FIFA’s ability to use football as a unifying factor has arguably never been more streamlined than the collective distaste for its decision to introduce hydration breaks in all fixtures at the World Cup.

Fans, players, coaches, and everyone in between have criticised, debated, and challenged the decision that has become a major talking point of the six-week-long tournament, with a myriad of other socioeconomic, political and financial problems.

When FIFA unveiled the rule in December, it was announced with a sense of finality. The global governing body for football claimed that players would “benefit from three-minute hydration breaks in each half of games as FIFA prioritises player welfare”.

Do players prefer hydration breaks?

One week into the tournament, and it’s obvious that the players are not keen on the inaugural, compulsory, non-negotiable amendment.

Netherlands defender Virgil Van Dijk led the charge against the “interesting” hydration breaks.

“If it’s really hot, obviously it will be good to put them in. But I think you have ⁠to look at it in every game separately, in my opinion.”

Belgium’s Youri Tielemans seemed to agree, saying the breaks could work both ways.

“In some cities, it’s not that hot, and maybe we shouldn’t do it. But at the end of the day, if you do it in some cities, you should do it for everyone.”

Tielemans’s comments are in line with FIFA’s reasoning.

“There will be no weather or temperature condition in place, with the breaks being called by the referee in all games, to ensure equal conditions for all teams, in all matches,” FIFA said last year.

From a weather aspect, very few of the games have actually met the level required to need a hydration break so far, according to weather expert Everton Fox.

“New York, California and Miami, as well as the Mexican stadiums, have been hot enough, but there’s no justification for breaks at the air-conditioned arenas like Dallas, Houston, Atlanta or Vancouver,” the senior meteorologist told Al Jazeera.

“I know FIFA claim to have done this across all games to be consistent, but it’s hard to see it as anything other than a commercial venture worth millions of dollars in advertising to the US TV channels, if not billions, globally.”

Hydration or commercial break?

Much of the criticism surrounding the breaks has been aimed at the commercial benefit of the three-minute pause in action.

A 30-second World Cup advertisement slot on Fox Sports costs between $200,000 and $300,000, and can go as high as $750,000 during USA matches and later stages of the tournament, BBC Sport reported last week.

In the US alone, advertising during hydration breaks could generate more than $250 million, the report added.

Canadian right-back Alistair Johnston said what several have echoed globally: “It’s probably making some more money for FIFA.”

“Hydration break turned into a commercial break,” the 28-year-old said this week ahead of Canada’s match indoors against Qatar on Thursday, which ended in a 6-0 thumping from the host nation and two red cards for Qatar.

While some broadcasters stuck with the live feed featuring players, others cut to commercials, disrupting the match-viewing experience for fans watching on TV.

Viewers in the United States were frustrated after broadcaster Fox cut away to full-screen commercials, and they missed some live action during the second half of the Mexico vs South Africa opening match.

Momentum killers

From a purely sporting perspective, others argued that the breaks kill momentum in the match.

World Cup debutants Curacao were in dreamland when Livano Comenencia equalised against Germany in their group opener in the ‌21st minute, ⁠only for the referee to signal a hydration break soon after, allowing Germany coach Julian Nagelsmann to rally his troops to a 7-1 victory.

Other examples include Bosnia and Herzegovina losing momentum during the hydration pause.

Since the tournament’s group stage matches began on June 11, fans in packed stadiums and their counterparts elsewhere in the world have collectively booed the hydration breaks.

Social media users went as far as generating nationally stereotyping AI videos of teams during the breaks; England players enjoyed a cup of tea in flowery cup saucers, while the US team enjoyed a cookout with hot dogs and beers, and Japanese players chowed down on sushi.

Still, not everyone is disappointed with the hydration breaks.

“For me, it’s a coaching break more than a cooling break, so to me, it’s very important,” Belgium coach Rudi Garcia said.

“Maybe if we are in a good moment, in a good flow, maybe it can interrupt, so this also we will see. But during the two friendly games we played … it was interesting to give some information tactically to the team.”

France coach Didier Deschamps also said it was an opportunity to speak to his players and “adjust a couple of things” before the restart.”It’s four quarter times we’ve got, basically. The coaches adapt to this new reality,” he added.