Tyler Adams did not concede a penalty against Everton
This despite his maybe having committed a foul in the box. He stuck his trail leg out, there appeared to be some contact, and the attacker went down. It was close, but the referee said play on.
Part of the reason the referee let it go was something Adams did in the first half. He’d gotten some tugs, and so threw himself to ground in Everton’s box.
There were appeals for penalty, but it wasn’t given. Fair enough. But that fairness would need to be matched later. And it was.
Teaching moment
This is a good teaching moment if you coach kids. Integrate into one of your regular talks about the importance of always diving whenever you take any type of contact in the box.
Use this Tyler Adams example to explain why you should still dive even when you don’t think the referee will call it. “Unsuccessful” dives protect you against penalty infractions you might commit in the future.
Discussion: If Tyler doesn't dive in the first half, then the referee will not remember the illegal tugging the Everton player was doing. Now come the second half maybe the referee doesn't think twice about giving a soft penalty to Everton. Does that seem fair?
Takeaway: Tyler's dive was good and right because it defended fairness for his teammates. Are you prepared to defend fairness for your teammates? You should always dive. It is wrong not to.
Sharing and discussing real world examples is the best way to create a culture of fearless diving. Consider reinforcing the learnings with extra incentives to encourage risk taking. I was recently talking to a coach who whenever one of his players gets a yellow for simulation, he buys the whole team pizza.
Love the idea of incentivizing the team with pizza for simulation. Kids these days just don’t dive like they used to, it’s fundamentally bad for the sport.
Question: how do we get Berhalter to implement this pizza incentive strategy?
I feel as if I learned a lot here today