American makeover leaves soccer facing a battle for its soul

NEW YORK: The 2026 World Cup may be remembered as much for its organisational and refereeing changes as for the football itself, raising questions about which innovations will remain part of the game after the tournament leaves North America.
FIFA embraced several features associated with American sports, including mandatory hydration breaks, championship rings for the winners and an extended halftime show at the final. While some were viewed as host-specific additions, others could influence future tournaments.
The hydration breaks, introduced throughout the competition on player welfare grounds, effectively divided each half into two segments. Coaches used them as tactical timeouts, while broadcasters gained scheduled opportunities that could prove commercially valuable. However, the interruptions also drew criticism from fans who felt they disrupted football's traditional continuous flow. UEFA has already indicated it will maintain its rule limiting hydration breaks to one minute, suggesting resistance to making the format permanent.
The tournament also highlighted FIFA's willingness to reshape aspects of the World Cup to suit the host market. The 27-minute halftime show at the final, compared by many to the Super Bowl, and the presentation of championship rings reinforced the influence of the North American sports model on football's biggest event.
Refereeing generated equally intense debate. Officials were required to apply new rules and interpretations while managing growing expectations for consistency and transparency. Several controversial decisions reignited discussions over the increasing complexity of the Laws of the Game and the role of technology.
VAR remained central to major decisions but did little to eliminate disputes. Instead, debate often shifted from the referee's on-field judgment to interpretations of slow-motion replays and technical regulations. Social media further amplified criticism and conspiracy theories surrounding officiating.
FIFA refereeing chief Pierluigi Collina rejected allegations of bias, insisting match officials operated with complete independence throughout the tournament.
The expanded 48-team format also came under scrutiny. While it provided more nations with the opportunity to compete and increased the number of knockout matches, the tournament's 104-game schedule prompted questions over whether the larger format enhanced the sporting spectacle or simply served FIFA's commercial ambitions.
Ultimately, beyond the identity of the champions, the 2026 World Cup may be remembered for setting new precedents in tournament organisation, refereeing and the balance between football tradition and commercial evolution. Whether those changes become permanent could shape the future of the World Cup ahead of the 2030 edition. — Reuters