Blog Post 6
Published in
3 min readApr 19, 2018
- There is no debate surrounding the question of if instant replay makes officiating a game more accurate; but we ask ourselves, is instant replay really helping sports or damaging it? Those who argue that instant replay is beneficial for sports support their stance with reasons regarding higher accuracy and fairness. While instant replay is a great tool to get better calls, it is not a cure all for sports. As previously mentioned before, plays can be reviewed but the referees might still make the wrong call. On the other hand, those who are against the system say that it slows down the pace of play, takes the fun out of the game, damages the purity of the respected sport and does not always result in the correct call. Many of the challengers of the instant replay system fail to see that there are by far more positives than negatives. They tend to not recognize that the instant replay system not only helps with officiating, but is also used for medical purposes. Many fans stay neutral on the subject, as they see and understand both perspectives. I am an avid sports fan and believe that the implementation of the instant replay is more beneficial than detrimental in the sports world. I will offer an analysis that supports the stance of those who are pro-instant replay. I will also examine studies on the improvements in accuracy that the system has made as well as the usage of it by medical staff. Finally, I will provide a possible solution that will resolve the controversy over the instant replay system in the world of sports.
- There is one thing that sports fan’s all around the world can agree upon; instant replay does in fact improve the accuracy of officiating. The question of whether or not instant replay should stay in sports still looms. Those who argue that instant replay is beneficial for sports support their stance with reasons regarding higher accuracy and fairness. While instant replay is a great tool to get better calls, it is not a cure all for sports. As previously mentioned before, plays can be reviewed but the referees might still make the wrong call. On the other hand, those who are against the system say that it slows down the pace of play, takes the fun out of the game, damages the purity of the respected sport and does not always result in the correct call. Both sides of the debate have valid points, but those against instant replay overlook some of the positive effects it has. They tend to not recognize that the instant replay system not only helps with officiating, but is also used for medical purposes. When you truly think of it, the implementation of the instant replay is more beneficial than detrimental in the sports world. Throughout the text, I will offer an analysis that supports the stance of those who are pro-instant replay. I will also examine studies on the improvements in accuracy that the system has made as well as the usage of it by medical staff. Finally, I will provide a possible solution that will resolve the controversy over the instant replay system in the world of sports.
- During the revising process, I followed Harris’ advice and used 3 of the five basic revisions. I added more transitions in between sentences, reworded sentences and removed unnecessary text. By adding transitions, my introduction had more flow and was easier to read. The rewording of the first sentence in the paragraph makes my claim much stronger. By removing the excess sentences, the reader is able to clearly distinguish the thesis in the introduction. This gave my text more power and showed that I have a strong stance on the matter. Not only that, but I felt that my paragraph was much more focused on my stance after revision. I felt that the first draft of my paragraph was strong, so I did not want to make any changes. However, I am very happy with the changes I made as they benefit my text.
