It was a perfect June night for soccer when Australia and Turkey faced off in Vancouver, Canada.
The air was cool, and fans had flown from across the world to see their two teams face off in the sides’ first 2026 World Cup match. Turkey started off strong, dominating the game’s first 25 minutes. The team controlled possession, created opportunities, and largely stifled Australia with an effective first-half game plan.
Then came the “hydration break.”
Australia used the mandatory timeout to regroup, adjust its tactics, and seize the momentum, scoring just minutes after play resumed. The second half followed a remarkably similar script: Turkey again started strong, only for Australia to find the net shortly after the second hydration break, going on to win 2-0. Australia would ultimately advance to the knockout round. Turkey, meanwhile, was eliminated in the group stage.
The ancient game of kicking an object around was codified as soccer (or football, or futebol, or 足球) in 1863. Since 1870, it has explicitly been a game played in two halves: Contestants played for 45 minutes, regrouped and adjusted in a 15-minute halftime, then played for 45 more.
But in the 2026 FIFA World Cup, the world’s most popular sport is being played as a game of quarters. FIFA’s required hydration breaks – which they say are for player safety – have become an infamous aspect of the tournament. Stadium DJs now try to drown out the inevitable hydration break boos from the crowd with classics like John Denver’s “Take Me Home, Country Roads.”
It’s impossible to know whether the Turkey/Australia match would have ended differently without hydration breaks, but it’s equally difficult to argue they had no effect on momentum. As for player safety, the match was played at night in Canada; these players have competed in thousands of games – including many in significantly hotter conditions – without mandatory mid-half breaks.
So why is FIFA insisting on extra breaks? Are they making money off of them? And why do most fans hate them so much? These questions are the topic of today’s deep-dive. Let’s get into it.
The 2026 World Cup is not the first to ever include a hydration break.
Some games in the 2014 World Cup – held in Brazil – permitted the breaks, but they were not mandatory and only permitted in “extreme heat and humidity,” as determined by a scientific heat-stress formula.
Those rules remained in place until this year’s tournament, which is being held across the US, Mexico, and Canada. Now, every game must stop and allow players to hydrate. Despite being called “hydration” breaks, players meet with coaches and trainers and are allowed to strategize a new game plan in the middle of the game. While players have always played games without the breaks – and have often done so in much harsher conditions – every game now has the two-minute breaks part-way through each half.
FIFA argues that the breaks provide the best results in terms of player health and performance: They say the North American summer heat can be intense, and health risks are a real concern. The Cup’s governing body says that implementing these breaks across all matches – regardless of temperature – “ensure[s] equal conditions for all teams, in all matches.”
Most viewers, though, seem to believe that these required breaks are simply an effort to air more commercials and bring in more ad dollars.
Let’s break down the numbers.
Editor’s Note
What’s your take on the hydration breaks? Are they necessary for players’ health, or are they just corporate greed? Let us know by replying here or leaving a comment below.
If you’ve missed our latest deep-dives, including yesterday’s on Graham Platner, you can find them below:
Thanks for reading.
—Max and Max
It feels like corporate greed, if it is not, then they should have the hydration break without showing any ads, that would prove that it is just for player safety.
Games change basketball put in a shot clock and a three pointer, American football has moved the goalposts and changed many rules over the years , baseball introduced a clock for pitchers and batters. Soccer is not immune there obviously is a need for a second referee on the field and the idea that no one knows when the game is going to end is ridiculous to most people so having two breaks to rest and discuss strategy makes sense to me.