Oso planning to go pro
everyone on twitter is looking at it on a 6 inch phone screen. If you didn't see it on TV then there's no point debating. You watching it on a normal tv screen with better resolution and size and it unquestionably hit the bat first. You can also hear it when they replayed the audio on tv.That being said, I'm not surprised they didn't overturn it.
more like:brewers fans: It hit the bat first.cubs and cardinals fans: take the blue and gold glasses off it clearly hit only his hand (which is clearly the only alternative given that it wouldn't hit the hand and bounce DOWN into the bat to then bounce UP to hit him in the shoulder). given the sound of the play this clearly isnt what happened.everyone else in america: it hit the bat first but you certainly cant say theres clear, concise, indisputable video evidence so how it was called, either way, has to stand.
Maybe, but I don’t see how anyone can say absolutely or clearly. Look how many people in that twitter link alone see it differently...some say bat, some say hand. Could be some optical illusions going on.First, I don’t think it hit the wrist, but the fatty tissue at the bottom of the hand. As for the ball jumping up, in my view it was hand, bat, jumps up to face. Not sure any of us have physics degrees to determine how much kinetic energy is absorbed at that moment and where the ball goes...we’re talking about a round ball hitting tissue and a round knob, predicting where it goes is anyone’s guess. I can understand both points of view, but just don’t see how it is clear as a bell with so many people disagreeing.
Yes, it’s an intra-divisional conspiracy to screw Brewers’ fans. We meet once a year in Aspen to chart out our plans with the MLB Umpiring staff to set the world order.
Hader for 2 innings terrifies me
HBP foul ball play, could not tell. Simultaneous is my best guess. Need to go with play called on field. If they had said foul ball, would not be overturned either. Evidence not conclusive.
You made that call last night?Do you think they would've overturned the call had they originally called it a foul ball?
FYI - From Joe Posnanski on the Athletic about the HBP:Taylor worked to a 3-2 count. Hader’s payoff pitch buzzed way inside and, pinball-machine style, hit various Taylor body parts. The umpire sent Taylor to first base.This turned out to be a controversial play, one that Brewers fans will undoubtedly gripe about forever, because super-slow-motion replay showed that the ball may have skimmed the bat before it hit Taylor. The umpires went to look at it, couldn’t make a definitive judgment, and the hit-by-pitch stood as called. Of this I have to say two things:It is possible that the ball hit the bat first. It kind of looked that way from the side angle.I’m entirely unsympathetic to the argument. On a full count, Hader threw a terrible pitch a foot high and a foot inside. It was, at the very least, ball four, and it was definitively headed for Taylor’s body. The fact that Hader and the Brewers might have gotten lucky and the ball might have ticked Taylor’s bat seems a flimsy argument to me. This cuts to the heart of the problem I have with instant replay; it’s built on technicalities and loopholes rather than the big picture. In the big picture, Hader got exactly what he deserved.
FYI - From Joe Posnanski on the Athletic about the HBP:Taylor worked to a 3-2 count. Hader’s payoff pitch buzzed way inside and, pinball-machine style, hit various Taylor body parts. The umpire sent Taylor to first base.This turned out to be a controversial play, one that Brewers fans will undoubtedly gripe about forever, because super-slow-motion replay showed that the ball may have skimmed the bat before it hit Taylor. The umpires went to look at it, couldn’t make a definitive judgment, and the hit-by-pitch stood as called. Of this I have to say two things:It is possible that the ball hit the bat first. It kind of looked that way from the side angle.I’m entirely unsympathetic to the argument. On a full count, Hader threw a terrible pitch a foot high and a foot inside. It was, at the very least, ball four, and it was definitively headed for Taylor’s body. The fact that Hader and the Brewers might have gotten lucky and the ball might have ticked Taylor’s bat seems a flimsy argument to me. This cuts to the heart of the problem I have with instant replay; it’s built on technicalities and loopholes rather than the big picture. In the big picture, Hader got exactly what he deserved.A bit harsh. I believe Josh hasn’t given up two singles to lefties since May 23?He’s not even close to being compensated for what he’s worth, came from a lower middle class upbringing, had a .143 era against lefties, donates his time to camp hometown hero’s, and is truly one of the “good guys”. Got what he deserved wouldn’t be the term I’d use for Josh.Very proud Brewers fan, even though that loss stings. Excited for the upcoming years, especially with Stearns in office.
You're over thinking it.
Well this is scoop
That is because you are incapable of changing your mind on anything. To do so would admit defeat.The rest of us see that sort of thing as personal growth.
This is what it comes down to for me. I don't think they could have changed it either way and had to stick with the original call.
Or I just don’t see it hitting the bat first just as so many other people don’t either while others do.I’ve changed my mind often and adapted where necessary, but “progress” for the sake of progress which sometimes based on unhinged emotional blather...your kind of logic...isn’t what I do. And for you to say you adapt is pretty damn funny. If a 1000 climatologists came out tomorrow to say climate data is trumped up like several did last week, you would fight to the death to destroy their findings. So give it a rest...you know that is exactly what you would do because otherwise you would have to admit you were wrong.
Politics.