Fair or foul? Here’s everything to know about the Pete Alonso non-homer.

There is a simple fix for this issue, Orioles players and manager Craig Albernaz argued Wednesday night.

The fair-or-foul debate regarding Pete Alonso’s would-be go-ahead home run late in what turned into a loss to the New York Yankees caused vexation. For the most part, that frustration was along party lines — Yankees manager Aaron Boone said postgame that their internal replay coordinator thinks it was a foul ball.

To the Orioles, that looks like a fair ball.

“It’s 2026. I think technology has advanced pretty good,” Albernaz said. “There were teams using AI on the iPads, and other sports use ball-tracking data for challengeable calls. Don’t understand why we don’t do it.”

Added right-hander Chris Bassitt: “Because it would cost money. That’s it. I mean, that’s literally it. You ask every fan of this game, that’s a true fan, every single fan would want those cameras. If you ask every single player, they would want those cameras. If you ask every coach, they want the cameras. It costs money. That’s it. That’s literally it.”

Naturally, it’s more complicated than that.

According to a person familiar with the league’s attempts to resolve a foul pole issue that comes into play only a handful of times per year, this sort of technology doesn’t exist.

Major League Baseball would have to develop, test and install technology for this sole purpose, which takes time — following a similar process as the league’s endeavor to see if checked-swing measurement technology is feasible, the source said.

Alonso called it a “simple fix.”

“We have Hawk-Eye,” Alonso said, referring to the technology used to determine the strike zone and other measures. “Like, football, you have the pylon camera with the plane where it shoots right across the goal line. And I feel like, for us, we could easily have a laser or a camera that shoots straight up. … The reason why I’ve been told we can’t do it is because every ballpark is different and that every ballpark is unique, it’s not the same dimensions everywhere.”

Albernaz said the information the Orioles saw on the team’s iPads in the dugout — which have access to real-time Statcast data — indicates that the ball flight of Alonso’s blast was fair.

However, that ball-flight tracking data is unlikely to be accurate that far away from the plate, a source said.

While there is a graphic that shows the ball flight, Mike Petriello of MLB.com wrote on X that the graphic is “an internal estimating, not evidence of the full trajectory of where the ball went.”

To confirm that point, on MLB’s internal research tool there is also a moving illustrator that displays ball-tracking data for a play. The moving illustrator, a source with knowledge of that page said, loses track of the fly ball just after it passes third base — showing that the flight data is an estimation.

The farther the ball flies from the Hawk-Eye trackers near home plate, the harder it becomes to track.

And, finally, there is the issue of a camera angle.

The one that was initially shown on Mid-Atlantic Sports Network — which appeared to show the ball curling around the pole on the fair side — is from the first base dugout well camera, which is about 90 feet from the third-base line.

However, MLB’s replay center used one specific angle — closer to home plate and pointed down the third-base line — to determine the on-field call of a foul ball stood. It could not be determined whether the ball definitely passed the foul pole fairly, so MLB stuck with the on-field decision.

Because of the angle from the first-base dugout well camera, it appeared as if the ball was clearly fair. But that camera doesn’t show the ball down the line, which creates issues in accuracy.

Either way, fair or foul, the Orioles lost, 5-3.

“It’s not why we lost the game,” Albernaz said. “But I think that moment was a big moment, especially [as] it takes a home run from us and Pete, as well.”