Chicago Addick

This is the year when the game of two halves became the game of four quarters. And the greatest sport and event was damaged for fistfuls of dollars. Hydration breaks ruin the game’s flow and frustrates fans and viewers. If hydration breaks were solely about player welfare then they would be linked to the temperature in the stadia. It’s a nonsense having a three-minute break in an air-conditioned arena. Fifa should long ago have established a working party of coaches, sports scientists, national team doctors and Fifpro to agree a set temperature at kickoff, say 25C, which triggers the breaks. That would prove the breaks were for player welfare. At the moment, and to nobody’s surprise, it is widely accepted that these breaks are for US TV to accommodate commercials. Big bucks for the small screen. Fifa should have thought more about the effect on games and to fan (and viewer) experience when negotiating. Coaches’ desire for a mid-half tactical time-out masquerading as a drinks stop should be resisted anyway. Games have been played for 150 years without needing such intervention. Coaches can shout instructions. And who says that 22 mins and 67 mins is when a coach needs to intervene anyway. It’s nonsense. It’s about money. Respected and sane footballing voices from Virgil van Dijk to Mauricio Pochettino have spoken out against the breaks. Fifa should listen to them not appear only to listen to the rustle of dollar bills. It’s important that there is resistance to this from all over. Because if we tolerate this, our TV games could be next. BBC can’t do ads, ITV says it won’t follow its US counterparts. But it has been discussed by TV people. It’ll come one day. #FIFAWorldCup.

Advertisements in the hydration break on US TV. Who’d have guessed?