It is now the third season that the VAR (Video Assistant Referee) system has been operating in the Premier League but nearly every weekend it seems to create controversy.
While most fans now probably accept VAR is here to stay, there are still too many head-scratching moments.
It is somewhat ironic that before the days of VAR, part of the fun of football was all the arguments in pubs the following week about perceived refereeing blunders.
It was thought VAR would put an end to this. But on the contrary, decisions made by VAR are creating even more arguments.
As one BBC commentator wryly put it: "VAR giveth and taketh away."
For all the high technology involved, it still comes down to a human being sitting in front of a television monitor at VAR's Stockley Park headquarters making a final decision.
When Luis Diaz was flattened last Saturday by Brighton goalkeeper Robert Sanchez as the Liverpool star bravely headed the opening goal, it looked a nailed on red card for the keeper.
It was a shocking challenge with a knee and a leg into the chest of Diaz. If that had been committed by any outfield player they would have been sent off immediately without any question.
But referee Mike Dean only offered a verbal warning to Sanchez while VAR incredibly did not see anything wrong with it.
Former Liverpool players were stunned that a red card was not given.
Robbie Fowler commented: "Can't believe that wasn't even a 'check it yourself ref' … anywhere on the pitch that's a red."
Peter Crouch said: "Diaz could have been seriously injured. You'll see red cards across the weekend and they will be nowhere as bad as that."
Another big VAR talking point last weekend occurred at Stamford Bridge where Chelsea were lucky to escape significant punishment.
Newcastle should have been awarded a penalty after blatant shirt-pulling by Chelsea defender Trevoh Chalobah on Newcastle winger Jacob Murphy.
While the referee may have been unsighted there was no excuse for VAR not to at least suggest the official look at the screen for a possible penalty. After all, that's what VAR is for.
Newcastle fans were also convinced Kai Havertz should have been sent off for elbowing Dan Burn.
Referee David Coote brandished a yellow card which was probably the right decision although Magpies fans would not agree.
Havertz definitely caught Burn in the face, but whether it was intentional or not is open to debate.
Rubbing salt into the wound as far as Newcastle were concerned was Havertz going on to score a sublime last-minute winner for the fortunate Blues.
Newcastle boss Eddie Howe was not impressed with the referee's failure to review the penalty claim saying it "made a mockery of VAR."
VAR has worked reasonably well in some areas and most fans accept the offside rulings, although it is still hugely irritating when what looks to be a perfect goal is disallowed because someone was offside by an eyebrow, nose or knobbly knee.
There is also that very awkward grey area of whether an offside player is interfering with play or not, which has to be a nightmare to interpret for the officials.
The slow motion replay in itself can be a problem as it tends to exaggerate bodily contact, making tackles look a lot worse than they actually are in real time.
That unfortunately encourages attackers to go down in the area at the slightest touch.
Handball is perhaps less contentious than before although there remains a lack of consistency in its application.
What cannot be denied is that VAR takes much of the spontaneity and passion out of the game and certainly the celebration of goals has been diminished.
When their team scores, fans love to scream, shout, jump about and do daft things in an unashamed release of pure joy.
But now there is the real fear that a few minutes later the goal could be overturned by a diligent VAR official who spots some infringement that is neither "clear" nor "obvious".
Owing to the FA Cup, there are only four Premier League matches this weekend.
But you can bet there will still be a few contentious VAR decisions which will give traditionalists something to argue about in the watering holes next week.