Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.

I also violated the rules (which couldn't possibly affect the outcome of the game) in matches where even the formal opening phase could be skipped. And if my opponent said, "technical loss," well, okay, technical loss. According to the rules, he's right, but how many more matches could I have played with him? In the end, no, thank you (I'll play with someone else). And after such "minor" incidents that turned a win into a loss, I wanted to introduce a "weight" to these violations so that I wouldn't lose a match like 7:1 at the 89th minute because of an offside. Of the reasonable solutions, this would only apply to the last turn, which is when the opponent demands a technical loss (if the violation doesn't affect the outcome of the match). In all other cases, no reasonable solution could be found because it would no longer be a violation of the rules, and I left the right to make the final decision to the opponent (technical loss or a clean win, as in the 7:1 case).
But here's the problem: most people started looking for these "minor" violations and immediately demanded a win in a lost match – THIS NEEDS TO BE CHANGED... let's say, instead of an immediate loss, some bonus is taken away from the next match of the same rank (season, tournament) (color, starting player, turn order, etc.)