Hydration breaks: The most controversial issue at the World Cup

Published 1 July 2026 · sports

The mandatory hydration breaks at the 2026 World Cup have sparked debate in the stands, on the pitch, and far beyond. When the group stage

The mandatory hydration breaks at the 2026 World Cup have sparked debate in the stands, on the pitch, and far beyond. When the group stage match between England and Ghana was put on hold for at "hydration break" after 22 minutes, loud boos rang out from the stands of Boston Stadium. The players trudged to the sidelines, and the coaches gathered their teams around them for brief tactical instructions. Just a few days into the World Cup, it had already become clear; no change is polarizing the fans quite like these mandatory interruptions in play. "As a coach, I would have loved it," Jürgen Klopp told DW. A few extra minutes for tactical instructions give a team a clear advantage. However, the former Liverpool and Dortmund manager also voiced criticism. "There is a problem with the length of the water breaks and what TV broadcasters or FIFA do during them." From heat protection to a bone of contention The rule was introduced officially to help players cope with the summer heat. Matches at this World Cup are stopped twice in addition to the halftime break, at around the 22nd and 67th minutes. Unlike in previous major tournaments or league games, the decision to call a water break isn't based on how hot it is, although the idea of introducing them came up during last summer's Club World Cup, when extremely high temperatures were a problem.

At this World Cup, though, the hydration break has become a major bone of contention. "I don't like this water break," an Iraq fan told DW in Philadelphia. "If the players really need a drink, they should just do it before taking a corner kick." The hydration breaks are even mandatory in air-conditioned venues like the one in Dallas Image: Kenjiro Matsuo/AFLOSPORT/IMAGO On the sidelines of the match between Argentina and Austria, another fan pointed to the fact that it was being played in a covered stadium in Dallas: "The air conditioning is running here, so where is the heat?" Not just a water break It is primarily the impact on the game that is sparking debate. In many cases, what was meant to be a brief opportunity to hydrate has turned into a tactical timeout. Coaches adjust formations, give instructions to players, and disrupt the opponent's rhythm. "On one hand, the breaks have changed the game by giving coaches more influence; on the other, they break the flow of play for the fans," an Argentina supporter told DW. Research conducted by the English newspaper "The Times" suggests this impression is not merely subjective. Using Opta data, the paper evaluated every group-stage match. A significant shift in momentum occurred in 32% of matches after the first water break, and in 26% after the second. On average, match momentum dropped by 17% following an interruption.