Get this: Arsene Wenger, FIFA’s Chief of Global Football Development, just came out and said the hydration breaks at the World Cup had *no impact* on how the games played out or their results. Seriously. He said this on Saturday, right before Spain and Argentina battled it out in the final at New York New Jersey Stadium. FIFA’s big review of these breaks is still on the table, which means their future in future tournaments is totally up in the air.
The “No Impact” Claim Just Doesn’t Sit Right
FIFA made these three-minute hydration breaks mandatory in every single World Cup match, forcing them midway through each half. But from day one, fans were booing these things early in the tournament. Critics went off, arguing the breaks chopped the game into four quarters, absolutely killing any momentum. Plus, let’s be real, broadcasters got over two minutes of commercial breaks out of it every time. Wenger, though, dismissed all that, saying, “No,” when asked if they had an impact. He added that while people “did not like them,” it “did not look to me that it changed the results of the competition.” He thinks FIFA is “here to serve people who watch football,” which is… a take.
Coaches Are Fuming, And They Have Receipts
While Wenger seems to think everything was fine, coaches on the ground saw things way differently. Spain coach Luis de la Fuente and Netherlands captain Virgil van Dijk, for instance, supported the *intent* of the rule for extreme heat. But they questioned why the heck they needed them in cooler conditions or covered stadiums. England coach Thomas Tuchel flat out said the breaks had a bigger impact than anyone expected and just broke up the game’s flow. And then there’s Uruguay coach Marcelo Bielsa, who went even harder, saying the breaks “added nothing to football” and completely “destroyed the sport’s cultural essence.” Talk about a mic drop!
The World Cup was played across Mexico, Canada, and the United States, meaning conditions varied wildly from extreme heat to much cooler temps, especially up in Canada and Boston. Wenger tried to explain the universal mandate, saying, “In some games it was really needed and because we did not want to make any difference between games we decided to do it.” He admitted, though, that “in some games where stadiums were covered, people were not happy with it.” FIFA is promising a “deep analysis after the competition,” but they’ve “not come to a conclusion yet.” So, will these game-killing stoppages be back? We’re all waiting to see if FIFA actually listens to the folks on the pitch and in the stands.
This article was created with AI assistance and published under Seattle On Tap’s editorial standards. See our Editorial Policy.
Leave a Reply