hydration

“So close to glory.”

That’s how Iván Barton described the moment he heard his last name called during the 2026 World Cup referee assignment meeting. It wasn’t to ask a question or to correct some administrative detail.

The next sentence changed his career forever: “Barton, your match is France vs. Spain. … After that, I didn’t hear anything else. I didn’t even know who my assistant referees would be.” The World Cup semifinal — one of the biggest matches a referee can officiate — had just been entrusted to the Salvadoran.

“It’s like going into shock, but a good kind of shock. ‘This is happening — it’s really happening.’ Reaching a semifinal is coming within a hair’s breadth of glory, because after a World Cup final, there’s nothing left,” Barton said.

Referee Iván Barton issues a yellow card to France’s Adrien Rabiot during a World Cup semifinal match against Spain on July 14 in Arlington, Texas.

(Lars Baron / Getty Images)

There’s one detail in that scene that captures the magnitude of the moment. While waiting for the meeting to begin, Barton was checking the airline’s app on his phone. His ticket was still scheduled for a return flight to El Salvador the next day. He had already started packing, convinced that his World Cup was over.

“I was already mentally preparing to fly back to El Salvador the next day,” Barton recalled. “When I heard ‘Barton,’ I thought, ‘What happened?’ Then they said, ‘Spain vs. France, semifinal.’ I didn’t even hear the names of my assistants.”

The first thing he did after that was call his wife.

“That’s when the tears of joy came,” he said. “It was also a moment to thank God for what was happening and immediately start preparing for the match.”

For the first time, both World Cup semifinal matches were officiated by CONCACAF referees. Barton officiated the France-Spain match, while American Ismail Elfath refereed the England-Argentina match. The confederation described both appointments as an unprecedented event for the region.

Barton said he fulfilled a dream working during the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, but he and other CONCACAF referees were determined to show their ability to call the most important games.

“Qatar meant making a dream come true. Making it to 2026 was a huge challenge because the bar had been set very high,” Barton said. “There were high expectations. We approached it with a great sense of responsibility and humility.”

When the tournament ended, the feeling was different from that of his first World Cup.

“I feel happy, very proud to have placed our little El Salvador flag practically at the very top of world soccer,” he said. “That’s what fills me with the most pride. We continue to open doors not only for my country, but also for the entire region and for CONCACAF refereeing.”

The red card that made history

Among the four matches Barton officiated, the Turkey-Paraguay game went down in history at the 45+3-minute mark.

During a confrontation between Miguel Almirón and Turkey’s Mert Muldur, the Paraguayan star covered his mouth while speaking aggressively to his opponent.

Barton had to review the play via VAR, and as stipulated by the new amendment to Law 12, the incident resulted in a red card, since the situation had elements of confrontation and the gesture served to conceal provocative, derogatory or inflammatory communication.

The review confirmed his interpretation.

Referee Iván Barton issues a red card to Miguel Almirón for covering his mouth while confronting another player during a World Cup match.

(Dean Mouhtaropoulos / Getty Images)

Almirón became the first player sent off in a World Cup under this new provision.

For Barton, however, the story isn’t simply about a player covering his mouth.

“People get confused. It’s not just the act of doing it; it’s doing it in a confrontational situation against an opponent. That’s what changes the picture,” Barton explained.

Clarity is important.

The amendment aims to prevent players from hiding insults or other abuse — including discriminatory remarks — behind their hand, arm or jersey.

In Almirón’s case, Barton believed the conditions were met.

“In that match, it was clear that it had occurred during a confrontational situation in which the players were facing off,” Barton explained. “Seeing it on the VAR footage was clear. It was evident, and at no point was there any doubt about the decision that had to be made.”

The incident occurred shortly before halftime, when Paraguay was leading 1-0. The red card left Paraguay with 10 players for the entire second half, but the team went on to win the match 1-0.

For Barton, the red card illustrates something he believes the public still misunderstands: VAR does not eliminate the need for the referee to interpret the rules.

“VAR isn’t there to eliminate 100% of errors,” he said. “Errors will always be part of soccer because there are many issues open to interpretation, and that’s what the referee is there for — to interpret them.”

Breaks that changed the pace of the matches

There was another major change fans protested during the World Cup — the hydration breaks.

FIFA decided that during the 2026 World Cup, there would be a three-minute break midway through each half, regardless of the temperature or stadium conditions. The referee was required to stop the match around the 22nd minute of each half.

The decision was motivated by concerns about player welfare in some of the hottest venues and a committee agreed it would be best to use the breaks universally rather than whenever the weather conditions required it to assure no teams were hampered by not getting breaks, but the debate did not go away.

In some cases, the breaks interrupted the flow of the game just as a team was starting to take control.

Barton understands that criticism, but he also doesn’t believe the break necessarily has a favorable or unfavorable effect on a team.

“Team A is attacking, attacking, attacking Team B. Obviously, it won’t be beneficial for Team A because they’re at their peak. For Team B, it will be,” he said.

The scenario can change in the second half.

“And what if, in the second half, the roles are reversed and it’s Team B that’s attacking Team A? For Team A, it’ll be beneficial. It’s very relative. I don’t think you can generalize whether it’s positive or not because it depends on the circumstances of the game.”

There’s also a difference between analyzing the break from the spectator’s perspective and doing so from the field.

As a referee, Barton found an immediate benefit.

“For us as referees, it’s beneficial because having a break to rest a bit, regain our strength and get feedback from our colleagues to see if anything needs adjusting — well, of course that’s positive,” said Barton. “In the United States, summers are extreme and it often becomes very difficult to say, ‘In this game, yes; in this game, no,’ because that undermines the consistency that the application of a rule must have.”

The stars’ last names don’t change the rule

What happens when the player who needs to be disciplined is named Kylian Mbappé, Lionel Messi, Lamine Yamal or James Rodríguez?

In a stadium, those names carry weight. On the lineup sheet, according to Barton, they don’t.

“As a referee — contrary to what many people might think — you detach yourself from many situations, from the noise, from the pressure,” he said.

That doesn’t mean the referee is unaware of who’s on the field. According to him, it means he can’t let a player’s name influence his decision.

“On the field, there are no big names, no big teams. You see 11 players against 11 players,” Barton said.

The Salvadoran had already officiated games featuring Messi during his career in various tournaments and at the 2026 World Cup, he faced some of the most renowned soccer players on the planet.

“At no point do we think, ‘I’m not going to speak to him firmly or show him a card because it’s this player.’ No, absolutely not,” Barton stated.

The rules must apply equally to everyone.

“If you see an incident, a foul or something someone did, you make a decision regardless of who it is,” Barton said.

Barton explains the relationship in a way that makes it clear it’s not about ignoring the players’ status in the sport. It’s about understanding that, for those 90 minutes, roles are clearly defined.

“Obviously, we respect them for what they’ve achieved, for what they represent in soccer, but when it comes to applying the rules of the game, we see 11 players against 11 players — and that’s it,” he said.

Taking El Salvador to the biggest stage

Barton speaks little about himself and a lot about his country. Every assignment, he explains, ceases to be an individual endeavor.

“The higher you climb a mountain, the stronger the wind blows. The harder it is to maintain your balance,” he said.

His philosophy has changed little since he began his career.

“I haven’t achieved these things on my own. There’s a huge team behind me. … My family, CONCACAF, FIFA, the people who have always supported me,” Barton said.

The Salvadoran acknowledges that, during international competitions, he often finds that there are still people who don’t even know where El Salvador is located.

“When you get to competitions at this level, there are people who can’t even locate our country on a map,” Barton noted. “Serving as a means for others to learn about El Salvador and ensuring that representation is dignified is one of my greatest responsibilities.”

There’s a common perception among fans that FIFA assigns the matches each referee will officiate from the very beginning of the tournament.

Instead, each assignment depends on the performance shown during the previous match.

France captain Kylian Mbappe and Spain captain Rodri pose with referee Iván Barton and match officials before a World Cup semifinal.

(Florencia Tan Jun / Getty Images)

“First, you have to earn a spot in the World Cup. Then you have to earn the privilege of officiating a match. And after that, it depends entirely on how you perform in that match,” Barton said. “It’s just like the teams. No one is guaranteed to advance. Game by game, you prove whether you deserve to stay in the competition.”

After each match, there are technical sessions during which every major match decision is analyzed.

“We have debriefing sessions to review what we did well and what we need to improve,” he said. “We also work with a technical staff that conducts tactical analyses of the teams to prepare for the different scenarios a match might present.”

Although the semifinal against France and Spain holds a special place in his heart, Barton recalls other World Cup moments that will likely stay with him forever.

“The four walkouts before the matches were impressive. Hearing the World Cup anthem and walking out of the tunnel was always special,” he said.

“When the final whistle blew in the semifinal, I felt like I’d written my name into soccer history by representing my country. It was one of the most sublime moments of my career.”

Unlike many public figures, Barton decided to stay virtually off social media before and during the World Cup.

“Our minds are what we choose to feed them. If we feed them garbage, we’ll end up thinking that way,” he said.

Barton only opened official accounts after the tournament — and, according to him, not out of personal interest.

“There were too many fake profiles impersonating me,” Barton said. “I’m not swayed by flattery, just as I’m not affected by insults. … I’ve faced the most attacks in my own country, not abroad,” Barton confessed.

Even so, he insists on always responding with the same message.

“Behind the referee is a human being. There’s a father, a husband, a son,” he said. “It’s fine to criticize the work, but don’t cross the line into personal attacks.”

Managers and coaching staff are allowed to discuss tactics with their players while the breaks are taking place.

Infantino said: “The main reason [for the breaks] is the heat, but we also have to understand that in a competition like the World Cup, played over 39 days, with teams potentially playing eight matches in those 39 days, having a moment to rest is extremely important.

“What matters even more to us is ensuring that all teams, in every match, are playing under the same conditions.

“And it’s very difficult to accept that a coach might have the opportunity to influence a match by making adjustments simply because it is hotter, while in another match, where the temperature is slightly lower, the same coach does not have the same opportunity.

“We want to ensure equal conditions for everyone and that’s why these breaks are implemented in every match.”

Experts have told BBC Sport an average 30-second World Cup advertising slot on Fox Sports costs between $200,000 (£152,000) and $300,000 (£227,000), rising to $750,000 (£567,000) during USA matches and the final stages.

That means advertising during hydration breaks is likely to generate more than $250m (£189m) in the USA alone.

Fox has adopted a new split-screen approach to ads during the World Cup’s mandatory hydration breaks, after a stir among viewers over how it had been handling the pauses.

At the start of the tournament, the network aired full-screen ads during the three-minute breaks, cutting away from the field during the opening match between Mexico and South Africa. Soccer fans complained that they were missing on-field action, and the backlash mounted.

By the Mexico-South Korea match last week, Fox had changed course, running split-screen advertisements for the first time: two side-by-side panels, one keeping the camera on the stadium while the other played a commercial. The approach hasn’t been consistent, though. For Friday’s U.S.-Australia match, the network reverted to full-screen ads.

Fox declined to comment on the changes.

Viewers were quick to notice the split-screen format and weigh in on social media. “At least FOX stopped doing the stupid full screen breaks,” one user wrote on X. “I can live with split screen.”

The World Cup has posted substantial ratings gains for Fox.

Throughout the first 16 telecasts of the tournament, the network is averaging more than 6 million viewers from Fox and Fox Sports 1, up 128% from 2022’s World Cup in Qatar. The broadcast of the U.S. team’s first game this month was the most-watched FIFA Men’s World Cup telecast in English in U.S. history, with more than 18 million views, according to the network.

The hydration break itself is new to the World Cup. FIFA announced it in December as a way to protect players’ health in the summer heat. In every match, the referee is to call for a break around the 22-minute mark of both halves, regardless of the weather.

In addition to helping the players, these extra minutes created a new advertising window. Networks are allowed to leave the on-field action 20 seconds after the referee signals the hydration break and return 30 seconds before play resumes, allowing for ads of up to two minutes and 10 seconds in total. They can air any full-screen ad they’d like, or run a split-screen ad — though a split-screen has to feature a FIFA partner, such as Coca-Cola or Adidas.

Ads during the tournament’s earlier games reportedly cost around $200,000 for a 30-second slot. The price jumps to $750,000 when the U.S. is playing, according to the Wall Street Journal.

When any rules change in televised sports, the most dedicated fans are going to get upset, said Patrick Rishe, the director of the sports business program at Washington University in St. Louis. Despite all the online uproar, he said that the hydration breaks are overall beneficial, as they allow networks an extra opportunity to recoup revenue and brands to get additional exposure.

“This is commercially fantastic for FIFA and the networks. It’s tactically helpful for the teams, and I do think it’s helpful for growing interest in the sport,” Rishe said. “It makes it easier for the casual fans to stay engaged.”

England head coach Thomas Tuchel has admitted he is not a fan of the controversial hydration breaks being used at the World Cup.

Tuchel, 52, was speaking before England’s second Group L game against Ghana in Boston on Wednesday (21:00 BST), where rain and cool temperatures are forecast.

England’s fans started the now customary jeering of the breaks when play was stopped in the first half of their opening game against Croatia in Dallas, despite the match being played under a roof in an air-conditioned arena.

The breaks will continue to be used in Boston irrespective of the weather, but Tuchel expressed his reservations about them and the impact they are having on games.

“I think that it interrupts and changes the identity of a football match much more than I thought. I had hydration breaks before when it was really, really hot and needed, but they were shorter,” Tuchel said.

“They were shorter and they were just in a few matches. In the interests of fairness here, it is now done in every match for every team.

“It breaks the match almost in four quarters. And I think it changes the characteristic of the match more than I thought.”

This was not the first game where boos have been at the hydration break, and the wave of dislike for them among fans appears to be gathering momentum.

On Tuesday, during Norway’s match against Iraq in Boston, the pause in play was greeted by boos from the crowd, with the temperature a more than manageable 23C at the time.

It was goalless just before the break but Iraq conceded four minutes after play resumed, and went on to lose 4-1.

There were loud boos for the pause during Sweden’s 5-1 thrashing of Tunisia on Monday and Spain’s goalless draw with Cape Verde on the same day, with that game played in the air-conditioned Atlanta Stadium.

And after England’s win against Croatia, the first hydration break during the match between Ghana and Panama was also greeted by jeers.

The hydration breaks have effectively turned games into four quarters rather than two halves, a concern for some of those England supporters who booed the break.

“It is like the Americanisation of football here,” said one.

“It is turning the game into quarters and I don’t love it. I get why people were booing and I was one of them.”

But some supporters do think there are benefits to them.

“I think they are badly marketed,” said another fan.

“If they were not called a hydration break, and were called a relief break then everyone doesn’t miss a goal.

“I think we have to think about it in a new way, corporate [bodies] get what they want, we get what we want and everyone is happy.”

So who are the losers, besides fans who have forked out high prices for tickets to see free-flowing, entertaining football – only for the game to be stopped in each half?

Well, World Cup debutants Curacao were in dreamland after equalising to make it 1-1 against Germany shortly before a first-half drinks break in Houston on Sunday.

However, the smallest nation ever to play at the World Cup, by size and population, were not the same when play resumed and lost 7-1 after the drinks break allowed the Germans to regroup.

The Czech Republic were on top during the first half against South Korea, but the hydration break abruptly ended that spell of pressure, and when play resumed, they lost momentum.

Despite taking the lead, they ended up losing the game 2-1.

Meanwhile, the Netherlands led Japan 2-1 going into the second-half hydration break in Arlington, Texas, on Sunday. They failed to hold on and drew 2-2.

Hydration breaks are not always the cause of these momentum shifts, of course.

But the further we go into the tournament, the more it should become clear whether the interruptions are becoming a major factor.

Former Arsenal and England forward Ian Wright made it clear where he stood on the breaks.

“I just think it’s another way of getting adverts into it from an American point of view,” he said.

US broadcaster Fox US overran adverts, external during a hydration break in the opening match of the tournament between Mexico and South Africa.

“They’ve used the fact that it’s for the players, but it’s not for me,” added Wright.

While the breaks have their detractors, there are others who believe they are a positive introduction.

“I am always interested in the health of my players. I think it’s the right measure, a pause, freshen up and continue,” said Spain boss Luis de la Fuente before his side’s opening game against debutants Cape Verde on Monday (17:00 BST).

That match is taking place in Atlanta where the venue has a retractable roof and is temperature controlled.

“Tomorrow, it’s chilled temperatures in the stadium,” added De la Fuente on Sunday.

“Throughout the week, we’ve seen huge temperatures. It’s very difficult to be exposed to these temperatures for so long when you’re working.

“In my opinion, the best thing to do is to drink lots of water. Take a break, let them breathe for a few seconds.

“It’s not going to be that hot [on Monday] but we need to let them breathe and then one or two minutes to give them a couple of directions.”

Five goals, four water breaks, three red cards and a glittering opening ceremony.

The World Cup 2026 opening day delivered everything you could ask for.

From an early thunder strike to a late winning goal, Thursday was filled with drama, stretching from Mexico City to Zapopan.

Al Jazeera breaks down the key takeaways from the 2026 FIFA World Cup’s day 1:

Is this going to be the World Cup with the most red cards?

The three red cards brandished to Yaya Sithole, Themba Zwame and Cesar Montes during Mexico’s 2-0 win over South Africa were an unusual sight at a World Cup.

In the last two editions, Qatar 2022 and Russia 2018, only four red cards were handed out during the entire tournament. This year’s World Cup opening game nearly matched that singlehandedly.

With officiating at the start of the tournament usually setting the tone for the rest of the campaign, the sequence of sending offs at Estadio Azteca could be repeated several times during the 39-day, 104-match spectacle in North America.

Thursday’s three reds fell just one short of the record of four at a World Cup 2006 game, nicknamed the “Battle of Nuremberg”, between Portugal and the Netherlands.

The record for the most red cards – 28 – was also set at the same tournament in Germany.

Controversial VAR at the centre of debate again

The look of confusion and disbelief among South African players after Zwane was sent off for flinging an arm into Mexico’s Roberto Alvarado’s face prompted the debate: Is Video Assistant Referee (VAR) playing spoilsport again?

Referee Wilton Sampaio did not initially pull out the red card, but after being sent to the pitchside monitor by VAR, Sampaio decided to send Zwane off.

While the replays were unclear, it seemed Zwane was trying to move past Alvarado, but his hand caught the Mexican’s face in the process.

Zwane was ultimately booked for “violent conduct”, a controversial decision, which seemed harsh given it was not an obvious call. South Africa coach Hugo Broos was not convinced by it, either.

“The second red card, I think the Mexican player blocked my player,” Broos said in the post-match media conference.

“It’s the position of the referee, and we have to accept it also, but I don’t think [it was a red], it was too soft to give that as a red card.”

Hydration breaks or momentum killers?

The introduction of fixed hydration breaks – one in each half – came into effect for the first time at the World Cup on Thursday, and attracted early criticism from viewers and coaches alike.

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.

US head coach Mauricio Pochettino had a mixed opinion over the three-minute breaks, which are held regardless of weather conditions and introduced by FIFA to prioritise player welfare.

“I don’t like it. I only like it when the conditions are very extreme, but when the conditions are good, it is not necessary to have water breaks,” he said during a news conference on Thursday.

“For me, it’s 50-50. For coaches and staff, it’s a chance to make some changes or fix problems. But it’s part of the game, and we accept that.

“I don’t agree with it, but it’s not a big issue and won’t have a big effect on the games,” he said, adding that he did not watch the opening game.

Son Heung-min misfires, but South Korea prevail

Son Heung-min has often been the hero of the South Korea national team on the biggest stage, but on Thursday, even though the talisman got the lion’s share of the chances, he failed to score in their 2-1 win over Czechia.

Son worked seamlessly with the impressive Lee Kang-in and Lee Jae-sung to create a host of first-half chances, with the trio combining darting runs through the middle with a succession of dangerous pass-and-go moves that they just could not finish.

But Oh Hyeon-gyu and Hwang In-beom stepped up to the occasion, bagging a goal each to steer the Koreans to a dramatic late comeback win over Czechia.

South Korea vs Czechia: A clash of styles

Even though both teams opted for a 3-4-3 formation, there was a stark difference in their systems and approach.

South Korea played a fluid, possession-based style of football, while Czechia were heavily reliant on dead balls, opting for a rugged, route-one tactic.

Although the Czechs broke forward first with direct, physical play, the Koreans – buoyed by a largely Mexican crowd rooting for them – bounced back with their dominance of possession and stylish play, getting the better of their set-piece specialist opponents.