Your opinion and everyone has one. See Post #22. I'll go with his before yours.....
Okay, I read post #22. Here's what it said:
"Agree. It tailed a bit inside as it crossed the plate, but I don't think it was an egregiously bad strike call. I've seen plenty of pitch calls much worse than that from male umpires."
So?
Even if you accept everything he said as true, he didn't say that it was a good call, or a strike. Would have been very easy to have said that, but he didn't. He said only that it wasn't an "egregiously" bad call, which is something I never claimed. I just said it was a "bad call".
But hey, you got your virtue signalling in, didn't you?
Oh, and you might be interested to know that her official umpire grade for the entire game was 92.72% correct calls, compared to the league average of 94.73, which is pretty respectable given that it was her first game.
https://nypost.com/2025/08/11/sports/jen-pawols-ump-scorecard-for-mlb-home-plate-debut-revealed/
But interestingly, her worst missed call of the entire night was on that very first pitch we've been discussing, which was 3.4 inches off the inside corner and should have been called a ball.
https://x.com/umpstrikezone/status/1954640399554785554rike-call-184812466.html
Question is - why might someone defend a clearly bad pitch just because the umpire is female? I mean, she's a big girl, and likely would admit that she blew that pitch.
Now personally, I have nothing against having a female umpire, and her overall score for the night was fine. But refusing to acknowledge a clearly bad pitch just because the ump is female is the kind of DEI crap I'd hoped we were getting away from.