Pros and Cons of Instant Replay Essay Example
Pros and Cons of Instant Replay Essay Example

Pros and Cons of Instant Replay Essay Example

Available Only on StudyHippo
  • Pages: 6 (1538 words)
  • Published: November 6, 2016
  • Type: Case Study
View Entire Sample
Text preview

With all of the technological developments that emerged in the recent times, several of these have already found their way onto the courts and fields of professional athletics. Instant replay is one of the major technological innovations in the recent years that are now regularly used in sports. The technology identified as instant replay permits broadcast of a previously occurring sports actions using recorded video. There are heated discussions over the initial use of instant replay which generally stemmed from difference over which game executions are appropriate for instantaneous replay. Nevertheless, a number of sports leagues today have taken advantage of the apparatus by establishing a regulation which justifiably permits the employment of instant replay in certain instances by game officials.

Advantages of Instant Re


play in Sports

Within the past decade, the National Basketball Association, the National Hockey League, the National Football League, and many others have accepted instant replay to steer clear of any disagreements that could take place from an erroneous call at some stage of the game. Every league has its individual instant replay variation, although every one of which serves as safety nets for human referees. In the past as well in the present, missed calls are the center of concern for the trustworthiness and integrity of every major and minor sports league. No matter what kind of sports is concerned, people can make errors all the time. Bad calls are dangerous to people, at the same time it can also change the course of history. Thus, every kind of sports often relies on the assistance of cameras. With instant replays, humans can take advantage of the

View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

technology and do away with human inaccuracy. The system as well generates drama and fun for the enthusiasts all at once.

During the 1985 World Series, for instance, a game six call influenced the outcome of a baseball’s championship. The Kansas City Royals was down to St. Louis Cardinals 2-3 in a best of seven series, and down 0-1 going into the ninth inning. Don Denkinger called Jorge Orta of the Kansas City Royals safe at the first-base to lead off the game’s ninth inning. The Royals beat the Cardinals 2-1, and in the next game the team finally went on to win the series (Barrack). Clearly, one erroneous call can alter the game’s momentum, as well as the series.


Currently, the only professional sport that is instantly paying for the instant replay system, yet has not adopted it is the Major League Baseball (Barrack). In sports world where we emphasize cheating as an unacceptable act, by not jumping on the replay wagon baseball is considered to be cheating itself. It is not complicated to incorporate instant replay in baseball league. By placing cameras on the outfield fence and at every base, questionable home run calls and risky calls of umpire at a base can easily be reviewed. Yet, until instant replay is not employed in baseball leagues, another team will likely get deprived of a justified triumph due to lack of aid from replay technology.


The machine dubbed as the Hawk-Eye Tennis Officiating System is increasing the human drama at every major competition around the world (“Love All for Instant Replay at U.S. Open”). Developed by Paul

Hawkins, an English entrepreneur and artificial-intelligence expert, the innovative system of instant replay conveys an unparalleled level of accuracy to a game in which the players are quicker, fitter, stronger and bigger, in hitting the ball more swiftly than ever and making line calls nearly unachievable for humans to put together (“Love All for Instant Replay at U.S. Open”).

Rather than mainly relying line calls from officials, the whole crowd now functions as referee, shouting “challenge” after controversial decisions. The system was perfected to put together dependable calls in not more than three seconds with zero mistakes. The outcome of replay is so entertaining that tennis officials have actually requested the Hawk-Eye technicians to delay the presentation of instant replays for a few seconds to permit excitement and suspense to build.


In basketball the astonishing tool of technology is used to guarantee that significant calls are made accurately. In 2003, the National Basketball Association adopted the use of instant replay to evaluate shots at the end of the game in addition to the replays at the end of every half to determine if shooter’s foot was on the three point line player and whether the player shot the ball in time or not (“Tennis-Challenge-Based Instant Replay Approved for U.S. Open”). Coaches and owners of basketball teams agree that the use of instant replay at the end of the game really plays a significant aspect in determining the appropriate calls.

The employment of instant replay was also approved by the National Basketball Association’s Board of Governors and team owners if the game clock breaks down in the concluding seconds of a

quarter or overtime (“NBA to Allow Expanded Use of Instant Replay”). The expanded use of instant replay assists the officials to accurately resolve if the period should have ended or how much time should have come off the clock. Additionally, during the last season, instant replay was employed to accurately verify players being ejected from contests concerning their flagrant fouls or participation in brawls.

Disadvantages of Instant Replay in Sports

People who oppose the employment of instant replay all declare that the system will remove every game’s human element. They defended that ever since, the human element has constantly been an important component of every sport. Others who resist replay declare that it will decelerate the pace of the game. In games where there is hardly stop and start to the action, employment of instant replay makes a little more sense. A team that question calls or decisions clearly interrupts the active play (Thomas). In the fast pace sports, continuity of action is extremely desirable.

Additionally, many people today already complain regarding how long the periods of some sports are, and believes that instant replay without a doubt will only further extend the duration of the game. Imagine baseball games, for instance, the umpires have to stop the game and go to the video, replay a home run to determine if it is foul or fair, and then come backs to the field to announce the call. This scenario just does not appear like baseball for several old school fans of the game.

Mixed Martial Arts

The dilemmas with the employment of instant replay in mixed martial arts are numerous.

For instance, the problem arises in the process of going about a challenged call when instant replay is employed; yet this is just one side of the problem. In mixed martial arts resting afford the opposition unwarranted advantages to recover from inflicted damage and physical exhaustion.


Arguably the National Football League employs instant replay more than necessarily required. In all of sport instant replay in football is the most unexciting experience as spectators sit on the stands and watch at an official while staring at a monitor for quite some time. In 1986, owners of National Football League adopted some degree of employment of instant replay as aid for officiating. The NFL owners in 1988 appended a replay official to a standard seven-man, on-the-field squad. In 1990, officials of the NFL set a limit in deciding replays to two-minutes (“Tennis-Challenge-Based Instant Replay Approved for U.S. Open”).

Currently, the NCAA has applied a “coach’s challenge” rule. The recent proposal is to permit coaches a single challenge every game. If the challenge succeeds, then it is advantageous to the team; however, if it fails, the team loses a timeout. This idea seems to collapse. While single challenge is better than none at all, it is without doubt not sufficient to provide as the basis for the employment of replay system. Conferring authority to both the officials and coaches in a replay system is a very bad proposal (“New Instant Replay Rules”).


 The accuracy of instant replay is based on a multifaceted computer-generated algorithm. Thus, instant replay generates its advantages as well as its disadvantages. The benefits of instant replay are

clear and widely documented. Supporters of instant replay believe that teams should be able to challenge a questionable call, or game officials should be able to review recorded videos at any instant they have to convene to consider a decision. Supporters of instant replay further believe that the system enhances the game, as compared to critics of instant replay’s belief that it would slow up the game. On the other hand, critics of instant replay believe that the technology only makes the games longer and tedious. Old school sports fan would rather witness continuous games, than have the games stopped to go for video replays.

 The application of instant replay in sports is a complicated question, but still worthy of bringing to life. People will by no means ever going to come to a consensus on this subject matter. Whether instant replay is applied or not, the bottom line is that officials have to be as accurate as possible. And in inevitable situations when officials carry out erroneous calls, athletes and teams should be provided with proper recourse.


Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds