Rigid application?
With anything, from theory to practice, there is always a gap, so that when "bumped" into reality, new problems arise for people to discuss. And basically, people are more likely to criticize than to look at it from a positive perspective.
At the 2026 World Cup, one of the regulations applied by FIFA is "3 minutes of hydration break" in the middle of each half. After initial feelings, reactions have appeared.
According to FIFA regulations, halftime breaks are mandatory in the summer weather conditions in North America, with the aim of "protecting players". But many people see it being implemented rigidly. For example, when the Mexican team played the opening match at 20 degrees Celsius, then another match took place at 16 degrees Celsius, there were also matches taking place at roofed fields and air conditioning systems operating, so the break was unnecessary.
Why? Football is one of the most continuously flowing sports in the world. The excitement is overflowing. A team takes the lead, puts pressure on the opponent, they can feel the goal coming... And then a whistle blows and everyone has to go drink water for a few minutes. The team being pressed gets a free "mid-half break" to regroup forces.
In fact, on the field, when the Czech Republic pressed South Korea, the break came and the match became cold. Morocco scored against Brazil in the 21st minute, the break came, they let Selecao equalize not long after. Curacao equalized impressively against Germany, but instead of maintaining their state, the cooling break immediately suppressed all signs of their excitement. Of course, the result of 7-1 is for many other reasons, but people see that the next break is a turning point.
That is a pattern that may appear more often at the 2026 World Cup. Of course, like any new feature or addition to the rules, teams will eventually learn how to use it. If you are struggling to defend, you slow down the pace of the match, racing against time until the referee asks for a break.
A small benefit is that coaches are allowed to talk to players during this break, which can eliminate all the mysterious cramps that goalkeepers "practice" when coaches want to discuss tactics in normal conditions.
Americanizing" football?
If this is really about temperature, people can think about setting a threshold (possibly 25 degrees Celsius or higher) and only applying a break when exceeding that threshold. But with FIFA, 3 minutes, once in each half, each match, is no exception.
Analysts can say that FIFA's way of doing things is similar to the NBA or NHL leagues, like a type of "Americanization" of football - dividing the match into 4 halves instead of 2 halves, a silent and unofficial way, but very effective. Even, like the NHL (and ice hockey around the world) call it a "advertising break".
Who feels most uncomfortable? It must be home-goers. What is announced as a measure to protect the safety of players is used to earn as much revenue as possible. For those at the stadium, a 3-minute break can pass quickly like a moment when you can check your phone or run to get refreshments. As for home-goers, they may feel the rhythm of the match is broken and mercilessly commercialized.
Along with these reactions, there are concerns about the precedent that the half-time break created, especially the thoughts that FIFA is taking advantage of it to create an additional advertising framework, bringing in a considerable amount of money for itself.
