The Unfair Rule That Eliminated Juventus

Fairness is one of the principles of football. Over the years, football rules have evolved to ensure that no team has undue advantage over the other.

It is on the basis of fairness that a coin is tossed before kick-off of every game. When one team chooses to kick-off, the other team chooses the side of the pitch to play from.

In the second half, the teams will change sides to ensure that the other team gets all the advantages their opponents enjoyed in the first half by playing on that side of the pitch. The team that kicked off the first half will allow its opponent to kick-off the second half.

Furthermore, the offside rule ensures that no player gains undue advantage by positioning himself beyond the last out-field player of their opponents.

Most competitions and qualifiers are played in a home and away format to ensure that every team enjoys the benefit of playing before their fans and face the challenges of playing away from home.

Recently, a new format for penalty shootouts has been proposed. Currently penalty shootouts see team A and team B take five penalties each in an alternating pattern. The International Football Association Board (IFAB), the body responsible for making football rules acknowledged that research has shown that a team taking the first penalty has a 60 percent chance of winning, because the players taking the second kicks from the opposing team are usually under more pressure than their opponents.

Hence, the newly proposed format is aimed at correcting this unfairness. The new system, known as ABBA, involves team A taking the first penalty, team B the second and third, team A the fourth and fifth and so on until each team had taken five. The sequence would continue if the shootout then goes to sudden death. This format will put both teams under the same pressure that only the second teams faces in the current format.

Goal line technology and Video Assistant Referee (VAR), are innovations aimed at ensuring that human errors on the part of the officials are minimized. Despite the controversies that have trailed some decisions made by the VAR, the soccer fraternity is in agreement that the aim of VAR is to enhance fairness.

Unfortunately, the elimination of Juventus from the UEFA Champions League by Porto is due to an unfair rule that should be amended.

In the first leg, of that round of 16 encounter, played at the Estadio do Daragao in Portugal, Porto defeated Juventus 2-1. Note that this match was played for only 90 minutes. There was no need for extra time as the second leg will take place weeks later.

In the second leg, played in Italy, after 90 minutes, Juventus were leading Porto 2-1. The aggregate stood at 3-3 with both teams having one away goal and two home goals apiece. The game proceeded to extra time – additional 30 minutes.

The extra time is an advantage to the away team, who now has more 30 minutes to score more away goals which the home side did not have when they played away in the first leg.

Though Juventus and Porto Scored one goal each during the extra time to bring the aggregate score to 4-4, Porto won on the away goals rule, having scored two away goals as to Juventus’ one.

While Juventus played for only 90 minutes in Portugal and got one away goal, Porto played additional 30 minutes in Italy and got two away goals. This is unfair.

To correct this unfairness, the IFAB should consider any of these two options.

First, the away goals rule should not be applied to any goals scored during the 30 minutes of extra time. This will ensure that the away team during the second leg does not have additional time to score more goals that will give them undue advantage through the away goals rule.

Alternatively, The 30 minutes extra time should be removed from every home and away encounter. This will ensure that both teams, playing home or away, have only 90 minutes for each of both legs to win or to lose. If both teams are tied on goals after full time in the second leg, it should go straight to penalty shootout.