England kicked off their 2026 World Cup campaign with an impressive 4-2 victory over Croatia in Dallas, but the match was not without its controversy.
The jeers that rang around the Dallas Stadium were not aimed at players or referees, but instead directed at the tournament’s hydration breaks.
Introduced to help players cope with the summer heat across North America, the breaks see play paused twice per game, once in each half, for three minutes at a time.
While coaches have largely welcomed the addition, fans attending matches have been far less enthusiastic, uniting across national allegiances to voice their displeasure.
The main criticism levelled at the breaks is that they serve as a commercial tool, giving broadcasters the opportunity to air additional advertisements during the pause in play.
“The hydration breaks are obviously for one purpose and that’s big money for advertisements,” said one England fan after the Croatia match.
A fellow England supporter added: “It stops the flow. Football is about the flow and there’s no need to stop the flow in an air-conditioned stadium.”
The booing is not confined to Dallas, with Norway’s match against Iraq in Boston on Tuesday also seeing the break met by jeers, despite the temperature sitting at a comfortable 23C.
Sweden’s 5-1 win over Tunisia on Monday and Spain’s goalless draw with Cape Verde both saw similar reactions, as did the first hydration break during the Ghana versus Panama fixture later in the week.
France coach Didier Deschamps acknowledged the shift in how the game now feels, saying: “It’s not two half-times, it is four quarter-times basically that we’ve got.”
Deschamps added: “This is what’s been decided and so the players and the coaches adapt to this new reality.”
One England fan summarised the frustration many supporters share, saying: “It is like the Americanisation of football here. It is turning the game into quarters and I don’t love it.”
However, not every supporter is opposed to the concept, with some arguing that the breaks are simply poorly presented to the public.
“If they were not called a hydration break, and were called a relief break then everyone doesn’t miss a goal,” said one fan outside the stadium in Dallas.
England goalkeeper Jordan Pickford took a pragmatic view, saying: “It is good practice to have them to prepare for New York and Boston.”
Pickford continued: “It is still humid in the stadium, they are not going to stop happening, so we may as well get used to them and treat them as an advantage not a disadvantage.”
Defender Nico O’Reilly admitted England’s squad felt well-prepared physically, but acknowledged the breaks do offer some tactical value during games.
“I don’t feel like we need them, we’ve acclimatised well,” O’Reilly said, adding: “They are a good chance to get information and take fluids on board.”
Netherlands captain Virgil van Dijk, speaking after his side’s 2-2 draw with Japan, admitted the breaks are “not great for TV.”
The breaks were introduced following the experiences of the Club World Cup, played in the United States, where heat proved a significant challenge for players and supporters alike.
FIFA has given no indication that hydration breaks will become a permanent fixture at future World Cups, though some fans fear that outcome is inevitable.
“It won’t be long before it becomes just a natural advertisement break,” said one England supporter leaving the Dallas Stadium after the win over Croatia.
