Traditionalism or stubborness?

Okay, I've got to admit upfront, I'm only about to rant on this topic because my team just got jammed, but I've been consistent on this position for years.

What might that position be? In this day and age, there is absolutely zero reason for baseball not to use instant replay to determine whether a ball that went out of the park just down the line was fair or foul. In some ways, I'm a traditionalist when it comes to baseball. But this is one situation where adherence to tradition just doesn't make sense anymore. (Just to clarify my opening statement, the Cubs were credited with a HR in this afternoon's game against the Phillies, when replays clearly showed the ball was foul)

I appreciate that we're probably always going to have to deal with imperfection in officiating. If humans are making the calls, humans will make mistakes from time to time. And I'm okay with that. And I'm also not in favor of any kind of widespread replay in baseball. Baseball games are slow enough as it is, I don't want to be introducing multiple stoppages for replay throughout the game. However, this one situation is where I have to make the exception, for a number of reasons.

First of all, with properly positioned cameras, you're able to a shot that will quickly and definitively tell you if the ball was fair or foul. You point the camera at the foul pole from an angle inside the foul line. If the ball disappears as it passes the foul pole, it's a foul ball, and if you can see it the whole way, it's fair. Very, very simple. One of the problems with replay in other sports is that sometimes you spend a significant amount time reviewing something, and the replay doesn't provide a definitive answer. That's not the case here. Furthermore, the reality is that on plays like this, directly down the line, which is where the 1B and 3B umpires are positioned, is one of the worst spots to try and make that call from. So, any delay resulting from this kind of review is going to be rather minimal.

Secondly, there's really not a disruption to the "flow" of the game at this point to do a review. On such a play, the batter is either going to be standing back at the plate ready for another pitch, or doing a simple home run trot. Furthermore, given the importance of the call, if it's close, there is invariably going to be an argument by one of the managers, which is going to disrupt the game anyhow. What happens when a manager questions one of those calls? The umpires conference to see if anyone else got a better look at the call. Wouldn't that time be much better spent making a quick call up to the booth to find out what the camera already knows?

Like I said (and this is true in all sports), human error is going to be a reality of officiating. I get it, I accept it. But what I don't get is why the baseball powers that be are so stubborn as to not embrace a non-invasive technological solution to what is a very, very difficult (and important) call to make.