Hey, a game theory question that we can answer conclusively with logic! These are fun
I'm going to go with quick and dirty logic because it's easy to read and the jumps aren't too big. Although if it's unclear I'd be happy to write up a longer more formal version.
--I think without the head ref bringing in subjective data always forcing replays or always allowing the affected alliance to decline them are the only two options.
--I am assuming alliances will only decline a replay if the outcome of the original match was favorable for them.
--The more consistent alliance would win more replay matches than the inconsistent alliance, so forcing a replay is in their favor.
--The inconsistent alliance is more likely to lose the replay, therefore they gain more by being allowed to decline it, so allowing declining replays is in their favor.
Assuming I haven't made any mistakes the above should be conclusive. Not comes the subjective part; I personally think consistency should be rewarded over inconsistent peaking, but that's just my preference.