>Football doesn't have plays. Stopping the game to confer over decisions would ruin the tempo. The referees decision is final but he can confer with his lineman if he wants. In the US case (I didn't watch the game) the commentators here say that it was a bad decision (if anything it should have been a penalty the other way) but you have to accept the decision and move on.
>
>I completely disagree that it would affect the tempo. The National Hockey League has demonstrated that.
>
>I agree that the decision must be accepted - my point is that the players deserve a better process. The system has no accountability if the official isn't even required to specify the exact penalty. What happened on Friday was a complete disgrace.
>
>And by the way, I completely forget about France's tainted goal a few months ago - a replay process CLEARLY would have shown Henry used his hand. That one was just as bad. So two screw-jobs in less than a year is a pretty clear indication that the process is broken.

Both teams are subject to the decision making of the same referee and his/her mistakes are part of the game. Referees become known for the quality of their decision making. In fact I would go the other way. I think FIFA have become to prescriptive in their rules for referees and the referees ability to make decision based on the game as a whole have been reduced.

Think about it.You'll remember the USA game for a lot longer partly because of the referees decision. "We where robbed" will become part of US sports culture.