Should every professional sport use video review for all officiating calls?

Start with a question: what does "every call" mean? A basketball game involves hundreds of judgment moments per possession, from hand checks to screens to whether a foot grazed the line. If review covers everything, someone must decide the order and timing of what gets checked, and that someone is just a new referee with a screen. We haven't removed human judgment, we've relocated it to a booth and made it slower. Now a hypothetical. Imagine a league that reviews every call and gets it right 99 percent of the time. Fans would still argue, because most contested calls are not factual but interpretive. Was that contact enough? Was the defender set? Replay can show what happened, but not settle what the rule means in the moment. Slow motion even distorts intent, making ordinary contact look like a foul. There is a real cost too. Sports are built on rhythm, and rhythm creates the tension that makes a late score matter. Constant stoppage drains that, and celebrations become provisional, since nobody trusts a goal until the booth clears it. I'm not arguing for zero replay. Narrow, binary questions like whether the ball crossed a line are good uses. But the position "Review everything" asks for far more, and it assumes error is the only cost worth counting. Let refs call it, and keep replay for the clear factual misses. Accepting some mistakes is the price of a game that still flows and still belongs to the people playing it.