Sweden's Football Chief Källström Defends World Cup Drink Breaks: 'Profit When You Can'
The Swedish FA has backed FIFA's controversial drink breaks at the World Cup, with football director Kim Källström admitting organisations are smart enough to capitalise.
SFN Editor ·
Sweden's football federation has come out in defence of the scheduled drink breaks at this summer's World Cup in the United States, Canada and Mexico, even as players and coaches from other nations have openly criticised the format.
"All organisations are smart enough, I think. And profit when you can," – Kim Källström, speaking to Expressen.
The tournament has introduced a new format that divides matches into four quarters, with a mandatory drink break in each half — regardless of whether a game is played in an open-air stadium in sweltering heat or in a fully air-conditioned venue with a closed roof. The commercial angle has not gone unnoticed. According to Expressen, American broadcaster Fox is set to earn around 250 million dollars purely from advertising aired during those pauses — a detail that drew sharp criticism from Netherlands captain Virgil van Dijk following his side's match against Japan.
Swedish FA secretary general Niclas Carlnén acknowledged that the breaks make clear sense in extreme heat — pointing to Sweden's own group-stage match in Monterrey as a prime example — but admitted the blanket application to all venues raises questions. He suggested applying a fairness principle: keeping conditions identical across all matches.
Kim Källström, the federation's football director and former Sweden international midfielder, added a tactical dimension to the argument. He noted that the stoppages give coaches a rare opportunity to deliver instructions directly to their players mid-half in a way that is normally impossible during open play.
Carlnén stopped short of endorsing the format long-term, saying conditions should ultimately determine whether breaks are necessary. But Källström's candid acknowledgement that governing bodies will find ways to capitalise on any opportunity is likely to fuel the debate — rather than cool it down.