FIFA president Gianni Infantino has directly addressed growing criticism over hydration breaks at the 2026 World Cup, stating that "there is no additional revenue for FIFA, as all commercial agreements were signed well in advance." According to reports from Associated Press, Infantino emphasized that "this is not a financial issue for us. For us, it is purely a sporting matter." The policy requires referees to stop play twice per match for three-minute breaks regardless of temperature conditions, with FIFA citing climate challenges posed by the summer tournament across the United States, Canada and Mexico as the primary driver. Infantino explained that "If we were to use hydration breaks only in those matches where it was too hot and not in the other matches, we would give an advantage or a disadvantage to some of the coaches or some of the teams." He added that "Why would the coach have the opportunity to influence the game in one match just because it's hot and in another match where it's a bit less hot, he wouldn't have this opportunity?"
The controversy stems from television broadcasters quickly transforming hydration breaks into advertising opportunities. As reported by Associated Press, industry estimates suggest a 30-second World Cup advertising slot on Fox Sports costs between $200,000 and $300,000 during regular matches, with prices rising significantly for USA games and knockout fixtures. With four advertising opportunities potentially available during every match, the breaks have created hundreds of additional commercial slots throughout the tournament. While FIFA may not earn direct revenue from pre-existing contracts, critics argue that broadcasters and commercial partners are undoubtedly extracting more value from the tournament. Infantino acknowledged that "Broadcasters maybe, they make, they generate more. I don't know, that's great for them. But for us, we make zero additional revenues." According to BBC Sport, advertising during hydration breaks is likely to generate more than $250 million in the USA alone, with experts noting that advertising during hydration breaks is likely to generate more than $250m (£189m) in the USA alone.
Several leading players and coaches have expressed concerns about the universal approach to hydration breaks. According to Associated Press, Argentina coach Lionel Scaloni and England coach Thomas Tuchel have also criticised the hydration breaks. French superstar Kylian Mbappe has reportedly questioned that the stoppages "interrupt momentum, particularly when one team is dominating possession and building pressure." Liverpool defender Virgil van Dijk has suggested that conditions should be assessed on a case-by-case basis rather than applying the rule universally. However, many managers have recognized strategic advantages, with England manager Thomas Tuchel admitting the pauses have had a bigger influence than expected, and Mexico coach Javier Aguirre describing them as football's version of an official timeout. The breaks have provided coaches with two additional opportunities per half to communicate directly with players during live matches, with managers and coaching staff allowed to discuss tactics with their players while the breaks are taking place.
The breaks have provided coaches with unexpected tactical advantages beyond player welfare concerns. As reported by Associated Press, France manager Didier Deschamps has described the breaks as turning matches into something resembling four quarters rather than two halves, allowing managers to reorganize shape, deliver instructions and adjust game plans without waiting for half-time. Mexico coach Javier Aguirre has embraced them as football's version of an official timeout, while the breaks effectively provide coaches with two additional opportunities per half to communicate directly with players during live matches. The universal application has created challenges, with some coaches and players speaking openly about it and crowd jeering the breaks in many matches. The biggest criticism has been that the hydration breaks are in place for all venues regardless of their location, including stadiums like Atlanta with roofs and air conditioning. Some matches, such as England's draw with Ghana on Tuesday, have been played in more comfortable temperatures and others staged inside air-conditioned stadiums with a roof.
The debate over hydration breaks may extend beyond the 2026 World Cup as climate concerns and operational advantages continue. According to Associated Press, climate concerns are unlikely to disappear with summer temperatures continuing to rise, and future World Cups may face similar challenges. While FIFA insists the breaks exist solely to protect players and create equal conditions, the wider World Cup ecosystem is monetizing them through additional advertising inventory and operational value. The maiden 48-team affair has introduced hydration breaks for the first time, making this tournament a test case for future World Cup formats. Infantino explained that one of the main reasons for having breaks in every match is to create "equal conditions" for all competing nations, noting that "in a competition like the World Cup, played over 39 days, with teams potentially playing eight matches in those 39 days, having a moment to rest is extremely important." The distinction between FIFA's sporting intentions and broader commercial benefits may continue to fuel criticism despite Infantino's clarification.
