This is also my best guess as to the convo with one addition. It would make perfect sense to me if GGG followed this with a tactical explanation that Gio would come in if they were chasing games. If they had a lead and were shutting things down, other subs would be used. I hypothesize that it was this combo that really hurt him.Prue speculation but there are very reasonable scenarios for why Berhalter knew pre-tournament that are far less controversial than are being painted online. It could have been as simple as Berhalter saying you are going to come off the bench because we can't change the attack to get you on the field as a false-9 because we don't have the time to get the tactics down. In Gio's mind, he is one of the best players on the team so any role where he isn't starting is extremely limited compared to his expectations and could have been seen by Gio as an extremely limited role.
Maybe he could have coped with the role of super-sub, #1 off the bench. But imagining leads against Wales and Iran and then only getting a second half stint against England? My guess is that's what sent him to "very limited role" sulking.
And in fact, ahead against Wales until the end of match, no Gio.
Tied vs England, 83' sub.
Ahead against Iran, no Gio.
Behind Netherlands 2-0, Gio in at the half.