From: astley@franklin.cc.utas.edu.au ()
Subject: Rule Changes- letter to FIFA
Organization: Computing Centre, University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 22:53:28 GMT


Below I include a letter I mailed off to FIFA HQ only a few days ago. 
I post it here just in case some people agree with me and feel they don't have
the time to write their own letter. Please modify it a little to suit you
and mail it away. If we don't like the rule changes or want more changes then
we should be vocal about or for ever hold keep our traps shut.

0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-

FIFA
P.O.Box 85
8030 Zurich
Switzerland

Dear Sir/Madam,	
			As a keen player and spectator of the sport of 
Football I thought I must write to you on a number of issues.
	I have been most concerned by the tactics employed by many 
teams in major tournaments like the World Cup and European 
Championships. I believe there is too much reward for gaining a 
draw. Too many games are controlled by negative stalling tactics. If 
victory was to be rewarded by 3 or 4 points a draw would be almost 
disastrous to a teams chances in a four team pool. Surely the aim of 
Football is to score more goals than the opposition. An attempt to 
gain a 0-0 draw is against the spirit of the game. I would go so far 
as to reward neither team any points for a 0-0 draw.
	Awarding games on the number of cards or corner-kicks makes 
the aim of the game completely different and leads to another point; 
refereeing. Whether the purists like it or not, many people make a 
living from football. Thus I feel referees should have some of the 
burden of decision making removed from their shoulders. Incidents 
like Maradona's 'handball' goal against England in 1986 and Van 
Basten's disallowed goal against the CIS in the recent European 
Championships were both gross-errors of misjudgement. As a 
referee of social games I realise referees are just as capable of 
making mistakes as players are. At social/amateur level refereeing 
mistakes will even out over time but at professional / international 
levels one mistake can be catastrophic. I firmly believe a fourth 
official would only be a benefit. With use of a video replay most 
errors could be overcome and travesties of justice will become a 
thing of the past. One reason I am in favour of assistance for 
referees is that I feel they can play too much part in a game. If 
games are decided by the number of cards or cornerkicks awarded 
then referees will become even more influential.
	I think that penalty kicks are also an unfair way to decide a 
game. While replays are obviously better, I realise they cannot be 
used in major tournaments. I would support sudden death extra time. 
The argument that TV coverage would be effected is ludicrous. The 
Wimbledon Tennis Finals are covered regardless of their length. If 
the game is good it will be covered. The argument about players 
getting exhausted is more reasonable, but if for extra-time an extra 
three substitutes were allowed or even the Basketball style 
interchange was used just for extra time this could be overcome. I 
would even suggest making each team take a player off the pitch 
every ten minutes (when teams could also change ends). This would 
have the extra effect of penalising teams that had had a player sent 
off previously.
	I am not in favour of wholesale rule changes to the game. I 
believe the lack of goals is more a problem of tactics and rewards 
than the rules. The simplicity of the rules and the ease of 
availability of equipment are what makes the game so popular. 
Changing the size of the goals would be especially foolish in my 
opinion as many places could not afford to go around modifying their 
goals. There are a couple of rule changes I would however support. 
The first is the introduction of Penalty Goals. The need for this 
became clear to me during the last Olympic Games. During the game 
between Australia and Yugoslavia an Australian forward rounded the 
Yugoslavian goalie and shot at goal only to see a defender use his 
hands to prevent a goal. The ensuing penalty was missed and thus 
blatant cheating was rewarded. In my opinion a goal should have been 
awarded and the defender sent off. Penalty goals would only be 
awarded for handballs on the goalline or fouls on a forward when 
they are in the penalty box and have an open goal in front of them.
	The other change I would support is the use of 'ball in play 
time' to decide the duration of a game. During the previous World Cup 
at the end of each game we were told which team had possession of 
the ball and for how long. Many games saw the ball in play for only 
30 minutes a half or even less. Now if the game was played for say 
2*30 minute halves where the ball HAD to be in play for the full 30 
minutes then time-wasting would be harder. Thus getting the ball 
back for a throw-in, setting up free-kicks and the goalie holding the 
ball could cause the clock to be stopped and thus preventing so much 
timewasting. I think this would be far easier to control than 
preventing back-passes etc.
	Anyway, I thank you for all the effort you and your colleagues 
put into our great game. I hope the above has been of some interest 
and shows what the general public think of our game.
							Your sincerely



--
Tim Astley      | Address : 1/16 Wallace Ave., Lenah Valley, Hobart,Tas. 7008
Chemistry Dept. |     or   astley@tasman.cc.utas.edu.au
Uni. of Tasmania|     or   phone (002) 202158 (work) (002) 280829 (home)

Newsgroups: rec.sport.soccer