But that's where I think the distinction comes in. In your example 8 or 9 years ago, if the official tells us that he had a clear view, we have to just accept that he believes that to be the case, however unlikely we think that is. Might be a poor, almost inexplicable decision, but there are still limits to what one man getting one view while running can do.
Now, we have VAR and therefore, we have an official who believes he took the time to look at all available angles to make the correct decision - and a football community that is united to an almost unprecedented degree in saying that he was wrong. So the question is still out there - did he genuinely take a long, detailed look at the foul and make a terrible decision (in which case, are there consequences?), or did he make a mistake and fail to fully consider the possibility of a red card, and then we are being fed a lie to try and cover it?
All I'm saying is I think this still has legs - the presence of an obvious mistake by the VAR adds intrigue and complexity to the post-match dissection in this case.