Over at Project Syndicate, they have decided enough is enough: The referees must be commented on. Am I being cynical to think that it was only after the US suffered that these guys took note? Germany earlier in the day lost because of a sending off deemed to be soft and unnecessary. Australia also felt aggrieved by the red card Tim Cahill received in their 4-0 thrashing by the Germans.
Cynicism aside, I am a firm believer something should be done about refereeing decisions, and that whatever is done, it should involve the use of technology, not more humans prone to error.
However, there is a large degree of scepticism about the use of technology in sport, with many not believing the additions have been helpful in cricket (where often even on TV replays it is not clear what the right decision is).
Any reform has to take along with it the majority of the spectators of the sport, and I remain to be convinced that this would be the case, particularly for some system like tennis where a team gets a number of challenges. That may just about work in tennis (but again is contentious), but in a team sport: Who decides when the two challenges should be used? Furthermore, can we know when a challenge is made that the TV replay will be conclusive? More often than not, TV replays in football on dives are inconclusive at best.