The lack of crippling of the game is hardly a defense of something that is still done poorly. It's not done poorly. This sequence is clearly an outlier. The sort of accuracy and consistency people are craving is already being achieved by the human umps. They're not infallible, but they're right 99.9% of the time. Things like video replays and timing equipment (in other sports) aren't infallable either. There's a failure rate with technology too. Point taken about the failure rate of technology, but I still disagree overall. I know it's splitting hairs, but 99.9% is wrong. Assuming 150 pitches per team per game, that would mean that "irrefutable contrary evidence" would only overturn one balls-strikes call every three games, and I don't think anyone could argue that point with a straight face. I wouldn't know where/how to research it, but my guess is that it's probably closer to 8-15 missed ball-strike calls per game, or around 95-97% accuracy, with outlier games probably ranging around 92-93 percent or even lower. Your argument based on your made up numbers is perfectly reasonable, but the numbers I just made up are too high to not find it necessary to employ technology where it could be easily employed.