My argument always has been that you're replacing uncertainty with irrefutably more certainty. I've never seen a sufficient argument to sway me and I've never felt that cricketers couldn't handle it that if the ball was showing to be clipping at X% (less than 50% for loose argument's sake) and was, across the board, adjudicated to be not out.I think umpire's call is fine because of that uncertainty - if you're going to overturn a decision it should be with clear evidence, not just replacing one uncertain decision with another one. But yeah that decision I feel didn't meet the threshold of certainty I feel a good umpire should employ.
I know as a fan I've felt wild where a decision has been upheld because it was just clipping, and knowing that dismissal existed because of the split second decision making with numerous swinging factors in place, not simply on technology (yes i know it is not 100% accurate)