Personally I think that football is 20 years behind the times in adopting what was an inevitability. Tennis, Cricket and Rugby but 3 sports that have embraced video technology. You can't uninvent the wheel now... it's here to stay!
But give it a couple of years and it'll be fully understood by players, managers, referees and the fans. That was the case with RU & cricket. The biggest concern was that the game play would be slowed to spoiling point, but I can see that in a couple of years we will fully accept the time taken to confirm fouls/cheating and indiscernible play for the greater benefit.
One of the best uses that developed in RU was that a ref can let an indiscernible knock on that leads to a quick Try play on at the time, but query the legitimacy of the Try when play stops. At that point allowing the Try or not.
99% of VAR reviews are now considered to be correct as the VAR team fine tune their use of the technology.
They do seem to be listening to critisism/feedback, which is more likely to be to England's benefit looking back at some of the bum decisions that have seen England bomb out in the past.
It's interesting to see that they rate the referees as 95% accurate Vs VAR's 99.3% accuracy. This proves that the referees don't really need to be visiting Specsavers nearly as much as we like to think so!
As with the technology introduced into cricket, it's also good to see some of the referees are now sticking with their original 'Umpires Decision' on the field rather than feel compelled to make a reversal because they get a suggestion that the VAR team think that it could be wrong. This takes into account that neither an on field ref or VAR can be 100% accurate, so fits in well with the 'Clear and Obvious' criteria that deals with the more subjective interpretation of rules in football compared to Rugby and cricket which have by far more well defined decisions.
I reckon by the next World Cup, we'll be in full acceptance of VAR because we will all understand it fully.