I Hate the FIFA International Break

For soccer fans worldwide, the FIFA international break is a persistent source of frustration. Just as domestic leagues gather momentum, these breaks interrupt the season by pulling players away from their clubs and leaving fans without their favorite teams in action. Beyond the surface-level inconvenience, the FIFA international break causes serious issues for club soccer, including scheduling disruptions, increased player injuries, and a lack of accountability from governing bodies¹. The negative impact of these breaks reflects deeper problems in the relationship between clubs and FIFA, highlighting an imbalance of power and a pressing need for reform.

One of the most immediate effects of the FIFA international break is the disruption it causes to club soccer schedules. Domestic competitions, which thrive on a consistent rhythm, are repeatedly interrupted as players leave for international duty. This interference breaks the flow of the season and affects team performance. Clubs on a winning streak may lose momentum during the break, returning disjointed and fatigued. The disruption undermines competitive consistency and increases the likelihood of poor performances upon resumption.

Fixture congestion is another significant consequence. With multiple breaks scattered throughout the season, domestic leagues must compress their schedules to accommodate these interruptions. In Brazil, for instance, clubs can play more than 70 matches per season, leading to an exhausting sequence of midweek fixtures. This intense schedule heightens the risk of player burnout and injury, as there is insufficient time for recovery between matches. Furthermore, clubs contributing a large number of international players face greater disruption than those with fewer call-ups, creating an uneven playing field. While some teams return from the break weakened, others remain unaffected, directly impacting league standings and title races.

The break also hinders tactical preparation. Managers are left without key players during crucial training periods, and when these players return—often just days before an important match—there is limited time to reintegrate them into the team structure. This lack of preparation compromises tactical consistency and makes it difficult for clubs to maintain peak performance levels. Despite these problems, FIFA and its governing bodies have shown little willingness to adjust the international calendar to better accommodate the needs of club soccer.

Another major consequence of the FIFA international break is the increased risk of player injuries. The combination of domestic and international commitments places an unsustainable physical burden on players, leading to a higher likelihood of acute injuries and long-term health issues. Players returning from international duty often endure long flights across multiple time zones, reducing their recovery time and increasing the chances of muscle strains and other injuries. National teams also frequently lack the advanced medical care available at elite clubs, further elevating the risk of misdiagnosis and improper treatment.

Despite the clear risks, FIFA demonstrates limited accountability when players are injured during international duty. Clubs bear the financial and competitive burden of these injuries, even though the decisions leading to them are out of their control. While FIFA’s Club Protection Program offers some compensation, it is often insufficient to cover the full cost of lost wages and medical expenses. Moreover, FIFA regulations mandate that clubs release their players for international duty, even when those players are recovering from injury. National teams may pressure injured players to participate, often disregarding their long-term health and well-being.

The reason clubs continue to comply with these disruptive breaks lies in the power dynamics of global soccer governance. FIFA holds a regulatory monopoly over international soccer, controlling participation in prestigious tournaments like the World Cup. This power dynamic forces clubs to adhere to FIFA’s regulations or risk exclusion from these high-profile competitions. Smaller clubs, in particular, are vulnerable because they depend on the financial benefits of international exposure. When their players perform well on the global stage, it raises their market value and enhances the club’s profile. Even wealthier clubs face limitations, as the legal framework established by FIFA enforces the mandatory release of players for international duty, leaving clubs with little ability to protect their own interests.

Addressing these problems requires comprehensive reform of the international soccer calendar. One effective solution would be to consolidate international breaks into fewer, longer periods. This change would reduce the frequency of disruptions while still allowing national teams adequate time for preparation and competition. Increasing compensation for clubs is another necessary measure. Expanding the FIFA Club Protection Program to fully cover injury-related costs, including player wages and medical expenses, would relieve the financial burden on clubs when their players are injured while representing their national teams.

Granting clubs greater autonomy over player call-ups is also crucial. Clubs should have the right to refuse call-ups for players, especially those recovering from injury, without facing sanctions. This policy would prioritize player welfare and prevent athletes from being forced into physically risky situations. Additionally, fostering greater collaboration between FIFA, confederations, and clubs could lead to more balanced governance. Initiatives like the World Leagues Forum represent a promising step toward increasing club representation in decision-making processes and ensuring that the interests of all stakeholders are fairly considered.

Standardizing medical care across club and international soccer would further protect players. Implementing universal medical protocols would ensure consistent, high-quality treatment, regardless of the team a player represents. This reform would help prevent misdiagnoses and ensure that injured players receive the care they need to recover fully before returning to competition.

The FIFA international break is a flawed system that prioritizes the interests of governing bodies over those of clubs, players and fans. That’s why I hate it!