On reflection, accept the point about the Rogers goal not being the same as the ref blew his whistle. It's just the whole process rather than actually being aggrieved at the decision at this point. So anything within a phase of play (or even before that, as shown with our disallowed goal against Brentford) can be checked by VAR even if they cannot make a definitive decision? Just raises the question then though of why just check when there is an incident and not every time?
Brentford was bad as the camera angles could not show it was out definitely and was a bad call (even if later fan footage showed it to be correct), but pretty much yes that in theory anything between whistle blows can be checked IF it leads up to a VAR remit decision (goal, penalty, sending off). There is mention of a "change of possesion" which I suspect means if the defending team foul the attacker (under non VAR review conditions) but play continues, then they win the ball legitimately and go up the other end and have a VAR remit decision, VAR doesn't take the non-called foul into decision. I suspect the cut-off is arbituary though.
Of course it also depends on "Clear and Obvious error" and what the ref states to VAR at the time. If the ref stated "My lino is calling the ball out, however I also will not be calling a penalty as although it struck his hand, it was natually up to call for ownership of possesion and hence not deliberate block", then VAR probably would not have gotten involved.
The second paragraph is what happened though. They gave a goal kick and turned down the penalty appeal, only for the VAR official to intervene and overrule on both.
Has it actually ever been stated that VAR can check every detail leading up to an incident and as we saw against Brentford, how far do they go back? Just seems like that leaves a massive grey area where someone sitting in a room somewhere is making decisions without the means to do so definitively.
