Why is it that the powers-that-be in football find it impossible to adhere to this maxim when it comes to planning the game's future?

UEFA's decision last Friday, in response to a proposal from the Scottish Football Association, to expand the European Championships from 16 to 24 teams in time for the 2016 finals smacks of change for change's sake.

It is as if European football's executive committee are unable to recall the events of last summer in Austria and Switzerland when a truly thrilling tournament was played out by the continent's best teams.

Euro 2008 was as unpredictable as it was engrossing with sides such as Russia bouncing back from truly wretched starts to reach the semi-finals and a much-fancied France finishing bottom of their group.

As if to underline its competitive nature, three of the teams who topped their respective groups then bowed out in the quarter-finals with only eventual winners Spain progressing in the knock-out stage.

The standard of play was also pleasingly high with Holland, Russia and Spain producing some truly captivating football, while anyone who watched Turkey's dramatic fightback against the Czech Republic in Geneva is unlikely to forget it in a hurry.

The format of the competition may have left a bit to be desired, why Russia had to play Spain in both the group opener and the semi-final is an answer only the organising committee can answer.

Despite that, Euro 2008 was, by common consent, one of the best finals held in recent years with the length and competitive nature of the tournament making it a huge draw for television audiences around the continent.

So, why is a change as dramatic as the number of entrants is required?

Surely the only consequence of increasing the competing countries by eight from 2016 onwards is that the quality of the finals will be diluted.

Are UEFA expecting us to believe that the presence of Steve McClaren's England would have added to Euro 2008?

Or, as admirably as they battled in qualification, both Scotland and Northern Ireland?

Looking beyond the United Kingdom, it is also hard to believe that the presence of Norway, Serbia, the Republic of Ireland and Bulgaria would have added anything but additional fixtures to the finals, and yet under UEFA's plans for 2016 all these would have qualified through finishing third in their groups. It also begs the question why there should even be a qualification stage with almost half of the 50 countries who started out on the road to Euro 2008 in September 2006 being destined, under the new plans, to reach the finals.

No, I am afraid, this latest brainwave from UEFA is based on nothing more than self-interest and money-making greed.

And the biggest casualty in all this?

Only the quality of what has, until now, been an ever-improving tournament.