FIFA president Gianni Infantino has defended the introduction of mandatory hydration breaks at the ongoing World Cup, emphasizing that the measure is based solely on sporting considerations rather than commercial motives. The three-minute pauses, implemented at the 22nd and 67th minutes of each match, were introduced to help players manage the high temperatures experienced in North America, where the tournament is being held.

Since their debut in the opening fixtures, these breaks have faced criticism from players, coaches, and fans. Some viewers have expressed frustration over additional advertising during the stoppages, which have created new opportunities for broadcasters to insert commercials. However, Infantino stressed that FIFA does not receive extra revenue from these interruptions, as all commercial contracts had been finalized in advance.

While the breaks allow teams an opportunity to provide in-game tactical instructions, some critics argue that this disrupts the natural flow and momentum of matches. England manager Thomas Tuchel described the breaks as altering the identity of football matches, and Uruguay coach Marcelo Bielsa remarked that segmenting the game into shorter periods detracts from its fundamental character.

Meanwhile, others have acknowledged the purpose behind the hydration breaks but questioned their necessity in less extreme conditions. Spain coach Luis de la Fuente and Netherlands captain Virgil van Dijk agreed that while the rule makes sense in high heat, its application in cooler weather and covered venues is debatable.

Infantino highlighted the physical demands placed on players, noting that the World Cup spans 39 days and can involve teams playing up to eight matches within that timeframe. “Having a moment to rest is extremely important,” he said, underscoring the need for consistent playing conditions across all matches. He added that allowing tactical adjustments only in hotter conditions could unfairly advantage some teams over others.

The FIFA president also addressed concerns about match intensity, stating that the breaks have not diminished the level of performance, with players maintaining high energy throughout games. The debate over hydration breaks continues as stakeholders weigh the balance between player welfare, game integrity, and commercial interests at the tournament.