But the VAR should be doing that anyway. Generally, what does the referee going "maybe I missed something there" add to the process?I don't think it's inconsistent at all. "I've got nothing because I didn't see ball hand contact. But I was shielded--double check for me."
And I don't think we know when an R asks about review--goes through the headsets and could be in the background where we don't see/hear.
Ironically, this example we're talking about is actually one of the few where it could have helped: the referee could have enforced a delay on the corner because he was asking for a check. But he didn't*, so my initial point still stands - the VAR carrying out their initial check will take an amount of time, and any system that relies on that amount of time passing before the next natural restart has introduced a pointless inconsistency.
In a "fair" game, this penalty would have been given. It's VERY obvious on the right replay and would have been just as obvious to the VAR. Why are we defending a system that adds this element of chance when we could at least be open minded to considering a system that makes the game easier for and less about the referees?
*possibly out of a fear that if he delayed the game to ask for a check that came to nothing, he would have denied Dortmund a quick corner opportunity for no reason?