While I thoroughly enjoy the "world's game" of soccer, I am interested only in our student-athletes who play the sport at colleges and universities throughout the country. Thus, I strongly disagree with the new substitution rules that have been put forth by the NCAA Men's and Women's Soccer Rules Committee (no re-entry in any period).

Under the revised format, a player who was injured slightly would have to stay in the match or come off and have his or her team play short for some time. This can put the student-athlete in danger. If a school's top player is hurt in the opening part of a period, the tendency for the coach would be to have the player get a quick look from the trainer, rest a bit and "walk off the injury" to determine if he or she can continue. In soccer circles, this is the proper thing to do, but does it serve the student-athlete? Last year, if the same situation occurred, the player could have been taken off, been thoroughly diagnosed by a trainer and then evaluated to determine whether he or she should re-enter the match. The current situation forces a rushed diagnosis since playing short for an extended period of time is a disadvantage. Is this worth putting players at risk?

With the proposed changes, a coach must "save" players on his or her bench in each period to be sure that he or she has 11 players to compete of case an injury. For example, if a coach used all his or her players with 15 minutes to go in a period and an injury occurred, the team would have to play with fewer than 11 players. Most coaches would save players, thereby denying additional player participation.

Coaches also will be more reluctant to substitute early if they are ahead. In years past, a team could play some weaker reserve players when they felt they were

"comfortably" ahead. In a sport like soccer, where goals are tough to come by, this often meant replacing top players with a two- or three-goal lead if the "run of play" was going your way. In the event that the momentum should suddenly shift back (for example, goal on a counter attack, penalty kick), the coach always had the flexibility to put his starters back in and recapture the game. Under the new format, coaches would be much more reluctant to substitute, knowing that his or her top players were out of the match for good. This limits potential opportunities for student-athletes to get on the field. Back-up players work hard in practice, and certainly a payoff for this hard work is to take part in a game. I would feel bad if the lack of flexibility of the rule lessened the playing time for even a few.

The rule change also makes it more of a challenge for a coach to control his or her players and the match. In the past, it was easier for a coach to remove a player to cool him or her down and prevent an incident from occurring. After some time off the field, a calmer player could be returned to the match. Now, a coach who takes the player off is committed to keeping him or her off for the entire period. Many coaches may be reluctant to make this decision. Sportsmanship is a major focus in NCAA athletics, and the ability of coaches to control their team is being compromised.

I also disagree with those who claim the rule will promote more parity. On the contrary, the better teams will now have a bigger advantage. With no ability to re-enter, a team with 14 strong players may only make three substitutions. Under past rules, more substitutions could be made with players re-entering for others. This makes for a larger advantage for the deeper team.

I do not understand why the committee went from one extreme to the other. Last year, many coaches were excited with the new flexibility to substitute, and this enabled more players to participate in matches because the re-entry rule was added to the first half. In addition to taking the first-half re-entry away, however, the committee also removed the second-half re-entry that existed for a number of years. I favor the timing changes for substitutions, which hopefully will help stop any "flow" problems, but I feel the re-entry rules from last year should have been implemented again along with the substitution timing modifications. To many, moving to the new re-entry restrictions is moving two steps in the wrong direction.

The NCAA needs to do what is best for those involved in college soccer, especially the student-athletes. Professional and international soccer entities have their own goals, and they look to serve the people and players involved at those levels. We need to make soccer the best for all those we serve.

Michael Smolens is the men's soccer coach and an associate athletics director at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy.