The World Cup Was Turned Into a Show with Advertising Breaks

The 2026 FIFA World Cup, taking place in the United States, Canada and Mexico, unexpectedly sparked a wave of criticism not because of refereeing or match results, but because of the new format of the games. European fans and players are outraged that mandatory advertising breaks have appeared during matches, increasingly resembling traditional American sports.

FIFA introduced mandatory three-minute “hydration breaks” in the middle of each half. The official reason is concern for players’ health during the hot North American summer. However, many are convinced that the real goal is something entirely different — extra advertising time for broadcasters.

For European football, such an approach looks almost blasphemous. A traditional match consists of two uninterrupted 45-minute halves, with commercials shown only during the break between them. The continuity of play has always been considered one of football’s main features. Now, however, matches increasingly resemble American football, basketball or hockey, where stoppages for advertising have long been the norm.

One of the first to voice discontent publicly was Netherlands captain Virgil van Dijk. After the match against Japan, he said that constant stoppages and broadcasters cutting to commercials were something he absolutely did not like. According to him, if the heat is truly dangerous for players, the breaks can be understood, but their necessity should be assessed separately for each match.

Former England striker Ian Wright also joined the criticism. He suggested that the breaks had become yet another way to build more advertising into broadcasts, geared toward the American television market.

The scandal intensified after, during one of the tournament’s first matches, the US broadcaster Fox became so absorbed in advertising that it returned to the live broadcast only after play had resumed. According to British media, viewers missed about ten seconds of the match. Formally, this was a violation of FIFA’s recommendations, according to which the broadcast should return to the game at least 30 seconds before play resumes.

Interestingly, many of the breaks were held even when it was not hot. For example, stoppages were scheduled for evening matches at a relatively comfortable temperature, as well as for games played at modern stadiums with climate control. This is precisely what led many to doubt the official version about concern for athletes’ health.

However, the innovation also found supporters. Belgium head coach Rudi Garcia admitted that the extra minutes allow coaches to adjust tactics on the fly during the match. In his opinion, such pauses become a kind of “coach’s time-out” that can significantly affect the outcome of the game.

Experts note that the conflict over advertising breaks reflects a deeper clash between two sporting cultures. European football has traditionally been built around continuous action and minimal commercial intervention in the game itself. American sport, by contrast, has for decades evolved as a television show in which advertising is a key source of income for leagues and broadcasters.

The 2026 World Cup is already being called the most commercialized in history. And if the experiment with advertising breaks proves financially successful, it is quite possible that such a practice will remain in football for a long time. But for now, European fans continue to ask: is this really about caring for the players, or is football gradually turning into yet another American TV product?