Statistically consistent methods based on the noise transition matrix ($T$) offer a theoretically grounded solution to Learning with Noisy Labels (LNL), with guarantees of convergence to the optimal clean-data classifier. In practice, however, these methods are often outperformed by empirical approaches such as sample selection, and this gap is usually attributed to the difficulty of accurately estimating $T$. The common assumption is that, given a perfect $T$, noise-correction methods would recover their theoretical advantage. In this work, we put this longstanding hypothesis to a decisive test. We conduct experiments under idealized conditions, providing correction methods with a perfect, oracle transition matrix. Even under these ideal conditions, we observe that these methods still suffer from performance collapse during training. This compellingly demonstrates that the failure is not fundamentally a $T$-estimation problem, but stems from a more deeply rooted flaw. To explain this behaviour, we provide a unified analysis that links three levels: macroscopic convergence states, microscopic optimisation dynamics, and information-theoretic limits on what can be learned from noisy labels. Together, these results give a formal account of why ideal noise correction fails and offer concrete guidance for designing more reliable methods for learning with noisy labels.