Referees and umpires are a key element of sports, and have probably the toughest job in all of sport. If they do their job well, they are hardly ever noticed, but if they are anything less than perfect their errors can have a massive effect on the outcome of a game and be remembered forever. Consider, for instance,
The Hand of God goal.
Therefore it behooves a team that wishes to be a champion to provide a sufficient margin of victory such that the officials' decisions -- whether correct or not -- are not the deciding factor. Although unfortunate, human error, by players and referees is an element of sport, and when one commits to playing the game one does so knowing that there is the possibility of a call being missed, or an incorrect call being made.
If one does not like this fact, one should not engage in competitive sport.
This is not to say that bad calls should not be noticed, or cannot be commented upon, merely that they are to be expected, no matter how much effort goes into trying to minimize the number that occur.
In sort, congratulations to the champions, who dealt with the refereeing and overcame the challenges it presented... even though it was not their choice to win this way, they managed to win... and condolences to the finalists who didn't want to lose this way.
Most of all, however, condolences to the refs and tournament organizers who did their best to provide a fair and fun competition, and probably feel much worse about this situation than even the teams involved do. It's not like they were trying to screw up... they just did. It happens.
So my vote is YES, there should have been a match if that is what the refs and tournament organizers felt was fair. Not the call I would have made, perhaps, but I wasn't there. It is up to the teams to suck it up and deal with the officiating, so long as it is not intentionally biased. As for the multiple gold medals idea in the olympics, I believe that has only happened in events where the judging has been shown to be intentionally biased.
Jason