See, I get this. I don't think it is a conspiracy, but I find it apt that we had two controversial VAR decisions - one that went in our favour and the other did not, which is why I don't think it's anything against us, but maybe a mentality issue on VAR's part.
The VAR decision for Simms' first against Wolves. I remember my brother finding it funny that I was getting animated in the ground at the length of time taken for VAR to review the goal shouting "if it's taking this long, it's not fucking clear and obvious then, is it?" (I am usually very mild-mannered and seek reason even in the most farcical of situations - other than people choosing Leicester City as the team to support, weird).
I watched back the game, as you do, on ITVX, just to watch it from a different perspective. To my horror, I saw that VAR seemed to go back to the ball coming in, several minutes after they found no conclusive evidence that Simms had handled the ball, and was maybe looking to try to find there was an offside.
In conclusion, VAR should NOT be trying to find reasons to overrule a decision, but just double check to ensure the ref and their assistant has not missed anything, this constant checking seems to indicate a mentality issue and once you look at something, confirmation bias may creep in also, to justify the length of time taken. I also find it annoying that the "A" in VAR stands for "assistant", so why in the holy frick is VAR overruling decisions in the first place?! But that's a whole different conversation.