Bink

@vtownhighroller @DevineGospel He didn’t even get on base once tonight

@DevineGospel He’s getting on base and hitting fine, learn ball

Tatis needs to stop being a puss and start earning his contract Done babying this dude

@HomieDudeBro78 @TalkingFriars Exactly

@TalkingFriars It’s a 1-0 game. In the second inning. Anyone who knows anything baseball says you take the double play and move on. It’s actually an extremely easy and obvious choice to take the double play

Mud was adamant Tatis made the wrong decision but I think a good throw gets him

@cywheela Ramirez is light years better

if you ever feel that you’re stupid remind yourself that there are living humans who think Jose Ramirez is better than Rafael Devers

@ari_zanger @AndThatsBB You haven’t been paying attention

@AndThatsBB Because .206 with a .599 over 111 games is so much better? Salas was a HUGE name out of the international FA market, but he just hasn’t lived up to the hype bat-wise

Revisiting this lol

@AngieNixon Absolute clown 🤡

Fighting for Democracy is more important than having decorum.

@chestaburger @will_nba_hater Exactly. Prospects are just prospects. Profar was a can’t-miss and ended up having a very average career. He may end up being a MVP, but for now he is just a prospect. Miller is the best closer in the game.

@will_nba_hater He hasn’t even played a major league game. Miller is the best in the game. You have to trade talent(who is still a prospect) to get talent. It’s how the game works.

I will not let people with the memory of a goldfish convince me this trade wasn’t lunacy The padres lost in the wild card round and traded the next Francisco Lindor for a guy who pitches 60-65 innings a season

@Viralvid_89 She clearly says “do not arrest me” multiple times yet she still got arrested?

Woman Tries to Walk Away From Officer, Situation Quickly Escalates. Part (1/2)

Did the Padres keep the wrong closer? 🤔🤔🤔

@ChowPuppy65533 @wcb_pod If Rodriguez got thrown out that would have been interesting, considering he wasn’t pitching.

@wcb_pod On the pitch that went behind Shaw's head, I'm mystified that the home plate umpire didn't eject Rodriguez. I don't think I've ever seen a non-call on a pitch like that.

Six different pitches over the last two days have buzzed past Cubs players heads from Padres pitching

@MSUinIL @TheConnorPils The ole changeup to intentionally hit a batter. Spot on Dan.

@TheConnorPils It was intentional. The movement was breaking in on the batter. Why was the ball starting up and in, in the zone. The pitcher/catcher knew exactly what they were doing.

Adam throws not one, but two straight pitches at Matt Shaw’s head. The Padres hit Nico Hoerner in the head a few innings ago. They threw multiple pitches at Seiya’s head last night. None of this looks intentional but if I’m the Cubs, I’m getting absolutely sick and tired of it.

@TheConnorPils Boo hoo it’s baseball. And a change up

@owndodgerhaters @BassigBrent @bigjeffm @SWATZ911 @MiguelCastill89 @SelfDuron @RichinLa12 Sorry man hope you’re doing okay

@BassigBrent @bigjeffm @SWATZ911 @MiguelCastill89 @SelfDuron @RichinLa12 I graduated from there in 2024 actually lol

“Dodger fans can’t sell out their stadium, we always sell out ours, even during day games” 😂

@ScoringChanges 💯

No this is not an error. You don't give an error for a fielder failing to make a full leaping catch like this.

@ScoringChanges @BenVerlander @dennistlin So… wrong?

OK, follow along, because I have answers. Bottom line. This is NOW a foul ball. I talked with the same person @BenVerlander did and the same person @dennistlin talked with, and here is how I can best explain this, and I’ll put this so it makes sense to the scoring followers. What is in the rulebook is unclear, because it can absolutely be interpreted the way that I, and many, many folks have interpreted it, that the ball touching the ground is a foul ball is in the section about a fair fly ball, so it applies to balls that are hit on a fly past the bases. I wasn’t wrong about that. However, many times folks here have heard me say that the Official Scorer’s Manual goes into greater detail on something (error, or earned/unearned run, etc.). As was explained to me, the Umpire’s Manual goes into greater detail on this exact play, new detail for this year, that stresses that this is a foul ball. Now, if it’s moving and touched, that can be interpreted different from what I understand, but as of this year, the ball in the @padres game should have been ruled foul (life would have been easier if France doesn’t touch it). I was given kudos for knowing the Mets/Pirates play from 2021 and the Yankees/Royals play from 2023, and those plays were both ruled fair at the time, but if those plays happened in 2026, they would be foul. Likewise, Monday’s play in 2021 or 2023 is fair. It is known that this needs cleared up better in the OBR for 2027 to avoid this. It also was explained that the rule needed tweaked and put into the Umpire’s Manual in greater detail due to replay advances, basically because of the issues that parallax can cause. So yes, it should have been ruled foul from what I have been told, but everything I said made sense because before this was put into the 2026 Umpire’s Manual, it was fair. Everyone that was wrong was wrong because of past precedent and actual info that wasn’t clear. The rule is written where it can be interpreted either way, and I’m satisfied with that. I feel WAY better hearing it for myself out of my meeting with those folks. The best part of this is NOW WE KNOW. Now let’s get some changes and educate!

@ScoringChanges Just admit you were incorrect on your assessment. Not that big of a deal

It just seems weird they wouldn’t post something officially. It seems like it’s big enough to say something definitive, but just pointing to a rule to leave the interpretation seems odd at best. I too work with MLB, and most folks didn’t know for certain other than the umpires certainly seemed sure of themselves. The umpires I talked with today had this as fair. Draw your own conclusions.

@erik_halterman It appears that you do not know the rule my friend

I feel like I'm going crazy seeing everyone's reactions to this play. The ball is very clearly hanging over the line, and the ump is staring right at it and has a perfect view. How are people claiming that's a foul ball? Maybe they just don't know the rule?

@FullCountTommy @cathyb314 MLB even said the play was called wrong. It’s not on or over. Ball has to be touching the line.

@cathyb314 Again that is from an angle. The ball needs to be on OR OVER the line. So considering the ball is a sphere, it's impossible to make that determination from this angle.

It's weird to me that people who have only seen this play from an angle are saying it's clearly foul when the umpire was 3 feet away from it staring directly up the line. You can't say something is clear when you ONLY have a distorted view.

@ScoringChanges @CloseCallSports @Jomboy_ Rule was changed 8 years ago. Foul ball

Again, this is a fair ball. This video done by @CloseCallSports explains the Parallex Effect and why this is a fair ball. How @Jomboy_ hasn’t hired me yet is beyond me at this point. youtu.be/JQNEP6lqhHo?si…

@MikeCaps09 @JomboyMedia

@JomboyMedia if any part of the ball, including the end of the ball, is still over the line, it is a fair ball. the ball could be slightly off the chalk, but if very end of the sphere is still hovering its shadow over the line that’s a fair ball. Having said that this looked a little further.

why was this called a fair ball

@TalkinBaseball_ @asedensky And he still blew the call

Home plate umpire Dan Merzel called the ball fair, giving Matt Shaw a single despite it appearing clearly foul