FIFA-approved World Cup hydration breaks a 'positive' for football moving forward

News

FT Desk

One of the most controversial aspects of the in-play action at the 2026 World Cup was the introduction of hydration breaks in each half to allow the players to have a drink and regroup in the stifling heat.

They proved almost universally unpopular with supporters at the matches, who booed the intervals each time they happened throughout the majority of fixtures, including the World Cup final.

The reasoning for the breaks is that most players are not used to playing in such warm conditions over the summer period in the United States, Mexico and Canada so it was in their best interests to be allowed to hydrate mid-game.

However, cynics would say they were implemented as nothing more than a marketing opportunity as on the US coverage, it allowed for an advert break in the middle of the half.

Coaches also used the break for short tactics meetings, which undoubtedly impacted the flow of certain fixtures.

There is a fear among fans that FIFA could implement these breaks at further World Cups or even at club level, and that's just fine in the eyes of Fox Sports CEO Erik Shanks, who thinks they actually improved the sport.

He believes the rule change has made games more competitive, saying, “I think it has made the games more close,” with fewer “blowouts” scorelines, according to Variety.

In his view, the additional stoppages also benefit teams by giving players a chance “to be able to collect their thoughts” while allowing coaches time to discuss strategy. Overall, he says, “It has probably been a positive for the game.”

The Wall Street Journal reported that the advertising revenue from these breaks in play have been a money spinner for Fox Sports, which is the US broadcaster of the World Cup. It claims that the media company stands to benefit to the tune of $250-330 million – covering a huge chunk of the $485m it paid for the broadcast rights.

Infantino defends hydration breaks

The issue has proved so controversial that FIFA has publicly defended the introduction of the breaks. President Gianni Infantino has insisted that the organisation is not generating any additional revenue from the change, arguing that its sole objective is to promote equality.

“The main reason is the heat, but we also have to understand that in a competition like the FIFA World Cup, played over 39 days, with teams potentially playing eight matches in those 39 days, having a moment to rest is extremely important,” he argued.

“What matters even more to us is ensuring that all teams, in every match, are playing under the same conditions. And it’s very difficult to accept that a coach might have the opportunity to influence a match by making adjustments simply because it’s hotter, while in another match, where the temperature is slightly lower, the same coach doesn’t have the same opportunity. We want to ensure equal conditions for everyone, and that’s why these breaks are implemented in every match.

“There is no additional revenue for FIFA, as all commercial agreements were signed well in advance. So, this is not a financial issue for us. For us, it is purely a sporting matter.”