Anyone with any thoughts of the officially sanctioned break in play in both halves of World Cup matches in this tournament. It was said that in the first half, a temperature at lineside of 38.8 degrees C had been montored in the Mexico v Netherlands match.
Good to see the game move into the 21st century with the development of something starting to look like a heat policy, but it needs to be monitored as it could also be the start of a slippery slope towards playing all matches (heat or not) in quarters to the benefit of commercial interests. The SBS broadcast in Australia didn't go to a commercial break during the drinks break, but I bet there were some broadcasters around the world which did take the opportunity.
A 38.8°C temperature in the sun (all proper weather temperatures are in the shade) is not too bad, it was the humidity which was the real problem.
In my opinion, a better policy would be to take some inspiration from what works in Australian Rules Football - allow the teams' trainers onto the field with drink bottles for the players whenever there is a break in play. This could apply to just a goalkeeper kick, corner, goal or injury, and it shouldn't need to be any longer than 20 seconds each time thanks to the short distances the trainers would cover compared to the 25-30 seconds AFL trainers get on massive oval grounds like the MCG or Adelaide Oval.
Alternately, FIFA could legalise players wearing hydration packs like in mountain bike racing, or carrying hip flasks. Think of the revenue that could be made from selling team-branded hydration packs
That will be like The North Pole compared to Quatar
If (and it's still a big if) Qatar happens, the conditions will be easier to handle as while the temperatures are a bit higher it will at least be a less oppressive dry heat - the sweat will evaporate and provide the players with natural cooling.
The problem last night was the combination of heat and humidity, take away either one and they would have been fine. In hot+humid conditions, the body sweats to cool itself, but when the sweat fails to evaporate (due to the humidity) the body is not cooled and it responds by just releasing more sweat which leads to dehydration.
I think it would have been too unhealthy not to. I shudder to think how much water they'd have lost although perhaps it should be earlier than 30m in?
Speaking from my experience with doing team support for a cycling team where we'd rarely see any of the girls back at the team car for more drink bottles inside the first hour, I thought it was about right - just long enough to give the fair reward to the players in better athletic condition but also short enough that none of them were in any danger. But I may be biased as to what is appropriate because of who I hang out with, the women on the team are much harder athletes than any player at the World Cup.
It would have been interesting to see what was intended if the scores were level at full time, whether the breaks before each extra time period would have been lengthened.
EDIT: I understand this was not the first match with the cooling breaks, USA v Portugal also had them.
still 6 1/4 million is a lot for Bournemouth.
