My favourites are the ones who have opinions on 'q', actually. Y'know, the bogus call that's supposed to be called "on the quarter". Yeah, you certainly know a jump was 'q', staring at your laptop...
I largely agree with you, but feeds can be streamed onto, say, 85" TVs (That's usually what I do.) Sometimes it can be easier to see if something is underrotated from a TV screen with a good camera angle than from the arena, especially if a jump is, e.g., crammed into the corner. I was kind of shocked at how much less obvious Sakamoto's flutz looked live, when I was sitting right behind the judges. I could sort-of understand the non-calls. In this case, I trust TV over live perception.
In real-time, I think it's easy enough to spot jumps that may be either q or <. Trying to separate q from < in real-time is incredibly tough, live or on camera. I cannot do it. On replay, it's easier to have an opinion. But sometimes I'm left confused even with replays.
I find it so so so so so funny, that people ramble on about how judges make mistakes and do a bad job and that ruins the sport and there needs to be more technique and even more gadgets and graphs and stuff to make stuff like GOES or jump rotations more objective.
Still exactly those fans think THEY are the ones who can always see which skater underrotates which jump and what is the right GOE or score , when THEY watch skating on their ONE screen with ONE camera angle
Sometimes they are right

, and sometimes the callers and judges eventually come around to their line of thinking. Of course, sometimes they are also just ranting in an obviously biased way (me included

). I am disappointed, and it does affect my enjoyment of the sport, when skaters like Sakamoto systematically get seven to ten points they shouldn't have because their blatantly obvious flutz isn't called when others' are. Or when a less well-known skater in the early group doesn't get GOE for excellent elements, and a well-known skaters in a later group gets fantastic GOE for average elements. There continue to be systemic problems with judging, some of which existed long before COP, and I'm glad when fans points them out. I'd probably be done with the sport entirely if I ever stopped hoping this would change.
I also think it's normal that young people aren't interested in the history of the sport. When I become a fan it was the 90s and 2000s, a bit of the 80s...I didn't ever go sit around watching skating from the 1960s or 1970s...so why would young people today watch skating of the 90s or 2000s, for them that's equally "ancient" as skating from the 1960s/1970s was for me.
I did watch old videos, and I wonder if skating from the 1990s and 2000s looks as strange, dated, and awful to "kids today" as skating from the 1960s and 1970s looked to me

. It's funny that the distance between, say, Peggy Fleming and peak Michelle Kwan is almost the same difference as peak Michelle Kwan and today's skaters. In my head, the former distance is 3x as long as the latter.