I agree it is minor, but is is an example to illustrate that the officials can and do have bias or other agenda's in their decision making. There will of course be bigger issues that will not have been openly discussed. Unless a ref wants to have criminal charges, he's not going to admit bigger fraud than that.
VAR is not a perfect system. It enables an 'extra' look, but does not prevent bias in the decision making.
When the ref goes to look at that screen, there is enormous pressure. He knows everyone in the world is seeing what he is seeing. He has to make a judgement call. If the decision is tight, and the significance great (e.g. a late penalty call), then the ref could be swayed by what he feels will be the consequence of the decision.
Ultimately, he is under more scrutiny now than before.
There is also the question of what is actually 'checked' by VAR. A couple of blatant incidents have been completely ignored.
Logged