But these aren't the only decisions that deriously change the game? Your idea is fatally flawed from this very point on.
That player could be miles away from the incident, all while play goes on. The system, because of the nature of the game and it's flow, has to allow an appeal, if you must have such an idiotic system, to be done practically instantly, there isn't time universally to have the captain be informed and then get to the ref. You've basically suggested a system that only works when plays already stopped, which doesn't solve the problem, which we already know because of point 1 but nevermind, lets humour ourselves.
So again, you've not solved a thing... and made a pointless sop to a)ruining the game and b)appeasing the mob desiring this who clearly haven't thought it through at all.
So you've not solved the problem and opened a new tactical problem, that potentially punishes teams for trying to do right.
What if it was wrong and the team who were in the right were already in an advantageous position?
Disagree wholeheartedly.
No, you haven't solved it at all.
I don't consider it sound.
I would require a higher standard of referees, better training, more monitoring of performance and much more harsh 'punishment' for failure, and make it a requirement the ref justifies his decision making post game in a publically available report.
And keep technology to the games that suit it.