I would suggest there is far more evidence for my suggestion Willo than an argument against. The words 'demonstrably' comes to my mind!

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

But VAR doesn’t happen at pace does it

There is of course pressure to arrive at a decision which doesn't take an eternity but I can only repeat that subjectivity can enter the equation and there can be nuances between incidents.

Of course I am exaggerating and somewhat parodying the usual cries heard from football fans though have to disagree now VAR is in use.

The pressure is huge yes. A referee cannot see everything, at every angle, all of the time of course not. Some decisions will have to be made subjectively yes. The referees are operating under pressure/incentive from 'bigger clubs'/the FA/corporations/other influences - about as provable as it is possible to dismiss entirely. The manner in which the match is officiated will always be down to the referee's prerogative which therefore inevitably will always be open to scrutiny and usually have more attention from the 'aggrieved' side, yes.

Ultimately, with VAR now in usage the basis of, and motivation for the implementation is one that would suggest the officiating of games is more accurate and officials are less open to scrutiny. We are not seeing this and have a catalogue of controversies and bad decisions each week. It may even be worse now.

Now, I am inclined to suggest that the further upon further complication of the rules has made things a lot harder and certainly not any clearer. This has made referees lean further towards application of frequently ambiguous wordings as opposed to their own opinions on footballing decisions. Everybody always now refers to 'the rules' as if we're playing an entirely different game now.

My final stance however is that whilst all the above is relevant, I feel as though referees too frequently make decisions which suggest bias and more so a lack of footballing understanding. The logic or thought process seems missing far too often which, along with the obfuscation of rules, has made the situation far worse. I think footballing bodies have tried to take the focus off of referees and also protect them however they seem to be making things worse. I still don't understand why referees cannot explain their decisions and are protected from accountability to such an extreme. Does not have to be in front of a camera, immediately pre-match however I think this would go a long way, especially in dismissing corruption rumours. Were I, by some unfortunate parallel universe shift, a PL referee and officiating a neutral game (wouldn't be many these days) as I should be, I would have no qualms in explaining any controversy and having to face the music where called out for not doing my job properly - in which instance I would issue an apology. All the danger that might bring must surely still be in existence and more toxic as things stand now.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

And that's the beauty of the game Willo and life in general. It is just my subjective opinion which is no authority nor guarantee of objective correctness whatsoever but I cannot for the life of me understand what goes through referee's heads sometimes and would most welcome an explanation from the individuals for the removal of any lingering, pernicious thoughts that may lead perhaps not myself but certainly others up false garden paths!

I have long opined the proclaimed atrocities are ineptitude as opposed to anything more malevolent and will caveat, especially in light of the criticism levelled at him from the most hard done by peoples in the history of mankind (scousers), that Michael Oliver for me is one referee I not only hold no grudge against but actually consider a very adept referee. I would not think that if I was so blindly committed to 'hating' upon the officials.

Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!!

It has been scientifically proven that refs are biased. The factors are largely psychological and multiple. Obvious things like home team comes into it. An interesting finding in our case is that refs favour successful teams, and research indicates that refs favour high reputation teams and players. It's not like we see it with our own eyes every week.
In the last match, when we were time wasting at the end, imagine that had been away at Old Trafford. We would have been penalised. So, the home advantage and Leeds being no bigger than us really (currently) meant we could get away with it.
Chelsea got all the decisions against us, by and large. Man City.
Usually, the games fit the pattern.

Red and Blue Army!