Simulation in football and the coach's power of selection

Simulation defined

Simulation is any attempt by a player to deceive a match official into believing that an offence has taken place. The most familiar form is a player going to ground in the penalty area when there has been no contact, or very little. It also covers clutching the face after a challenge to the body, rolling over repeatedly to suggest a serious impact, and appealing for a foul the player knows did not happen. Separate from all of these is a fall that is real but exaggerated, where contact did happen and the player overstates it.

In the Laws of the Game, simulation is treated as unsporting behaviour. The referee has to judge two things: whether contact took place, and whether that contact caused the player to fall or only gave them an excuse to. The first is often visible. The second calls for a judgement about intent, and that is why the offence is so disputed.

The subject has come back into discussion after comments attributed to the head coach of Italy's under-21 side were shared on Reddit's r/soccer forum. According to that post, the coach said he reprimands players who dive and will stop picking those who keep doing it. He framed this as a question of character and of the enjoyment players first found in the game, rather than one of results. The source provides no further detail. The occasion, the setting and any specific incident behind the remarks are not known.

Origins of the problem

Simulation is as old as the incentives that reward it. Football's rules give large prizes for fouls in particular places. A penalty kick is a very good scoring chance, and a free kick near the area can be just as valuable to a side with a good set-piece taker. A second caution sends an opponent off. In each case, a moment of deception can change the balance of a match for a small personal risk.

For most of the game's history, the referee was the only defence. One official, standing some distance from play and seeing it once at full speed, had to decide straight away whether a fall was real. Players learned that a fall at the right moment could put a decision in doubt, and that referees could not be sure enough to punish them. Television replays then made deception easier to spot after the fact, so that public anger grew faster than the tools to deal with it.

Many coaches have argued over the years about whether winning fouls is a skill or a form of cheating. The distinction many of them draw is between attacking a defender so that contact becomes likely, which is legitimate, and inventing contact that did not happen, which is not.

Sanctions in today's game

Today simulation is dealt with at several levels, each with its own reach.

On the pitch. If the referee decides a player has simulated, the punishment is a caution and an indirect free kick to the opponents. The referee cannot do more than this for simulation alone. A player who has already been cautioned and then simulates is sent off, but only because they now have two cautions.

Video review. Where competitions use video assistant referees, the review covers a limited set of match-changing situations, including penalty decisions. If a penalty is given for a fall that replays show was not a foul, the decision can be overturned. The protocol is designed to correct clear errors in those decisions. It is not a general system for policing every exaggerated fall in midfield.

After the match. Some national associations have set up procedures to review footage and act against a player who successfully deceived an official. How these procedures work, which incidents they cover and how often they are used all vary between competitions.

In the dressing room. The coach has a sanction no rulebook gives them: selection. At club level, selection sits within employment contracts and squad management. At youth international level the lever is even more direct. Players are called up at the discretion of the national coach, there is no contract with the federation that guarantees a place, and there is plenty of competition for spots in the squad. Telling players that repeated simulation will cost them their place is therefore a credible threat in a way a referee's caution is not.

This is also a coaching method, not only a punishment. Under-21 football is the last stage before senior international football. Habits formed there, from body position in duels to how a player reacts to contact, tend to stay with them. A coach who refuses to reward a dive is shaping how their attackers play in the box. The emphasis moves to staying on their feet, finishing the move and treating contact as something to play through.

Common misconceptions

Every fall is a dive. A player who is running at speed and is clipped will often fall even from light contact, because their balance is already committed. Saying "he went down easily" does not prove simulation took place.

Contact means it cannot be simulation. The reverse mistake is just as common. A player can look for contact, for example by stepping into a defender's path or leaving a trailing leg, so that a non-foul looks like a foul. Referees are asked to judge whether the defender committed an offence, not simply whether bodies touched.

Video review has solved diving. It has narrowed one category, wrongly awarded penalties. It does little about simulation elsewhere on the pitch, or about play-acting aimed at getting an opponent cautioned.

Diving is a national trait. Simulation is often linked with particular footballing cultures. That is a stereotype, not an explanation. The incentives that reward it are the same in every competition played under the same laws.

A coach's stance is only rhetoric. Statements about values can sound like public relations. But in a youth set-up where the coach controls selection, a declared policy has a real mechanism behind it. Whether it is applied consistently is a separate question that outsiders usually cannot check.

Frequently asked questions

What counts as simulation in football?

Simulation is any action by a player meant to deceive the referee into thinking an offence has happened. The usual examples are falling without being touched, exaggerating the effect of light contact, or pretending to be hit in the face after a challenge to the body. Under the Laws of the Game it is classed as unsporting behaviour. When the referee spots it, the usual sanction is a caution and an indirect free kick to the opposing team.

Can a referee send a player off for diving?

A single act of simulation is punished with a caution, not a red card. A player who has already been cautioned in the match and then simulates receives a second caution. That leads to a sending-off, so diving can end a player's match indirectly. The referee has no power to show a straight red card for simulation alone. The laws reserve that for more serious offences such as violent conduct or denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

Does VAR punish players who dive?

The video assistant referee reviews a limited set of match-changing decisions, including penalties. If a penalty is given for a fall that replays show was not a foul, the decision can be reversed. The system is not designed to review every exaggerated fall across the pitch, though. Simulation in midfield, or play-acting intended to get an opponent cautioned, mostly remains a matter for the on-field referee's judgement.

Why can youth national coaches drop players so easily?

Youth national team squads are chosen at the coach's discretion. Players have no contract with their federation that guarantees a place, and many eligible players compete for each spot. That makes selection the strongest tool a youth international coach has. Leaving a player out for behaviour such as repeated diving costs the coach very little administratively. For a player hoping to move into senior international football, it carries a real cost.

Is going down after contact always a dive?

No. A player moving at speed has their balance committed, so even light contact can make them fall naturally. Simulation means the fall was invented or deliberately exaggerated to deceive the referee. Referees are asked to judge whether the defender actually committed a foul, not simply whether there was contact. That is why identical-looking falls can be judged differently, and why the offence stays one of the most disputed in the game.

Sources and further reading

• The International Football Association Board: the Laws of the Game, especially the law on fouls and misconduct
• FIFA and IFAB: published guidance on the video assistant referee protocol and reviewable incidents
• National football associations: disciplinary regulations covering retrospective action for deceiving officials
• UEFA coach education material: guidance on fair play and player behaviour in youth development