In last night's World Series game the instant replay came into play. In Major League Baseball the instant replay can only be used at this time for verifying home runs. Alex Rodriguez hit a ball that bounced off the lens of a T.V. camera in the stands in right field and fell back into play. It was initially called a double, but after reviewing the instant replay it was changed to a home run.
Now I was watching the game with the mute on, and listening to music as I watched, so I don't know if the commentators discussed this or not. But the lens of the camera was hanging out over the railing of the stands. And the downward angle of the ball's flight at the time it hit the lens did not look to me like the ball would have been a home run had the camera not been there. I sincerely doubt from the angle of descent that it would have cleared the railing and been a home run. It might have bounced off the top of the railing and into the stands, making it a home run. But it looked to me more like it would have hit off the front of the railing and fallen back into play... making the original call of "double" correct.
In sports the instant replay is only supposed to be used to reverse a call made in real time if the evidence is conclusive. To me the evidence in this case was anything but conclusive. I like the instant replay. I have been a proponent of expanding its use for close calls on the bases, etc. But if you're going to use the technology, use it right. Examine all the aspects of the evidence before making a ruling.