tetraNG,
there is nothing wrong with making a 2nd attempt to land in conditions like these, provided:
1) you have enough fuel to make a 2nd approach and THEN proceed to your alternate (if you fail to land again) and
2) the wind is within limits (aircraft limits and/or specific airfield limits)
Usually, on gusty conditions when the aircraft is uncontrollable below 100', is just bad luck that you are about to flare when the strongest gust blows. But that is just a gust. If you were at the same point 15 seconds later there would not be any gust and you could probably make a safe landing. When the wind is "gusty" , gust is the "exception" of the prevailing wing. That means that you get a wind that every now and then gets stronger.
Provided the above "rules" are met, there is nothing wrong with trying again. In the ATR's case, it seems that the gust was more frequent. It is all down to the judgement of the particular captain on the particular day to "make the call". That's what he is paid for.
It is all very nice and safe to judge or question these calls in front of your pc monitor (I include myself in the last comment).
About the damaged on landing 737 carrying on to ATH from RHO .........hmmm , I don't know. Keep in mind that technically, they should "land at the nearest suitable airport". RHO was definetely not suitable! If the weather was better in KGS, that would be I think the safest option. The problem usually is that you have to think commercially as well. Grounding your aircraft in KGS (especially if you don't know how bad the damage is) might keep the a/c grounded for much much longer than necessary (lack of qualified engineers, special tools, parts , hangar).
Very interesting scenario for training!