The Football Video Support (FVS), improperly defined as “VAR on call”, is the new system designed by FIFA to help referees as much as possible to make correct decisions in contexts in which the implementation of the VAR system is not as sustainable as the Italian Serie C. Unlike the VAR, there is no room with Video Match Officials (referees who control every action). The FVS is part of the technologies that are revolutionizing the world of football and has been introduced to allow the race director, at the request of the teams, to review some game actions through specific situations through Replay. The system provides that the referee, with the assistance of a video operator, uses a monitor located on the sidelines. The decision taken in the beginning remains valid unless the images do not highlight a “clear and evident error” or a “severe episode not seen”.
How the Football Video Support works
From this season during Serie C football matches, the teams will have the opportunity to draw the referee’s attention to doubts or, according to their opinion, judged erroneously. The cases in which this request can be presented remain the same as the VAR protocol, therefore goals, penalties, direct expulsions and exchange of identity. Only in case of evident error can the decision taken initially has changed.
The main novelty, and certainly the most curious, concerns the fact that the teams themselves, in particular the two coaches, will have available to them during each game two challenge – requests – that can be expenses by delivering a badge to the fourth man. It should be emphasized, however, that if the coach was right and therefore the referee decided to rectify his decision, the call would not be counted.
Another possible scenario is that of the automatic overhaul or “overrule”. To each goal marked and in the presence of a possible objective infringement (like a touch of hand, an obvious offside and so on), the fourth man will check the images and inform the referee of the incident. If you were to deal with a situation that requires a subjective evaluation of the video, however, the referee will be recalled directly for the review (however only in the event of scored goals).
The provisions of FIFA do not indicate a maximum time interval within which it is necessary to recall the referee, therefore it will be necessary to rely on common sense and avoid any waste of time or “tactical” requests from the staff. To confirm what has been said, it was decided that, in the event of a doubtful event, the coach of the team concerned or the player protagonist of the episode will have to raise and rotate the finger in the air to take time and indicate to the race judge to wait for the resumption of the game, so as to reflect (without exaggerating) on a possible use of the FVS.
The entire system works thanks to different configurations of cameras, variables in number and type, both operated by human and automated beings.
What differences are there with the VAR system
Fifa has repeatedly underlined the desire not to replace the VAR system and, indeed, to strongly believe in this technology. The Football Video Support, therefore, was born for those contexts in which it is not possible to implement the VAR and differs from the latter in different aspects. The main difference is that there is no room in charge of the video review with specific tender officers and communication system with the referee on the field. Consequently, the revision does not take place automatically (except in the cases of Overrule), but represents a limited choice of the coach and the team to be used with seriousness and thrift.
The first disputes
During the first day of Serie C 2025/26 and, especially, in the race between Carpi and Juventus Next Gen, a controversial use of the FVS immediately emerged by the coach of the home team.
During the game, the Carpi coach used a “badge” to ask for the revision of an alleged touch of a doubt, which cost a double admonition to one of his defender. Since the episode did not fall within those subject to the football video support, the coach motivated his request by assuming a direct red against his player (more serious sanction than that assigned). Certainly of the arbitration error, the technician forced the use of technology and, however absurd, the video made it possible to notice that the foul in question had not actually happened, hence the decision to read the defender on the field.
AIA (Italian Referee Association) decreed that it was an improper use of technology attributable to a strategy not in line with the spirit of the game. The product of this story is the introduction of a new rule according to which no intervention can be requested that goes against your team.
