r/baseball • u/malliabu Toronto Blue Jays • Pittsburgh Pirates • 1d ago

Video [ Removed by moderator ]

https://youtu.be/Xwr1cUOYdz8

[removed] — view removed post

0 Upvotes

35% Upvoted

37 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/LovingAbsurdist San Diego Padres 1d ago

The clickbait thumbnail seems to imply otherwise

2

u/ThePlagueofCustom 1d ago

That’s the thing about reading and watching things, you can find out what they say instead of being immediately outraged. And, we know what happened, the series is over, the Yankees did not tie this game on an Anthony Volpe home run.

9

u/jebuizy New York Yankees 1d ago edited 1d ago

I actually disagree. Clickbait titles are exactly meant to mislead you and absolutely should not be ignored and forgiven even if the actual content ends up accurate. It's bad to do that, and indicts the whole project. The title and thumbnail ARE outrageous on their own terms, and actually even worse because we know the author knows better.

We know what happened, we are in the baseball sub, no shit, but some rando on YouTube may not.

0

u/ThePlagueofCustom 1d ago

I mean “Fan robs a home run?” is not the worst thing I’ve ever seen, a rhetorical question answered plainly and immediately after the event occurs in the video, as a matter of fact you could interpret it as a rhetorical question leaning toward the answer of “no, the umps got this right” which is in fact what happened — and again, we know what happened. I guess he could have titled it “Volpe - Fan Interference on called home run video.” If you’re watching this video, it’s a safe assumption that you have some awareness of what happened, i.e. there’s no controversy about this call and the consensus belief is it is correct. The title wasn’t “Umps rob Volpe of home run?” I don’t know if it’s a big deal if some rando comes across a 13 min baseball youtuber’s breakdown, I sincerely doubt non-baseball fans are watching that regardless.

“Roof robs Padres of home run?” Is that a clickbait title? Because that was an out, clearly and succinctly according to the ground rules and call. I wouldn’t say that would be a hypothetically misleading title.

I get what you’re saying, and while I could say, “this is the world we live in you might as well argue with the tide” - I think this is not particularly egregious.

As an aside, if you watch the video, the slow motion replay, it looks a little closer than I thought at first glance.