FIFA, the international governing body for the sport of soccer, has mandated a three-minute hydration break midway through each half of all 104 games at the 2026 World Cup, creating de facto four quarters to a game that has always been just two halves. Officially, this is meant to prioritize “player welfare.” But there appears to be more to it than that. Though boosting revenue by airing more commercials isn’t a formal objective, by announcing in March of this year that broadcasters would be allowed to sell advertising during the tournament’s compulsory breaks, FIFA facilitated a change with huge financial implications.
Ostensibly, the rule protects athletes from extreme heat. Experts agree that under such conditions taking water breaks is good for players’ health. But the rule also applies in domed, climate-controlled stadiums and in outdoor venues when the weather isn’t hot. FIFA says this ensures a consistent, standardized approach across the entire tournament. But making the stoppages mandatory for all games regardless of (weather) conditions raises an unanswered question: To what extent is the change in rules also driven by a massive advertising revenue opportunity that accrues from opening up dedicated time slots television networks to air commercials during games?
Prior to this year’s global soccer event, water breaks were considered on a match-by-match basis, beginning at the 2014 World Cup in Brazil. The first such unofficial stoppage for water took place during a very hot and humid group stage match between the United States and Portugal in Manaus, Brazil. And the first official “cooling break” happened at the same tournament, in Fortaleza, Brazil. This was during a round of 16 match between the Netherlands and Mexico. The temperature reached 39°C (102°F).
The breaks occurred at the match referee’s discretion and applied only if the so-called Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature — a measure that takes into account heat, humidity, wind and cloud cover—exceeded 32°C (89.6°F).
It’s noteworthy that while the American broadcaster Fox cuts to full-screen commercials during hydration breaks, U.S.-based Spanish-language television network Telemundo has explicitly committed to not doing so. Instead of leaving the match feed, Telemundo broadcasts what’s happening on the live pitch, including team huddles, and shows replays and analysis. So, for viewers in the U.S. who prefer this format (and want to brush up on their Spanish), they can tune in to Telemundo.
In Europe, whether viewers see advertising during hydration breaks will depend on which country you’re in. Some national broadcasters prohibit such commercials. Others are introducing them for the first time to an audience unaccustomed to seeing spots at any point during a game except for halftime.
Observers suggest that the hydration breaks also offer new tactical opportunities for coaches to discuss strategy with their players, similar to timeouts in American football, basketball and ice hockey.
Other changes happening at this year’s World Cup include sideline interviews of coaches at halftime throughout the tournament and a halftime show at the final match next month, featuring among others, Shakira and Madonna.
European news outlets speak of Americanization of the sport of soccer, which is ironic given that it’s not even in the top four sports in terms of TV viewership in the U.S.
My first taste of professional soccer came in the fall of 1980. Having just arrived in the Netherlands, I wanted to immerse myself in Dutch culture. What better way than to watch soccer (“voetbal”) on television. Back then very few games in full were televised. But when they were, I watched with my host family on their Aristona black and white TV.
What initially attracted me to the game was the continuity. There weren’t any formal clock stoppages other than the half- and full-time whistles. In fact, for the two 45-minute halves, there were practically no stoppages of play for anything. This included the minutes that referees would seemingly arbitrarily add to each half.
There were no commercials or timeouts. And when someone went down with an injury, play usually continued unless it looked serious. And even then, referees seemed to regard injuries as nuisances that stopped the flow of the game. Practically as soon as training staff attended an apparently injured player, the referee would motion them to move outside the touchline so the game could resume.
As a person with an aversion to commercials of any kind, I considered this refreshing. I still do. Besides the simplicity of what is called the beautiful game, there’s something special about watching a match uninterrupted by spots.
But now this is changing, at least at the World Cup, purportedly for player safety. But I believe the adage follow the money applies here, too, as it does in most areas of life in 2026.
