Fifa to review unpopular World Cup hydration breaks
Fifa will assess the impact of its mandatory three-minute hydration breaks after the 2026 World Cup, with the governing body’s head of global football development Arsene Wenger acknowledging the stoppages were not well received. The breaks were imposed for every match across stadiums in the United States, Mexico and Canada regardless of playing conditions, introduced as a commitment to player welfare.
Criticism and crowd reaction
Wenger, the former Arsenal manager, said “sometimes people didn’t like” the hydration breaks and Fifa will “analyse after the World Cup what the impact was”. “It didn’t look to me that it changed the results but we are here to serve people that watch football and we will come to conclusions afterwards,” he added.
“In many games, especially when the stadium was covered, people were not happy with it but at the start of the competition it was decided to do it for everybody,” Wenger said. As the tournament progressed, supporters began booing the breaks as frustration at the stoppages grew.
Broadcaster incentives and tactical use
Critics have pointed to broadcasters using the breaks to sell commercial slots, with US network Fox Sports charging between $200,000 and $300,000 for an average 30-second ad and up to $750,000 during USA matches and the final stages. On the field, the pauses effectively became tactical timeouts, with coaches running through strategic changes with players.
Divided opinions among coaches
European football body Uefa has ruled out introducing the breaks, while England manager Thomas Tuchel admitted earlier in the tournament he is not a fan, saying they “interrupt and change the identity of a football match”. Spain boss Luis de la Fuente voiced support last month, stating: “I am always interested in the health of my players. I think it’s the right measure – a pause, freshen up and continue.”
Wenger defends 48-team expansion
Wenger also said the expansion of the World Cup from 32 to 48 teams has been a success. “It was questioned before it started but we found it was ethically needed to give a chance to more teams. I am convinced it was the right decision and it was a great success,” he said.