I disagree. Replay reviews are limited (at least in American football), and therefore don't disrupt the game much and you lose a time out if you lose the replay call. I'm very against a team losing because a ref made a bad call.
I agree with you on this one. And the standard is, as I understand it, there's either
clear evidence for changing a call or it stands. That's the correct call because it gives the ref the "benefit of the doubt" and that's as it should be. In the OP example, that's one where it would be likely preferable if the original call was upheld - it's really too close to call. But those kinds of disputes are inevitable in any system.
The people playing the game are IMO entitled to have the game decided on the play, not a bad call because the ref didn't have a good angle or was looking away or just screwed up or had a bet on the other team. If the player was in bounds at the catch, that should count, even if the ref blew the call. If he was out, the defense should be rewarded for that, etc. I remember a "catch" long ago that decided a game I cared about. It was a fantastic game, "my" team won it on the field, but a referee with a bad angle changed the outcome by ruling what was
clearly a non-catch into a last-second game winning TD. It wasn't fair to the players on the field, end of story.
My wife watches tennis and I love the cameras. Bottom line is if a player hits an ace, or a winner on the line, it should count, even if the line umpire missed it because it's a 100mph shot. It's shocking sometimes how badly GOOD umpires miss calls. They're human and it's expected, but the players shouldn't have their livelihood affected by someone else's clear mistake, not when technology allows for easy and ACCURATE replays.
I'd also expect that good umpires/refs welcome the replays. They don't want to their screw ups affecting the outcome. It also should take some pressure off of them, in the moment and certainly after the game is over. So it helps everyone IMO...