Championship teams have turned down plans to adopt VAR for the upcoming season.

Clubs competing in the Championship have opted not to proceed with plans to introduce a modified version of the video assistant referee system for the upcoming season. The proposal had been under consideration following discussions about improving officiating standards, but it ultimately failed to gain sufficient support among teams in the division.

Championship clubs had been asked to consider bringing in the challenge system of VAR for next season

The system in question, known as Football Video Support (FVS), was being explored as a more accessible alternative to traditional VAR. It was designed to operate with fewer technical requirements and reduced costs, making it a potential fit for leagues outside the top tier. However, despite these perceived advantages, clubs were not convinced it was the right move.

Proposal Presented but Lacked Support

The idea of implementing FVS was formally introduced during a presentation by Professional Game Match Officials Limited at the English Football League’s annual meeting. Following that session, the EFL sought feedback from its member clubs to gauge appetite for adopting the system.

It quickly became evident that there was strong resistance across the Championship. Teams expressed concerns about various aspects of the proposal, and there was little enthusiasm to move forward with any form of video review technology at this level.

As a result, the concept has effectively been shelved. Sources indicate that the idea is unlikely to be revisited in the near future, with little expectation that clubs will reconsider their stance within the next year.

Existing Technology Remains in Place

While the introduction of FVS has been rejected, certain technological tools will continue to be used in the Championship. Goal-line technology, which has already been implemented in the division, will remain in operation.

There are also ongoing discussions about potentially extending this technology to lower tiers. A cost analysis is expected to take place ahead of a vote in June regarding whether goal-line systems should be introduced in EFL League One.

Managers Previously Voiced Support for VAR

In contrast to the clubs’ collective decision, several managers in the Championship have publicly expressed support for the introduction of VAR or a similar system.

Norwich City head coach Philippe Clement highlighted situations where he believed video assistance could have improved decision-making. After his team conceded a controversial penalty against Ipswich Town, he remarked that there are moments when having VAR would help ensure correct calls are made.

Similarly, former Bristol City manager Gerhard Struber pointed to evidence suggesting that VAR can lead to more accurate and fair officiating. His comments reflected a broader sentiment among some coaches who feel that technology could reduce costly errors.

Despite these viewpoints, the clubs themselves were not persuaded, prioritising other considerations over potential improvements in refereeing accuracy.

Concerns Over Cost and Matchday Experience

One of the primary reasons behind the rejection of FVS was concern over financial implications. Even though the system is designed to be less expensive than full VAR, it would still require investment in infrastructure, staffing, and ongoing operational costs.

In addition to financial factors, clubs were wary of how video reviews might affect the flow of matches. There were fears that introducing such technology could disrupt the rhythm of games and diminish the overall experience for supporters in stadiums.

These concerns ultimately outweighed the perceived benefits, leading to a clear decision against adopting the system.

VAR in Other European Leagues

While the Championship has decided against implementing video review technology, VAR is already in use in the second divisions of several major European leagues.

Competitions in Spain, Italy, and Germany have integrated VAR into their lower tiers, aiming to enhance officiating standards. France had also planned to introduce VAR in Ligue 2, but those plans were abandoned due to financial difficulties following the collapse of a television rights agreement.

These examples highlight that while the technology is spreading, its adoption is not universal and often depends on economic viability.

Understanding Football Video Support (FVS)

Football Video Support is a simplified version of VAR that has been under trial for the past two years. It is specifically designed for competitions that lack the extensive camera setups and officiating resources required for full VAR implementation.

Unlike traditional VAR, FVS does not involve a dedicated video assistant referee making decisions remotely. Instead, a replay operator provides footage to the on-field referee, who then reviews the incident using a pitchside monitor.

How the System Works

A distinctive feature of FVS is the introduction of a challenge-based system. Each team’s coach is allocated two opportunities per match to request a review of a decision.

If a challenge results in the referee overturning the original call, the team retains that challenge. If the appeal is unsuccessful, the challenge is lost. This mechanism places greater responsibility on coaches to decide when to use their reviews strategically.

Mark Bullingham has previously stated that this approach reduces the number of automatic interventions seen with traditional VAR and shifts some of the decision-making responsibility onto managers.

Potential Impact on Game Flow

Although FVS is intended to streamline the review process, it could still lead to more frequent interruptions during matches. While the number of checks might be lower compared to VAR, the use of coach-initiated challenges introduces additional stoppages.

For example, in a typical round of Premier League fixtures, referees might consult the monitor only a handful of times across multiple games. Under an FVS system, however, the number of reviews in a single match could increase significantly, particularly if both teams use their allotted challenges.

This possibility raised concerns among Championship clubs, who were wary of altering the pace and continuity of games.

Trials and Early Experiences

FVS has been tested in several competitions as part of ongoing efforts to evaluate its effectiveness. Trials have taken place in the third tier of men’s football and the top division of women’s football in Spain, as well as in Serie C in Italy.

More recently, the system was introduced in the Canadian Premier League. However, its implementation has already sparked debate, particularly regarding how it can be used tactically by teams.

Controversial Incident Highlights Concerns

A notable example occurred during a match between Pacific FC and Supra du Quebec. With the score tied at 2-2 in stoppage time, a challenge was made by Supra du Quebec following a tackle that the referee initially allowed to go unpunished.

The review determined that the incident did not warrant a red card, but the referee issued a yellow card instead. Because the player involved had already been booked, this resulted in a dismissal.

Although Supra du Quebec did not win their challenge, the outcome still worked in their favour by reducing the opposition to ten men. They went on to score the winning goal during the additional time created by the review.

This incident demonstrated how the system could be used strategically, raising questions about fairness and unintended consequences.

Decision Reflects Cautious Approach

Ultimately, Championship clubs have taken a cautious stance by rejecting the introduction of FVS. While the technology offers potential benefits in terms of decision-making accuracy, the concerns surrounding cost, match flow, and fan experience proved decisive.

The decision suggests that, for now, the league is content to continue without video review systems, focusing instead on maintaining the traditional pace and atmosphere of the competition.

Future of Video Technology in the Championship

Although the current proposal has been dismissed, the broader conversation about technology in football is unlikely to disappear. As systems evolve and become more cost-effective, there may be renewed discussions in the future.

However, based on the current position of Championship clubs, any move toward adopting video assistance appears to be a distant prospect.

For the foreseeable future, the division will continue to rely on on-field officials, with goal-line technology remaining the only form of technological support in place.