The June 2025 sitting of the FIFA Football Agent Exam was supposed to mark a new beginning after some interesting in-person exam reviews. The new format was set to offer a streamlined, global digital experience. Instead, it left thousands of candidates across the world frustrated, locked out, or flat-out robbed of the opportunity they spent months preparing for.
Held for the first time exclusively online, FIFA’s transition to a fully virtual format meant every candidate had to configure their own setup: software downloads, dual-device compatibility, system checks, Secure Exam Browser installations, and exam app synchronisation. In theory, it was a way to modernise the process. In reality, it was an unmitigated disaster.
Candidates Did Their Part
This wasn’t a test people stumbled into. It was a moment months and maybe years in the making, particularly for those who have operated as agents since the regulations changed in 2015.
Aspiring agents around the world treated the FIFA exam with the gravity it deserved. They cleared work calendars. Some took unpaid leave. Many paid hundreds for preparation courses, revision guides, private tutors, and mock exams. They joined study groups, worked through hundreds of case scenarios, and memorised regulatory frameworks line by line.
They understood the stakes: this exam governs their right to operate professionally in football, to build a business, to legally represent players and clubs, and to shape careers at every level of the game.
They did the work. But when it mattered, the system let them down.
Candidates logged in early. Devices tested. Internet speeds checked. Cameras working. Mics working. Yet the platform failed them.
“Everything works on my end but they couldn’t connect my computer to share the screen. I wasn’t able to take it. What a waste.”
“The invigilator’s screen froze, the session disconnected and he couldn’t give me the PIN. I stayed restarting over and over until it finally worked, 20 minutes in.”
These weren’t isolated glitches. They were global and systemic. Entire exam sessions collapsed due to technical malfunctions. Screens froze. Audio cut out. Invigilators lost connection or couldn’t assist. Basic functionality, like the search bar in an open-book exam, disappeared without explanation.
“When I finally joined, only 35 minutes were left. I told the invigilator. Nothing they could do.”
“My study materials disappeared 25 minutes before the end. So I had to go from memory. The invigilator just shrugged.”
Some candidates were logged in, present, and prepared, but couldn’t even begin.
Others fought through system crashes only to see their hard work wiped out mid-exam due to bugs and poor platform design.
“I noticed that upon scrolling, some answers had disappeared. I had to go back and re-enter them.”
“The bar froze halfway through. I couldn’t search anything. It’s an open-book exam where you can’t open the book.”
One candidate put it bluntly:
“Deplorable exam conditions that are totally inexcusable.”
Poor Support and Unequal Conditions
For many, the tech issues were compounded by inadequate, or at times, hostile, invigilation.
“I tested my camera and mic before joining. All worked. Then the invigilator accused me of being unprepared. No support, just blame.”
“When I couldn’t share my screen, I asked if I could resit later in the day. She said no, wait until next year.”
Some invigilators never turned up. Others left mid-session. In several cases, it was the invigilator’s platform that failed, not the candidate’s.
“My invigilator was supportive, but he couldn’t send the PIN. I waited 25 minutes with the app open before it worked again.”
There were also clear inconsistencies between candidates. Some had working search functions. Others didn’t. In an exam where the regulations are hundreds of pages long, that’s not just an inconvenience, it’s a fundamental inequality.
“I didn’t have the search bar. Others did. Isn’t this supposed to be a level playing field?”
The confusion didn’t end with technical problems. Several candidates reported misleading questions that didn’t fairly test their understanding of the regulations.
“You could fully understand the concept, but still drop a mark because the wording was intentionally confusing. What’s the point of that?”
A Heavy Financial and Emotional Toll
Beyond the exam itself lies the real cost, emotional, financial, and professional.
Candidates paid substantial entry fees. Many invested in expensive study courses. Some travelled abroad to take the exam from more reliable internet environments. Others paused work commitments or turned down client opportunities while preparing.
Now, under the current system, they may have to wait a full year to try again.
“It’s shameful. We did everything we could. We were prepared. This was out of our hands.”
“FIFA stripped away our chance to even sit the exam. It’s not fair, people’s livelihoods are on the line.”
“They must add another sitting this year. It’s not optional anymore. It’s necessary.”
What Needs to Happen Now
This goes beyond technical glitches. It’s a question of fairness, accountability, and the credibility of a system that regulates careers and licenses in the most powerful sport on the planet.
FIFA cannot proceed as if this was a minor inconvenience. The agent exam isn’t just a test, it’s a gateway. For many, it’s years of study, sacrifice, and investment in a future within football. And that future was taken out of their hands by a system failure they couldn’t control.
FIFA must immediately commit to running a second exam sitting this year. One annual attempt is no longer good enough, not after this breakdown. Dozens, possibly hundreds, of well-prepared candidates were denied the opportunity to take the exam through no fault of their own. Their careers are now on hold indefinitely.
That’s unacceptable.
A re-sit is not a bonus. It’s a bare minimum. FIFA owes it to the individuals affected, and to the integrity of the profession, to put this right.