Replanting avulsed teeth with a doubtful long‐term prognosis due to unfavorable extra‐alveolar conditions has recently been questioned by Kenny and Barrett (1). Many factors, however, still favor replanting such teeth. First of all, reliability of failure predictors has not yet been tested in prospective studies. Secondly, preservation of even resorbing replanted teeth may offer significant long‐term advantages in preparation for definitive treatment. Also, for psychological reasons, replantation can significantly reduce the anxiety and despair of both the injured child and the parents. Furthermore, decoronation of a resorbing anterior tooth will allow it to serve as a matrix for alveolar bone formation and preserve an otherwise resorbing alveolar process, thereby leaving an environment of bone and soft tissue that is optimal for both single implant insertion or fixed prosthesis. Finally, replantation and subsequent decoronation, if indicated, appears to be cost‐effective in comparison with non‐replantation combined with subsequent repeated prosthetic tooth replacements owing to vertical alveolar growth of adjacent ridge areas, with eventual definitive implant placement or a fixed prosthesis.