England trailed DR Congo by a goal after just seven minutes on Wednesday and looked disjointed, directionless, and well below their best. Yet a 2-1 victory and a place in the last 16 of the World Cup — where they will face co-hosts Mexico — was ultimately secured. The question now being asked is whether the tournament's contentious hydration breaks deserve some of the credit.

Tuchel turns the breaks into a tactical weapon

Thomas Tuchel is no enthusiast of the hydration breaks — he made that clear after the match. But he also made no apology for using them to his advantage. "I make the most of it," he said. "They are here, why would I not try and take advantage?"

The numbers tell a compelling story. Before the first break, England had recorded zero shots and zero touches inside the DR Congo penalty area. By half-time, those figures had climbed to eight shots and 20 box touches. A similar pattern emerged after the second break: England had mustered two shots and seven box touches before it, then produced six shots and 13 after — the period in which Harry Kane struck twice in the final 15 minutes to seal the win.

During both intervals Tuchel gathered his players around him, delivering animated instructions while his squad listened intently. "I felt today it was easier to speak to players — they were very calm, very receptive," he said. "I enjoy football more when it plays out with momentum, but the breaks are here and I felt the players quite focused in the key moments."

After the second break England pushed additional players forward, found more space on the flanks, and played with greater urgency as DR Congo visibly tired. Forward Eberechi Eze acknowledged the shift: "At times it can sort of change the momentum and give you a bit of time to breathe. Of course, we were on the better side of it this time."

Fans divided on the breaks themselves

Former England striker Alan Shearer was watching closely. Speaking on Match of the Day after the first break, he said: "I don't agree with them but it has come at the right time for England. You can see Thomas Tuchel going around all his players because not one of them has put in a performance yet."

Among supporters leaving the stadium in Atlanta, opinion was split. One England fan was unconvinced the breaks were the decisive factor. "They just figured it out in the last 20 minutes — that it would be the end for the next four years," he said. "I think that was what was on their minds."

Others acknowledged the breaks carry genuine tactical weight. "The hydration break depends on how your team is doing in the moment," one fan said. "It is something that is definitely a factor in this tournament and can change momentum forwards and backwards." A third supporter went further, saying: "All the games we have watched, the hydration break changes the game — it gives the coaches the chance to change the game. I like them."

The main source of criticism from supporters remains the sense that the stoppages serve commercial interests, with broadcasters filling the time with advertising. FIFA has confirmed the breaks will feature in every match at this tournament regardless of temperature, citing the need for continuity — a decision that continues to draw boos from the stands, even when the team on the pitch has cause to be grateful for it.