I am against using instant replay as a basis for changing refs calls. I don't like it in the NFL and I would like it even less in basketball.

First off you have the difficulty of deciding what would fall under the review procedure for possible change.

Some of the things that could fall under the review process are

1. Cheating on the tipoff
2. All possible out of bounds plays.
3. Possible goal tending
4. Zone defenses
5. Charge or blocking call
6. Outside the arc on a three point shot
7. All plays on defense where there is contact. (should a foul be called or not)
8. Entering the lane too fast on a free throw
9. Possible travel calls
10. Carrying the ball over situations.
11. Hanging on the rim (technical or not)
12. Illegal and moving screens
13. Flagrant fouls - Is the foul a flagrant or not
14. Zone offenses
15. 3 seconds in the lane
16. Animated reaction to a an officials call by a player or coach. (These actions can be subject to technical fouls under the current rules)
17. Too many players on the court
18. All other situations that I left out that become subject to review.

Once the powers to be decide on the items that will be subject to review, which will probably take two or three years. The Player's association will obviously have to agree to the list. So what is on the list become like an other item covered by the collective bargaining agreement between the league i.e., owners and the Players' Association.

Then you must decide how many appeals a team gets and what happens if they go over the limit, just like in the NFL. Will there be a different penalty or maybe none at all, even if the team that raised the challange is over the limit, provided that the play is not overruled. Again this become a negotiated point for the collective bargaining agreement.

This to me is the worst part of the player review. Why. Because it leads to coaches throwing the flag, or however a challenge will be indicated, when they think a call is made that is important to be reversed. Not a call that they disagree with, which would be the case if there was no limit on how many challenges a team could make. I it did work like that, where there was no limit without penalty, then the games would never be competed.

So as it is now in the NFL, a lot of bad calls go unchallenged and a coach challenges only those calls that he thinks will make the difference if the call is reversed.

So you have a lot of bad calls that affect the outcome of game and few challenges on calls that may or not affect the outcome of game.

I would rather live with the coaches complaining about a call or lack of a call in certain situations rather than have coaches make decisions to review only those that the coach deems important, whether they correct in that judgment or not.