In Bottom of the 9th, Phillies Score at Atlanta, as Braves Lose in 'Blown' Call at M.L.B.'s Replay Booth in New York (VIDEO)

AoSHQ has a post on the fall of the N.B.L, "Poll: MLB Falls To Lower Approval Ratings Than Football."

I was going to just do some grading for a bit, but I miss reading around the blogroll, and I miss reading Ace (near) everyday anyway, so here you go: 

It turns out I was watching Sunday night's game, on Sunday Night Baseball, and I honestly couldn't believe what happened, and no doubt I'm not alone. See USC's Annenberg Review, "Spitballing: MLB’s replay review system is flaming garbage. The solution: Fight fire with fire." 

In a Sunday night fiasco that was a perfect combination of thrilling baseball and inexplicable umpiring, two parties emerged primarily victorious: ESPN and the Philadelphia Phillies.

The Phillies, for obvious reasons. Alec Bohm’s “run” in the top of the ninth inning against the Atlanta Braves at Truist Park — you know, the one he scored without touching the white pentagon in between the batter’s boxes — was the Phillies’ seventh of the game. The Braves scored six. That sounds like a victorious happening to me.

And for its part, the ESPN crew, led by USC Annenberg alum Matt Vasgersian and Minnesota Timberwolves soon-to-be-co-owner Alex Rodriguez, got to head the broadcast of a thrilling ballgame that caught the entire baseball world’s attention in a matter of minutes.

Here’s the rundown. A whirlwind of home runs by Ozzie Albies, Rhys Hoskins, Didi Gregorius, Freddie Freeman, Ronald Acuña Jr. and the underrated Bryce Harper helped the Phillies and Braves enter the ninth inning tied at six. Gregorius stepped to the plate with one out and Bohm on third and lifted a fly ball to Atlanta outfielder Marcell Ozuna in shallow left. Bohm tagged, was surprisingly sent and, well, see for yourself...

And, yes, watch the video yourself below. These are my thoughts:

If you watched the Phillies at Braves game yourself, on ESPN, you might still be in daze (or not, if you don't care) at how those freakin' desk-jockey replay "umpires" at M.L.B. studios on New York City could possible botch an obvious "out" at home plate call, so as just give the stupid game to Philadelphia? My theory is that M.L.B. doesn't like the "tomahawk chop" music playing on the loudspeaker, and they obviously don't like the fans "chopping" along like a bunch of "racist" crackers; and somebody at M.L.B., way up there in the top ranks, has let it be known that the Braves ain't getting any breaks this year, which is, like duh, as those hacks already moved the All-Star game to a literally all-white city in Colorado, leaving Atlanta short of about $100 million in revenues, that could have, you know, maybe helped the majority black folks there, I mean, those folks still recovering from this messed up lockdown, and who've no doubt been put through enough trauma already; well, let's just say M.L.B. hasn't got the "brightest minds" working up there; either that, or most of those folks literally have "no balls," because all of this is not going play well with "middle America," which sooner or later will even abandon "America's pastime" if "cooler" [and more intelligent] heads don't prevail in the executive office of the league.

Atlanta's manager, Brian Snitker, and his reaction, is hilarious, and I appreciate how he kept his cool while arguing with the umps, and was not thrown out, even though, it was practically the end of the game.

Also interesting is Pedro Sandoval, who came in to hit late in the game, and as you may know, he had a couple of phenomenal years with the Giants, and then took his skills to the Red Sox, but seemed to hit a pretty long-lasting slump, and never returned to his most outstanding level of play he displayed in San Francisco?

You gotta love baseball, right? Well, maybe not, as Ace discusses above, as "woke" politics is now infecting the league like the other major national sports, especially football and basketball, and America will indeed lose its "national pastime" if someone, anyone, jeez, doesn't step in to save the sport. 

Erin Andrews Video Scandal: The Sexism/Sports Culture Connection; Demand for Peephole Glimpse Still High, Maybe Not ESPN After All!

From the St. Petersburg Times, "Was Erin Andrews Video Born From a Sexist Sports Journalism Culture?":

That uproar you heard this week over a nude video of ESPN sideline reporter Erin Andrews isn't just fan boys salivating over explicit pictures of sports media's biggest sex symbol splashed across cyberspace.

Indeed, that blurry video, taken illegally with a peephole camera as Andrews primped herself in a hotel room, has wrenched the sports world into an uncomfortable discussion: Just what role does the industry play in the mass marketing of female journalists' sex appeal?

And as the issues percolate, a reporter with growing fame as an object of beauty has found her privacy ripped away by a creep with a camera and an Internet connection.

"I think all of us in the media have fostered this culture, in the hopes of driving more people to our networks, our columns and our radio shows," said CBS Sports reporter Lesley Visser, a 30-year veteran recently named No. 1 female sportscaster by the American Sportscasters Association, in an e-mail to the St. Petersburg Times.

"Every woman in this business has dealt with unwanted attention, but this culture makes it more difficult," Visser added. "Erin's America is the merger of a beautiful woman and a lawless Internet."

In the way only a juicy media scandal can, coverage of the sizzling controversy has burned some news outlets. The New York Post and CBS News in particular have taken criticism for showing images from the video, earning their own audience spikes while ruthlessly re-victimizing the sportscaster.

Also, more on that. See Rochelle Nikita, at Associated Content, "Erin Andrews Peephole Videos and Erin Andrews Peephole Pictures: Setting the Record Straight":

So let's get one thing straight about people searching for Erin Andrews peephole videos, peephole pictures, Rapidshare links, and so forth. They think if you take Erin Andrews' side in the peephole incident, you're a feminist, and a sad excuse for one at that. If you think she got what friend. What's that all about?

I typically try not to go the extra mile to insult my readers. But if they think insults in my direction are going to change my mind about Erin Andrews, they can forget about it.

Now I'll admit, Erin Andrews wasn't necessarily doing all she could to prevent something like this. For one, standing naked in your hotel room for several minutes (unless you're hired for a few nights by a United States governor) is not typical for most women I know ....

But one thing is for sure: just because I defend Erin Andrews a little bit does not mean I am a feminist. Far from it, actually. But do I recommend other women act like Erin Andrews? Hardly. I hope you're a little smarter. Erin might have brains when it comes to journalism and reporting, but evidently not too much common sense. You'd think anyone would know better than to wear their birthday suit while curling their hair and ironing their pants. It's a burn hazard.

And that's from a woman! Looks like Christine Brennan's not the only one spouting that line.

Indeed, this feminist writer takes issue with Brennan (and calls her a "sexist"):

I found this article (that is an excellent example of intelligent feminist commentary) which shares Brennan's catty comments on Erin Andrews. Everything she had to say was like one rape myth after another: she was asking for it because she is sexy, it was her fault for flirting with men, next time she should be more responsible, etc, etc. My question to you is, why do women constantly feel the need to show a difference between women who are victimized and themselves? Erin is being blamed for the crime committed against her, for the same reasons all attractive women are when they are harassed, abused or attacked in some way. According to the masses, because of the face they were born with, the way they wear their hair, and the clothes on their back, women, and especially attractive women, were "asking for it." I think humans have this desperate need, when something horrible like this happens, to find some reason why it could never happen to THEM. In actuality, sex crimes can be committed against anyone, regardless of how they dress, how pretty they are, or even how visible they are - because sex crimes aren't about any of these things; they are about power. They are crimes of opportunity, and crimes of insecurity. Sex crimes do not happen because of anything a woman did or did not do; they happen because she simply exists.

I had dismissed Erin's story as something I was going to write about until I saw the Salon.com article and realized that Erin's story is my story, and your story, and the story of, to quote Gloria Steinem, any woman who "chooses to behave like a full human being." Erin has been met by the armies of the status quo and needs her sisterhood, but unfortunately, it seems in this case her peers are the status quo. When will we stop pointing fingers at each other and put the blame where it belongs – SOLELY on the people, mostly men, who commit these crimes against us? Are we too afraid of sounding like feminists to actually be one? Where is Erin's sisterhood now that she needs it most?

But wait! Here's Lanie Grace (NSFW), "Erin Andrews Video: No Pity at all For Her":

I know I am going against the popular crowd but honestly, I don't feel any pity for Erin Andrews, not one bit. The whole thing wreaks of being a publicity stunt and furthermore, this is a woman who exploits her sexuality for fame and glory so please don't waste your time trying to convince me that men simply love her expertise on any given sport ....

One of my favorite lines from her attorney is "That we are still looking for the whereabouts of the unknown perpetrator. Here is the fault in that bogus statement.

"Hottie" knows where she has been staying and definitely being the celebrity she is indeed, it stands to reason she and her security people know exactly who is staying in the room next to her. Certainly the fact these videos were shot in two different Hotels should narrow it down some I would think.

I do not believe for a second the exact location of the two hotels and exact room numbers are still a mystery to anyone in her camp. I guess we are supposed to believe she parades around naked, shaking her ass like Tawny Kitaen on Whitesnake's car in so many hotels that she can't remeber which one it is. Yeah makes sense to me. NOT

Seriously girls, How many of us parade around in the total nude waving a curling iron prancing around in porn star mode while casually getting dressed. Better yet, how many of us curl our hair in the total nude under any circumstance?

I guess women are torn!

Here's USA Today on IndyCar driver Danica Patrick, "Patrick: Video Demonstrates Issues of Internet Age." Also, from the Sports Journalists' Association News, "Woman Sports Presenter in Nude Video Shock."

But here's more on "how she deserved it," at the guys' sports website Deadspin, which helped break the story wide open last week, "The One Where Everyone Talks About That Thing That Everyone's Talking About":

Save the sensitivity for Ms. Erin Andrews. Remember, she is a reporter; and reporters have no morals when it comes to getting a story for their careers (Geraldo, Cooper, ESPN's anchors).

How many times do paparazzi and reporters force their way into people's "private" lives, just to get a story? We always hear of everyone's privacy being exposed in the media, but not the reporters and anchors themselves.

Or how about this guy, at the Los Angeles Daily News? "MEDIA: To Catch an Erin Andrews Predator":

This is not to imply in any way, shape or form that she's remotely at fault for finding herself making national news as the victim in a hotel peephole video scandal, one that has her attorney threatening all kinds of punishment to anyone who dares show the clip or else they're an accessory to a crime.

But ...

In the same media-crazed, image-conscious, ethics-breaching world she works in, could she be that na ve to think she's impervious to perverted behavior and possibly taken better steps to protect herself from unwanted attention?

That maybe if she demanded more take her seriously and acted at least a bit more indignant of the fact that Playboy has awarded her the title, "America's sexiest sportscaster," the past twoyears in a made-for-Internet poll. We could try to overlook those times when she dressed inappropriately on national TV football, basketball or baseball assignments.

Speaking , we in the media know plenty of ways to objectify female reporters who don't deserve it.

But ...

Most of them try to nip that kind of treatment in the bud when they realize their career arc hardly will go far if that's how they're generally perceived.

We're in full agreement with the immediate response to this by USA Today's Christine Brennan, who launched a Tweet the other day that, of course, was immediately misconstrued: "Women sports journalists need to be smart and not play the frat house. There are tons of nuts out there. Erin Andrews incident is bad, but to add perspective: there are 100s of women sports journalists who have never had this happen to them."

That's something every female sports person has to be thinking about as they decide if they're more in tune with creating an image of media maven or a credible news gatherer.

You can try to have it both ways. But ...

Blog Prof has an analysis, "USA Today sports columnist Christine Brennan on Erin Andrews illegal nude peephole video: SHE WAS ASKING FOR IT!."

Okay, and NSFW (and not linked), you'll find full-nude screen shots at The Dirty, "Breaking News: The Plot Thickens, Erin Andrews Was Not a Victim," and the Something Awful Forums, "Sexist and Exploitative to Post Erin Andrews Peephole Pictures?" Plus, see this very critical report at Associated Content, "Erin Andrews Peephole Video on CBS and Fox News: Erin Andrews Peephole Video Goes Mainstream Media 'Disguised' as the News." Also, "Is Bill O'Reilly a Hypocrite for Showing Erin Andrews Video?"

And, in response to Lisa Bloom's comments this week that simply viewing the tape was illegal, see "Erin Andrews Nude Video Means We Should Regulate the Internet?" And, "So Now It Is a Crime to Even Watch the Erin Andrews Video?" (Reposting this one).

Okay, here's an interesting legal analysis, "The Erin Andrews Chronicles: A (Semi) Regular Look at Sports and the Law."

And on the continuing interest in the story, from an Indian newspaper:

Interest refuses to die down in Leaked Erin Andrews Peephole Tape Video. Watching the video has become a rage among teenaged Americans and sports fans. It is the hottest search on the internet for the whole last week.

And, "Erin Andrews Peephole Tape Video Spreading Like Wildfire."

But don't miss Don Chavez (but NSFW), who offers a new theory of the case, "Erin Andrews Peephole Scandal: the Other Victims & the Inside Job Theory":

Without a doubt, people love to look at pictures of Erin Andrews on the Internet. Just like they would look at photos of any other attractive female, whether she be a sportscaster, a Playmate, a Maxim Hometown hottie, the latest sex scandal teacher, or some random woman with a disgruntle ex-boyfriend. The Internet is not what caused this to happen.

The individual who videoed her did not follow her around the country. There were six video clips, all shot of her in the same hotel room, which were on Daily Motion. Once this story broke, those clips were made into a five minute compilation complete with the Sportscenter theme song at the end. So any talk you hear of more video is just someone referring to a smaller portion of the compilation that you “haven’t seen yet”.

Now as you will see below, the user Goblazers1 had a total of 40 videos uploaded to his account. This is the earliest known source of the videos on the Internet (which he has since removed), and Erin Andrews was not the only woman this individual had peeped on. As you will see in these exclusive screen shots that can only be found on Donchavez.com, one of the rooms have a likeness to that of the room Erin Andrews was filmed in.

However, one thing is for sure, not all of these peep holes were in the same location. So this could indicated that Goblazers1 has several peep holes at his disposal, is a traveling peeping tom that has other voyeurs who let him uses their peep holes, or he is a collector of voyeur footage.