פירוש על ברכות 81:8

R' YIRMIYOH SAID [IT SHOULD] PRECEDE; R' YOSAIF SAID ETC. The Gemara cites an opinion that the dispute between R’ Yehudoh and the Rabanan is even when the b’rochos to be recited are the same. The Gemara asks: what can they be arguing about if the b’rochos are not the same. R’ Yirmiyoh answers: they argue about which of the two b’rochos are to be recited first. In our text of the Gemara that Tosfos is now quoting we read: as R’ Yosaif said. The implication of this text is that R’ Yosaif’s statement is following the opinion of R’ Yehudoh and that is why he holds that the order that must be followed is the order that the Torah teaches us of the seven species. The Rabanan however, do not subscribe to this opinion of R’ Yosaif and they hold that there is no need to follow the order of the seven species at all. Tosfos presents an alternative text, not דאמר רב יוסף rather רב יוסף אמר. According to this text Rav Yosaif is not linked to R’ Yehudoh, and his statement is true even according to the Rabanan. They also agree that we must take into account the order of the seven species in the Torah.
Rashi and R’I explained that according to this text, דאמר רב יוסף this statement of Rav Yosaif that whatever is first in this verse takes precedence for reciting b’rochos, was said only according to R’ Yehudoh. The Rabanan do not agree at all that the order of the seven species has any significance in the matter of which b’rochoh is to be recited first.
Tosfos introduces a dissenting opinion. However, Rabainu Sh’mayoh’s text is רב יוסף אמר וכו' without the 'ד that connects it to R’ Yirmiyoh’s statement. It is an independent statement by Rav Yosaif and it was said even according to the Rabanan, they too agree that the order of the seven species must be taken into account when determining which b’rochoh is to be recited first. And it is speaking of when one is not more of a favorite than the other, and then we must go according to that which is first in the verse. For if there is a favorite, it is certain that the favorite is first, For even when the choice is between other species as opposed to the seven species, the Rabanan say that one recites a b’rochoh on whatever fruit he wants, the favorite, certainly when the choice is between the seven species we should have to follow the favorite. And the statement of Rav Yosaif is an independent statement, not attached to R’ Yirmiyoh’s statement.
Tosfos has a serious problem with Rabainu Sh’mayoh’s opinion that even the Rabanan agree that we must take into account the order of the seven species when that does not conflict with the favorite. And this is not clear, for it is soon evident that the proper text is דאמר רב יוסף and it was said only according to R’ Yehudoh and the Rabanan disagree. For Rav Chisdo and Rav Hamnuno were sitting at a meal, and they brought before them dates and pomegranates, Rav Hamnuno recited a b’rochoh on the dates first. Rav Chisdo said to him do you not hold of Rav Yosaif’s teaching that whatever is mentioned earlier in the verse takes precedence for a b’rochoh? This question about Rav Hamnuno’s choice makes sense if we hold that the consideration of that which is earlier in the verse takes precedence over all other considerations. Then it makes sense to ask, do you not hold of Rav Yosaif’s statement? But if Rav Yosaif’s statement is not absolute as Rabainu Sh’mayoh suggests and that when there is a favorite that overrides the order of the seven species in the Torah and one recites the b’rochoh on the favorite, why was Rav Hamnuno’s choice questioned at all? Perhaps he chose the favorite as he should and he agrees with Rav Yosaif when there is no favorite.

The seven species are enumerated in this verse.