By Tom HancockAnnouncing the new measure back in December, FIFA explained: “Players at the FIFA World Cup 2026 will benefit from three-minute hydration breaks in each half of games as FIFA prioritises player welfare throughout next summer’s tournament co-hosted by Canada, Mexico and the United States.”A cynic would argue football’s world governing body are prioritising profit. The hydration breaks just so happen to be sponsored by Powerade (an unmissable detail given the size of the big screens at many of the USA’s World Cup venues – including those with air con, hardly the most parching of environments).They’ve proved unpopular with fans – who routinely greet these unwelcome interruptions with choruses of boos – and players alike. Well, at least one player, Netherlands captain Virgil van Dijk, who said: “Hydration breaks are a bit interesting because I was obviously watching almost all the games up until today, and every time going to commercial is a bit…Not really that I like it.“I think for the neutral watchers on TV, it’s also not great. If it’s really hot, obviously it would be good to put them in. But I think you have to look at it in every game, separately, in my opinion…”France skipper Kylian Mbappé offered a more balanced view: “You shouldn’t ask players for their opinion because our opinion changes a lot. If my team is dominating, it ruins the rhythm. If it’s hot, I’m happy. Everyone complains when there are new rules. We’ll have to see how it goes in the long run.”Incidentally, there was no second-half hydration break after France’s game against Iraq was delayed by more than two hours due to thunderstorms (so they don’t have to be taken?), but Mbappé is right on the money when he says hydration breaks disrupt the rhythm of the game. These aren’t brief stoppages as they should be (go pour a glass of water now and see how long it takes you to drink it): they’re officially meant to last three minutes between the referee whistling to pause play and again to restart it. It feels like someone’s hitting a great big reset button twice each match.But let’s take a look at what the numbers say about the impact of FIFA’s latest great innovation…Unsurprisingly given the expansion from 32 teams to 48, the 2026 World Cup reached the 100-goal mark quicker than any previous edition of the tournament. And of the 140 goals scored across the first two rounds of group games, 31 (22.1%) have come in the five minutes preceding or following a hydration break. Eighteen of those 31 goals have changed the state of the game (i.e. been an equaliser or given a team the lead), with the goals scored before a hydration break doing that the most (14 out of 18).Match momentum from Germany’s win over CuraçaoSix of the sides who have equalised or gone ahead in the five minutes leading up to a hydration break have gone on to win; six have drawn. Curaçao are the big outlier here, drawing level with Germany just before the first-half hydration break but going on to lose 7-1.How do we attempt to explain this phenomenon, then? Well, a sensible theory would be that teams are consciously upping their intensity for a brief period, safe in the knowledge they’re about to get a breather. Of course, either side could decide to do that, but one would imagine it would be to the benefit of stronger teams with greater strength in depth when it comes to the crunch in the knockout stage.While goals just before hydration breaks have, so far, more often altered the game state than goals just after hydration, it’s a much more balanced affair where lead-extending goals are concerned. Six of the 20 goals in the five minutes before a hydration break have done that, as have six of the 11 goals in the five minutes following a hydration break. For a team already in the ascendancy, it seems, hydration breaks might be more of a help than a hindrance – with only five teams conceding an equaliser five minutes either side of a hydration break.Match momentum from Japan’s win over TunisiaArguably no side has taken better advantage of this than Japan, who went 2-0 up against Tunisia four minutes after the first-half hydration break and made it 3-0 two minutes before the second-half hydration break, going on to win 4-0. No other team has scored before and after hydration breaks in the same game – though Canada have done so in separate matches.The argument that, fundamentally, hydration breaks are the same for both teams is a valid one, but their introduction has undeniably and unnecessarily distorted football as we know it. Player welfare is paramount – above a certain temperature threshold, such intermissions are undoubtedly necessary – but would they have been brought in ubiquitously had this World Cup not been held predominantly in the USA, home to four-quartered sports like American football and basketball?There is some good news, though: UEFA have already confirmed there will not be mandatory hydration breaks at the next major tournament, Euro 2028 in the UK and Republic of Ireland. Then again, with sweltering temperatures like we’ve seen across Europe this week, perhaps we’ll all make like true football fans and fickly welcome hydration breaks with open arms in two years’ time.(Images from IMAGO)You can follow every game from the World Cup on FotMob – with in-depth stat coverage, including xG, shot maps, and player ratings. Download the free app here.Add FotMob as a preferred news source on Google by clicking – here.