclusive, not the umpire’s ruling.
The replay from the stands on first base side certainly looked to me like there was a gap between the ball and the pole. And I’m not watching on HDTV.
By brother claims it glanced off the pole. I’m not sure. I didn’t see that so Mince has a point at least. To me it looked foul.
Obviously. I am not able to dust the foul pole for baseball prints. But my opinion wasn’t based on the replay, it was based on the live footage and then backed by the replay. I think the ball had already curved foul by the time it reached the pole.
But you freely admit that you can’t definitively conclude that an atom of the ball did not make contact with an atom of the pole, based on Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle?