Is excessive use of instant replay good or bad for professional sports?


The 2002-03 NBA season saw the beginning of instant replay being used to change calls during the game.

Instant replay has been part of football since Sept. 7, 1986 and has helped the game immensely.
In the past couple of years other sports like baseball and basketball began using instant replay more often.

Some fans say it is better for the game while others think it takes away from the history.

Instant replay has its pros and cons but is it really good for sports other than football?

Ryan and Bryan debate whether instant replay is good or bad for professional sports in this week’s edition of the Hot Corner.

Ryan: I do not think instant replay is good for professional sports besides football.

The game of football moves so fast that it becomes hard for the officials to catch everything that is happening. Instant replay allows them to slow the game down and make the right call.

Football has had instant replay in the game for a very long time and everyone has been accustomed to it so no one really raises the question as to why it is used.

Photo by Photo courtesy of Doctorindy on Wikimedia Commons / The Slate

The NFL uses a replay booth for officials to a take closer look at calls they have made on recent plays, allowing them to make the correct decision.

When it comes to baseball and basketball fans do not like that instant replay is being used more often and I am one of those fans who think it should be limited.

I am a huge baseball fan for one, but the game takes long as so as it is. When you give the umpires the opportunity to review any call they want, it makes the game drag.

I feel that baseball umpires should be allowed to review home runs because those can be tricky to call at times but anything else should be determined by what the officials see.

When it comes to basketball I believe that instant replay should be used for the sole purpose of seeing if a player gets a shot off before the shot clock sounds. Instant replay should not be used otherwise.

When it comes to instant replay I do not think it should be used as frequently in sports like baseball and basketball because it takes away from the game.

Bryan: I do not think that the new instant replay in baseball is going to change that much of the game. For one, there have been new rules set up to make sure the game does not drag on for too long.

Each manager can challenge no more than two plays in a game. Even if the manager is correct and the play is overturned, there is still a maximum of two challenges per game.

With the two-challenge rule in place, only important plays will be looked at. Managers will not waste a challenge to see if the ball hit down the line was fair or foul in the first inning.

Another interesting aspect of this rule is the plays that are reviewable. According to Major League Baseball, managers can review -home runs, ground-rule doubles, fan interference, stadium boundary calls, force plays, tag plays, fair or foul in the outfield only, trap play in the outfield only, batter hit by pitch, timing play, touching a base, passing runners and record keeping.

Another argument people make is that instant replay will take human error out of the game. My argument would be why would you want human error in a game? Get the call right.

There are enough people arguing and yelling at the game and at their televisions that the umpire missed the call and then they will argue against replay.

Human error seems like a dumb thing to have in a game that has been around since the late 1800s.
So, for those who think the game is going to take longer now that instant replay is being used, take a chill pill, or take a bathroom break, or change the channel for a minute. It’s for the best to get the calls right that can impact the outcome of the game.

Comments powered by Disqus

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Slate.