Professor Dixon argues the biggest long-term impact may not be on the pitch, but in future broadcast negotiations.

I have absolutely no doubt that FIFA will present this as a, as a, as a rationale for increased revenue generation for any future broadcast sales at future World Cups.

I think it was a very weak defense on behalf of FIFA to say that we're not making any money out of it this time.

But the reality is this is now, I think, the, the hardest part for FIFA was to introduce it the first time, and now that they have introduced it for the first time, the tournament has not collapsed [laughs] because of it.

Uh, the- these hydration breaks are here to stay and they will be used to drive up the value of broadcasting rights in the future.

And he says having transparency is essential in this scenario.

You know, there are certain circumstances where these hydration breaks would be absolutely justified in terms of playing in hot and humid conditions.

Uh, but the conditions that the athletes are being exposed to, um, are not, are not meeting the threshold that would be of a, a, a concern to player welfare.