When a player who spent nearly two decades representing baseball’s traditional values starts questioning what the sport is selling between innings, perhaps the league should pay attention.

And Murphy wasn’t the only major leaguer raising his voice.

Los Angeles Dodgers outfielder Alex Call, who isn’t on the team’s postseason roster, joined the criticism with a pointed message directed at MLB and its television partners.

“Can we please get the soft porn ads off playoff broadcasts, TBS, Fox, NBC, @MLB?” Call wrote.

“My son wants to watch baseball with Dada, but how do I justify that when a half-naked women could come on screen anytime?? This is America’s Pastime. Parents shouldn’t have to worry about this.”

Several Dodgers teammates reposted his message.

At the center of the controversy is Sweeney, the 29-year-old “Euphoria” actress who has turned her partnership with Novig into a master class in provocative advertising.

Her latest commercial, released Sunday, features the actress wearing little more than white underwear bearing the company’s name while strategically covering her breasts with footballs.

“There are grown men making spreadsheets to bet on what color underwear I’m wearing,” Sweeney says.

The punchline? Novig is supposedly about sports, not sex.

That’s a curious distinction for a company using sex to sell sports gambling.

Sweeney has defended the campaign by pointing to athletes who previously posed nude for ESPN’s Body Issue. But there’s an obvious difference between celebrating athletic bodies and using a Hollywood actress’s body to attract customers to a sports wagering platform.

Actress Sharon Stone also weighed in, arguing that women’s sports shouldn’t be reduced to attracting male attention for gambling.

Of course, the Murphy family’s criticism ignited its own backlash.

Some social media users questioned why the family-friendly outrage centered on revealing advertisements rather than the gambling being promoted. Others pointed to the White House’s controversial execution livestream, accusing critics of selective moral outrage.

Those comparisons raise legitimate questions about where Americans draw their lines, but don’t invalidate a parent’s right to question what appears on a baseball broadcast.

The league has spent years obsessing over attracting younger audiences, implementing rule changes, embracing social media and desperately trying to make baseball more appealing to the next generation.

Yet during its most important games, the television experience can feel designed for an entirely different audience.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with Sweeney appearing in provocative advertising or Fox promoting a legal prescription treatment. Adults can make their own decisions about what they watch, purchase and consume.

But parents should also be able to watch a playoff game with their children without wondering what sexually suggestive commercial or terrifying movie trailer might appear during the next pitching change.

MLB doesn’t necessarily control every advertisement sold by its broadcast partners, but it certainly has a stake in the experience being delivered under its name.

The sport can’t spend the afternoon telling families baseball belongs to everyone, then shrug its shoulders when those same families complain about what they’re seeing during the broadcast.

Download The California Post App, follow us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters