Hydration breaks may be necessary in extreme heat, but Cross argues they risk becoming tactical timeouts. His objection is less about player welfare than the effect on momentum, atmosphere and the traditional flow of a match.
He took a similar stance on half-time entertainment, saying: “Those bizarre choreographed shows didn't really work for me, so generally ditch.”
That does not mean every innovation should be rejected. Momentum graphics were one of the clearest successes for television viewers. “I loved [the momentum graphics]. Absolutely loved them,” Cross said, calling them “a genuine, interesting stat.”
The tournament’s ball-sensor technology also came under scrutiny. Cross felt the so-called “Snicko” system failed to provide convincing clarity during the disputed decision to rule out Croatia’s goal against Portugal.
“Well, I didn't like it,” he said. “Because basically, you cannot tell me that it helped... No chance. Absolutely no chance.”
That is the central test for any new football technology: does it make decisions clearer, or simply add another layer of debate? Cross is more positive about mistaken-identity safeguards in VAR, which can correct an obvious error without fundamentally changing the referee’s role.
Cross also backed the tournament’s restriction on players covering their mouths during conversations, arguing that consistent enforcement would quickly change behaviour. “The players will quickly learn,” he said.
The next Premier League season will show whether football’s authorities can separate genuine progress from unnecessary spectacle. The challenge is not to reject innovation, but to ensure every addition serves the match rather than competing with it.