There are two general philosophical approaches to law in the Western world. One philosophy of law is often referred to as Germanic, and can be summarized as "Whatever is not permitted is prohibited".
The other is often referred to as the Mediterranean approach, and can be summarized as "whatever is not prohibited is allowed".
An example: I think it was the prior edition of the GIRM; it stated the posture of people at Communion. The way it was written, it appeared that all were to satnd as Communion commenced, and were to remain standing until Communion was completed. that ment that contrary to prior practice, one was to stand in their pew after receiving until the last person received.
Francis Cardinal George sent a dubium (an official question) to Rome and Francis Cardinal Arinze answered that Rome had no intent of being so rigid as to posture, and that people could stand, kneel (as before) or sit after returning to their pew.
Although not exclusively, Americans seem to be generally of a Germanic approach to law.
And Last time I checked, Rome was considered to be in the Mediterranean.
Over the past several decades, there have been numerous people who have made complaints to their priests, then to their bishops, and then to Rome. I certainly don't follow everything Rome says or does, but I can only recall one time where Rome intervened (somewhere in the Midwest, if I recall correctly) and that was on an appeal which was done professionally.
The rule generally is that the bishop is the chief liturgist in his diocese, and while that does not grant carte blanche to him, Rome generally seems to give more latitude than many would claim was legitimately the bishop's to have.
Father Z has certainly made the point that "do the red and say the black" is not that difficult to accomplish. However, what often comes up when someone tries to go through the GIRM and substantiate what they believe is an aberration is a responding "That priest is not reverent", which not only ignores the differences in approach to law, but also makes a judgment call on the priest in terms of character.
What I have said is not meant to say that there are no abuses to the liturgy. We can all acknowledge that. However, not everything that occurs is an abuse. Getting ourselves involved in critiquing the rubrics is not always going to result in good; it can distract us from worship of God, cause us to be judgmental, lead to gossip and calumny, and serve no useful purpose. It is an area that people are anywhere from opinionated to extremely opinionated, and too often not as knowledgeable as they would insist.