THW replay international sporting events if an extreme umpiring error affects the result.

Thanks, Pro, for starting this debate. 1. Destroying the Ethics of Sports Pro contends that allowing a bad umpiring call is unacceptable and demands that a rematch be played, or else it will destroy the ethics of sports. That's absurd. Bad calls are a part of almost every single game or match ever played at both the professional and minor levels. Referees are only human, have limited awareness, and do their best to make the proper call. Just because an umpire called a foul ball fair or vice versa doesn't mean that any ethics are being violated. It's tough luck. Instead, a situation I can think of where ethics and sports are involved are when referees do things like bet on the games that they're reffing. It's sad and unethical, and those people should be punished and fired, but I don't think there should be a re-match because of it. Further, I don't think it's true that athletes are going to play any more unethically because a ref makes a bad call. In most cases, they're penalized for it. Refs are typically unbiased and have no incentive to blow calls. In fact, quite the opposite: bad umpires won't have jobs. We saw how in the 2009 World Series, they amended the rules so that only experienced umpires got to work the big games. If a ref consistently makes bad or missed calls, they will be unemployed. So, it's in their best interest to keep a good eye on the game, and though players screw up in almost every game, most of the time it is rectified and addressed. 1a. CON: Sports = Business Despite all the glamor, professional sports are just GAMES. The reason they're in business and so popular are because of the market demand; in other words, professional sports is a business. I'm sure there's a lot of heart and passion amongst some of the players and coaches, but at the end of the day, it's about a pay check. Case in point: Brett Favre. Just kidding. But anyway, let's take a game like the Super Bowl. A 30-second slot for a commercial being played during the Super Bowl costs 2.6 million dollars [1]. If a bad call was made (and for whatever reason not reviewed until after the game) that changed the outcome of the Super Bowl, it's ridiculous to think that a game of that caliber would be replayed. Advertising companies specifically pay to have their commercials aired during certain key times and directed at a specific demographic. To replay the game would mean to interfere with other elements than just the game; for instance advertising, marketing, etc. The reason a Super Bowl commercial goes for 2.6 million is because of its annual prestige. To simply have another Super Bowl would be nonsensical. And, if your argument is that this practice should only be done for smaller games, I can prove how THAT is unethical. In other words, this resolution must apply to games across the board. 1b. CON: Part of the Game Mistakes and bad calls are a part of every game. Whether it's intentional or not, breaking the rules is something that happens frequently and that's just the nature of sports in general. Players and coaches have to accommodate for those discrepancies. In every game, the athlete plays hard and often violates the rules, which result in penalties (free throws, a loss of yards, etc.). When they violate the rules, they're doing it either (a) on accident, (b) strategically - as in intentional fouls in basketball to help you beat the clock, or (c) taking a chance and hoping that the ref will miss it. When I played basketball, girls constantly would tug at my jersey to hinder my playing in the games, and the refs never noticed. So, I had to accommodate for that by avoiding a situation where that could happen, playing even harder, or not letting it affect me. Part of what distinguishes good players and coaches from bad ones are the ones that can play through adversity and adjust to game situations. 1c. CON: Preventative Measures Over the years we've come up with ways to avoid bad calls ruining games, such as having more refs, utilizing replays via video footage, allowing challenges of certain calls, etc. So, obviously everyone would agree that breaking the rules is bad and upholding the rules is good. We should continue to utilize and implement measures that will prevent bad calls from disastrous conclusions; however, again I don't believe that re-playing a game is most fair option. 1d. CON: Unfair Advantage A rematch would carry with it a lot of differences that could potentially negatively impact a team. For instance, during the first game, the other team's coach may have picked up on certain plays or play calls which would give them an unfair advantage in the next game. Another example are player's statuses; for instance, if they had incurred any injuries during the first game or rather just beat themselves up physically or emotionally which could greatly hinder their second performance. Yet another issue is the immense pressure that both players and refs would be under and a certain expected outcome. For instance, if the France/Ireland game were replayed, people would expect Ireland to win based on what happened last game. The refs would be aware of this and perhaps make calls leaning in their favor to rectify the past injustice. Either way, it wouldn't result in a fair game. 1e. CON: Impracticality If we were to replay every game with a bad ref call, we'd never get through a game let alone a season. As I said, since it's the little games that build character, talent and take you to the big games, it's silly to suggest that this only be considered for "important" games. It would have to apply universally, which is unfeasible. 2. Effects on the Popularity of Sports I disagree entirely that sports will be given up as a favorite hobby, past time or thing to follow because of a few bad calls. For instance, in the 1982 World Cup Semi Final, German goal keeper Schumacher committed a horrible and obvious foul, but it wasn't called and Germany went on to win the game. Or what about the infamous Diego Maradona's "hand of God" goal being allowed to stand in the the 1986 World Cup quarter-final? [2] There's even entire books dedicated to blown calls [3] ... So the point is, it's unrealistic to think that fans will stop appreciating the athletes and loving the games based on bad calls. Will they be pissed? Sure. Rightfully so? Maybe. But the fact remains that this contention is one without any merit or proof, whereas history shows us that I'm right: fans will not stop being fans or get discouraged because of bad calls; there's a high market demand for sports. 3. Enraged Fans I don't care how big of a fan you are - to engage in violent behavior because your team lost is unethical, immature and deserving of punishment. You can't just go around vandalizing things and assaulting people because your favorite sports team was jipped. As I said, these kind of mistakes happen all the time; you can't go around being abusive and destructive every time, and for the most part, fans don't. As I said - it's just a game. If fans are going to act like savages on behalf of their favorite team, then clearly they don't respect themselves, the players or even the "ethics of sports" enough. 4. The Morality of a Generation It's really ridiculous to say that a bad umpiring call will destroy the ethical foundation of entire generations.Sports games are hardly the #1 place parents and children look as a foundation for morality. Further, while Pro suggests that kids will learn that cheating = good, I think the opposite will happen: Kids will see how cheaters are exposed, condemned and crucified in the media (i.e. Thierry Henry) and as such will choose not to go that route. That's all I've got for now - back to ye. Sources: [1] http://money.cnn.com... [2] YouTube: Maradona hand of God [3] http://www.amazon.com...