Potentially eligible players thread

[Mr_Parker]

IFA say Michael O’Neill was speaking 'in a personal capacity'

https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/soccer/ifa-say-michael-oneill-was-speaking-in-a-personal-capacity-467959.html

From a couple of days ago. You got to laugh at Britain's comments, especially his "trying to find a positive way" justification of Michael O'Neill's comments.

[geysir]

"In the event where a player is eligible to play for multiple nations, he is only 'cap-tied' to a nation after playing for its senior team in an official competition, or having played in an official competition at youth level and later submitting a request to change national association with*FIFA."

Jack has not yet been capped yet at competitive level for England. He has to cross the white line, either in the starting line up or as a sub in a competitive game at any age level before he's recognised as having used up his once in a lifetime choice. The toulon toournament does not count as competitive.
Jack can cancel his request to change from the FAI to FA.

[Closed Account]

Jack has not yet been capped yet at competitive level for England. He has to cross the white line, either in the starting line up or as a sub in a competitive game at any age level before he's recognised as having used up his once in a lifetime choice. The toulon toournament does not count as competitive.
Jack can cancel his request to change from the FAI to FA.
He has played in U21 Championship qualifier.

[geysir]

That's just from a Wikipedia article though.
And??


Isn't geysir saying that it has been proven that it is the first cap for the new association that makes the switch permanent, however?
Yes, and there are numerous examples. Even just use plain common sense.
Why do you think there is all the rumpus about capping a player in a senior competitive game in order to get a player tied.
That's the gilded criteria.
A dual national has 2 choices.
the first choice is who to play for and the second choice is should he chose to switch over to the other nationality.
Being eligible to play for a country does not mean a dual national player has used up a choice .
He has to be capped at underage competitive level in order for to be recognised as using up his first choice.

We were Jack's first choice. He is not regarded by FIFA as using his onetime right to change association until that time he is capped by England at any competitive level.
One eg
Rafinha played for Spain, switched to Brazil, but still eligible to declare for France

[geysir]

He has played in U21 Championship qualifier.

Which game was that? Afaics he hasn't been capped at competitive level.

[Diggs246]

Which game was that? Afaics he hasn't been capped at competitive level.

I'm I missing something here, I might be wrong but Jack is clearly no longer able to play for us, regardless of his under age cap for England

"If a Player has more than one nationality, or if a Player acquires a new nationality, or if a Player is eligible to play for
several representative teams due to nationality, he may, only once, request to change the Association for which he is
eligible to play international matches to the Association of another country of which he holds nationality"

and your own post

"In the event where a player is eligible to play for multiple nations, he is only 'cap-tied' to a nation after playing for its senior team in an official competition, or having played in an official competition at youth level and later submitting a request to change national association with*FIFA."

[osarusan]

The question is when exactly a player's change of associations becomes 'final' or 'irreversible'.

Is it at the moment that FIFA stamp the word APPROVED in big red letters on his Change of Association application form? In which case, a player is tied to his new association from that moment on, even if he is never selected for any future game, friendly or competitive.

Or is it the moment that he actually takes the field in a competitive game for his new association? And up to that point, does the request to change association remain provisional, and could it be withdrawn, or even replaced by a new application for another association?

Grealish played in the Toulon tournament after his change of associations, but Idon't think that is classified by FIFA as a competitive game.

[tetsujin1979]

Michael O'Neill issued a statement today j https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/international/i-did-not-attack-the-fai-northern-ireland-manager-michael-oneills-statement-on-eligibility-row-in-full-36695783.html

[Closed Account]

Which game was that? Afaics he hasn't been capped at competitive level.

Posted it earlier:
https://foot.ie/threads/119079-Potentially-eligible-players-thread?p=1954072&viewfull=1#post1954072
https://www.uefa.com/under21/season=...325/index.html (https://www.uefa.com/under21/season=2017/matches/round=2000649/match=2016325/index.html)

[geysir]

The Toulon tournament (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toulon_Tournament)is most definitely not a FIFA competitive tournament.

Wiki is indeed a wonderful source :)

[geysir]

Posted it earlier:
https://foot.ie/threads/119079-Potentially-eligible-players-thread?p=1954072&viewfull=1#post1954072
https://www.uefa.com/under21/season=...325/index.html (https://www.uefa.com/under21/season=2017/matches/round=2000649/match=2016325/index.html)

Thanks Joe, that's Jack lost forever.

I had only checked this page (https://www.uefa.com/under21/season=2017/teams/team=200039/squad/index.html) where they show the stats for the squad members

[DannyInvincible]

And??

It's not verified by a reference, so it could just as easily be an editor's presumption as a fact.

Anyway, the Wiki article conflicts with your own position though, It says: "In the event where a player is eligible to play for multiple nations, he is only 'cap-tied' to a nation after playing for its senior team in an official competition, or having played in an official competition at youth level and later submitting a request to change national association with FIFA."


Yes, and there are numerous examples.

Who are the examples? We had assumed Bobby Zamora was an example at one point due to media reports but he isn't on the database of players who've requested a switch to which Yann has access.


Even just use plain common sense.
Why do you think there is all the rumpus about capping a player in a senior competitive game in order to get a player tied.
That's the gilded criteria.

That's undoubtedly what ties him to an original association, but I don't see why it should necessarily follow or be assumed that that's what will make a switch irreversible.


Rafinha played for Spain, switched to Brazil, but still eligible to declare for France

Did FIFA approve a formal switch for Rafinha from Spain to Brazil, but you believe he'd be able to request another switch from Brazil to France because he has only represented Brazil in senior friendly games or are you saying that FIFA would regard a future request from Rafinha as constituting a transfer-request between Spain and France because the player hasn't really performed or effected a switch to Brazil yet?

[DannyInvincible]

Michael O'Neill issued a statement today j https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/international/i-did-not-attack-the-fai-northern-ireland-manager-michael-oneills-statement-on-eligibility-row-in-full-36695783.html

When he says: "For me, eligibility is not and should not be a political issue. Nor should it be a religious issue. For me, eligibility should be a football issue."

What does that even mean? Eligibility is a national identity issue because national identity is the foundation of national teams.

He also said: "The FAI correctly states that it has broken no rules in approaching young Northern Ireland players in requesting they switch allegiance to the Republic of Ireland."

This is baloney too. The FAI don't "request" players to switch. It's the player who makes the request. The FAI might make an enquiry and can facilitate a player's wishes, but they can't demand that he switches. I can only assume this is just further misleading and accusatory terminology employed to curry favour with hard-line NI fans.

I also thought this bit was funny: "During a recent interview, I was questioned about the issue of eligibility. Contrary to how it was reported, I did not attack the FAI, I merely responded to the questions I was asked."

He says that is if it isn't possible to attack someone in an answer to a question.

He also complains that "[t]he Irish FA invests thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of pounds in our club NI programme", but his desire to have the players' right to switch restricted until after the age of 21 would only result in the IFA having spent more money on a player whose ultimate aspiration might have been to play for the FAI, if that player does indeed end up switching after 21. Besides, the IFA receive money from the public purse; a very significant portion of that is money from the nationalist community. As a collective, we're more than happy to see players from our community declare for Ireland having been trained with our money too.

The following appears to conflict with his "cautionary" tone for potential switchers the previous week: "While it is a player's right to choose to play for the Republic of Ireland at underage level, such a decision means that another young player will have missed out on an opportunity to be part of our elite performance pathway and another player in the FAI's system will miss out on selection."

Last week, he was saying the players who switched were then pretty much abandoned by the FAI after switching and exampled Hale and Brown (despite both having been in FAI squads), but now he's purportedly trying to make an appeal for the interests of players who are already in the FAI's set-up to be considered because he's claiming they'll miss out on account of the incoming switching players. Which is it? I'm rather suspicious of this apparent concern for FAI players. It would appear to me that he is professing concern for young players in order to win sympathy for what are ultimately his own interests and those of his association. It's a bit like the old "won't somebody think of the children?" plea. Rather conveniently, O'Neill would have us believe that the best interests of young players just so happen to align with the interests of Michael O'Neill and the IFA. Hmm...

If O'Neill wishes to see limits placed on the rights of players to switch, he needs to petition FIFA. There's no point pointing the finger at the FAI. I don't think FIFA will have much sympathy with what he's saying though because it would reverse the trend whereby a right (for a dual or multi-eligible player) to switch association once by the age of 21 was introduced in 2004 and that age-cap of 21 was lifted in 2009. I don't see FIFA back-tracking on these sorts of rights in an increasingly globalised world. After all, the right to switch was to protect young players from self-interested associations.

It also must be asked, why should the IFA have some sort of exclusive claim over players aged 17-21 who are also eligible for another association? No other association enjoys such a privilege.

[Olé Olé]

Seamas O'Reilly was on the Second Captains podcast to discuss this point (along with Alistair Campbell's new book). Whilst being an Ireland supporter from Derry he was quite balanced in his assessment. I think the conclusion drawn from the conversation between him and Ken Earley was that Michael O'Neill should have known better with the loaded insinuations he was making and should have known more than better that identifying a lad from up North as Catholic is as inter-changeable with Nationalist.

[Gather round]

Seamas O'Reilly was on the Second Captains podcast to discuss this...Whilst being an Ireland supporter from Derry he was quite balanced in his assessment. I think the conclusion drawn from the conversation between him and Ken Early was that Michael O'Neill should have known better with the loaded insinuations he was making and should have known more than better that identifying a lad from up North as Catholic is as inter-changeable with Nationalist

Michael's judgement has been poor. We (IFA, NI fans, media etc) need to accept the reality that the FAI can pick these guys within the rules. Little to be gained by gurning about it. The references to Catholics are silly as well as likely to offend- we all know Marty would pick a team from the Shankill plus Kevin Kraftwerk and Phelan O'Dutchman if they were good enough and available...

The wider problem's probably insoluble (not least as a majority of our fans think you're running some sort of press gang and a majority of yours think our team shouldn't exist). Best we can hope for is detente?

There's already a 'Hibernian Warriors' (SOR's suggested all Ireland team name), albeit bulked out by mercenary Angles and Caledonians. And they just keep being walloped by marauding hordes of Jutes and Saxons ;)

[ifk101]

Michael's judgement has been poor.

Well he did drink and drive, so yes.

But Michael has recurring poor judgement in relation to comments aimed at the FAI. The sceptic may believe this poor judgement is encouraged by his employers, they certainly are not discouraging speaking in a personal capacity on the matter.

[Closed Account]

and a majority of yours think our team shouldn't exist
Is this true? I don't think I've ever had a discussion with a football fan about the existence of the NI football team. Do they think it shouldn't exist because the UK shouldn't have 4 teams or because of a desire for a united Ireland?

[Mr_Parker]

When he says: "For me, eligibility is not and should not be a political issue. Nor should it be a religious issue. For me, eligibility should be a football issue."

What does that even mean? Eligibility is a national identity issue because national identity is the foundation of national teams.

He also said: "The FAI correctly states that it has broken no rules in approaching young Northern Ireland players in requesting they switch allegiance to the Republic of Ireland."

This is baloney too. The FAI doesn't "request" players to switch. It's the player who makes the request. The FAI might make an enquiry and can facilitate a player's wishes, but they can't demand that he switches. I can only assume this is just further misleading and accusatory terminology employed to curry favour with hard-line NI fans.

I also thought this bit was funny: "During a recent interview, I was questioned about the issue of eligibility. Contrary to how it was reported, I did not attack the FAI, I merely responded to the questions I was asked."

He says that is if it isn't possible to attack someone in an answer to a question.

He also complains that "[t]he Irish FA invests thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of pounds in our club NI programme", but his desire to have the players' right to switch restricted until after the age of 21 would only result in the IFA having spent more money on a player whose ultimate aspiration might have been to play for the FAI, if that player does indeed end up switching after 21. Besides, the IFA receive money from the public purse; a very significant portion of that is money from the nationalist community. As a collective, we're more than happy to see players from our community declare for Ireland having been trained with our money too.

The following appears to conflict with his "cautionary" tone for potential switchers the previous week: "While it is a player's right to choose to play for the Republic of Ireland at underage level, such a decision means that another young player will have missed out on an opportunity to be part of our elite performance pathway and another player in the FAI's system will miss out on selection."

Last week, he was saying the players who switched were then pretty much abandoned by the FAI after switching and exampled Hale and Brown (despite both having been in FAI squads), but now he's purportedly trying to make an appeal for the interests of players who are already in the FAI's set-up to be considered because he's claiming they'll miss out on account of the incoming switching players. Which is it? I'm rather suspicious of this apparent concern for FAI players. It would appear to me that he is professing concern for young players in order to win sympathy for what are ultimately his own interests and those of his association. It's a bit like the old "won't somebody think of the children?" plea. Rather conveniently, O'Neill would have us believe that the best interests of young players just so happen to align with the interests of Michael O'Neill and the IFA. Hmm...

If O'Neill wishes to see limits placed on the rights of players to switch, he needs to petition FIFA. There's no point pointing the finger at the FAI. I don't think FIFA will have much sympathy with what he's saying though because it would reverse the trend whereby a right (for a dual or multi-eligible player) to switch association once by the age of 21 was introduced in 2004 and that age-cap of 21 was lifted in 2009. I don't see FIFA back-tracking on these sorts of rights in an increasingly globalised world. After all, the right to switch was to protect young players from self-interested associations.

It also must be asked, why should the IFA have some sort of exclusive claim over players aged 17-21 who are also eligible for another association? No other association enjoys such a privilege.

The most worrying thing about the statement is that is obvious Michael did not write it, but it was a prepared IFA statement that he read out, uncomfortably, and since it was put together by IFA personnel it further highlights their inability to correctly understand the situation, in their attempt to spin their way out of the difficulties O'neill left them in.

[Olé Olé]

Imagine if Nigel Worthington or someone who is less likely to have had some form of Nationalist identification during their life made these comments?

[Gather round]

Is this true? I don't think I've ever had a discussion with a football fan about the existence of the NI football team

It's backed by widespread polling. For example RTE in November last year, around the play-offs. 70% preferred an all-Ireland side, by which presumably they mean other than the one that already exists as referred above. I imagine the latter has almost 100% support ;)

Of course the question always specifies or implies that such a change would be with the agreement of NI fans, rather than imposed on the nasty bigots. Which is obviously a non-starter: we aren't going to agree to our team's disappearance. Respondents with any knowledge of the issue must realise this, but would rather play dumb than admit to their own bias


Do they not think it should exist because the UK shouldn't have 4 teams or because of a desire for a united Ireland?

I imagine it's the latter. The average Joe on the Cabinteely omnibus has no problem with Scotland, Wales or the Faroes having their own teams

[CraftyToePoke]

I've no idea of Smyth or Lewis's longer term ambitions, but in reality their most likely short-term highlight is a full NI cap in the March/ May friendlies. That's inevitable while our teams are of similar standard but one has a much smaller pool to draw on.

How do you read Smyth remaining in your u21s ? Bit of fire to go with the smoke maybe ?

[tetsujin1979]

It's backed by widespread polling. For example RTE in November last year, around the play-offs. 70% preferred an all-Ireland side, by which presumably they mean other than the one that already exists as referred above. I imagine the latter has almost 100% support ;)

Of course the question always specifies or implies that such a change would be with the agreement of NI fans, rather than imposed on the nasty bigots. Which is obviously a non-starter: we aren't going to agree to our team's disappearance. Respondents with any knowledge of the issue must realise this, but would rather play dumb than admit to their own bias



I imagine it's the latter. The average Joe on the Cabinteely omnibus has no problem with Scotland, Wales or the Faroes having their own teams

Can you link to that poll?

[Gather round]

How do you read Smyth remaining in your u21s ? Bit of fire to go with the smoke maybe ?

Fire would be him declining both of our teams surely?

Michael's squad is pretty conservative. The only new players are Jamal Lewis to replace the probably retiring Brunt and two reserve keepers. I wouldn't have been that surprised if Smyth had been there but that would have meant dropping probably one of McGinn or Ward. Both past their peak but still key players for us.

And that poll

http://www.thejournal.ie/all-ireland-team-3695302-Nov2017/

[Closed Account]

It's backed by widespread polling. For example RTE in November last year, around the play-offs. 70% preferred an all-Ireland side, by which presumably they mean other than the one that already exists as referred above. I imagine the latter has almost 100% support
;)
Of course the question always specifies or implies that such a change would be with the agreement of NI fans, rather than imposed on the nasty bigots. Which is obviously a non-starter: we aren't going to agree to our team's disappearance. Respondents with any knowledge of the issue must realise this, but would rather play dumb than admit to their own bias



I imagine it's the latter. The average Joe on the Cabinteely omnibus has no problem with Scotland, Wales or the Faroes having their own teams
Fair enough, if I was asked that question, I'd probably answer yes also, but wouldn't see it as removing the NI team, so the poll doesn't explicity infer that the respondents don't want a NI football team.
Personally I don't have any problem with the existence of the NI team and seriously doubt the majority of Irish supporters do either.

[Gather round]

Fair enough, if I was asked that question, I'd probably answer yes also, but wouldn't see it as removing the NI team, so the poll doesn't explicity infer that the respondents don't want a NI football team.
Personally I don't have any problem with the existence of the NI team and seriously doubt the majority of Irish supporters do either

There's already an 'All Ireland' team that we all recognise. That poll is asking people about something different- ie quite clearly ONLY the AI team representing players from NI. So by association no more NI team. It should be easy to grasp.

As I may have mentioned on here before, people thinking like this fall into three broad groups

a) bored stirrers

b) daydreaming Shinners

c) simpletons who think merging 2 mediocre teams will provide a World beater almost by definition

I know you don't have a problem, but if 73% of the populationin a wide survey say otherwise you have to admit you may be untypical (and of course those of us who frequent semi anonymous chat boards aren't typical of 'fans' generally)

[ifk101]

That poll is asking people about something different- ie quite clearly ONLY the AI team representing players from NI........

The article you linked does not state the wording of the questions asked. It says nearly three in four would like to see a merger and 73% would support an all-Ireland team. That reads as if they are using the same 73% figure to make two claims; ie 73% would like to see a merger and 73% would support a merger. They are not the same thing.

[DannyInvincible]

Seamas O'Reilly was on the Second Captains podcast to discuss this point (along with Alistair Campbell's new book). Whilst being an Ireland supporter from Derry he was quite balanced in his assessment. I think the conclusion drawn from the conversation between him and Ken Earley was that Michael O'Neill should have known better with the loaded insinuations he was making and should have known more than better that identifying a lad from up North as Catholic is as inter-changeable with Nationalist.

Listened to that last night. Seamy is an old friend of mine from St. Columb's College in Derry. I mightn't have been as balanced, but he spoke well. He pointed out that the GFA has nothing to do with it, mentioned the 1956 legislation and emphasised that it's an issue of player choice. Although the GFA may have enhanced confidence or assertiveness (or perhaps even awareness of rights) within northern nationalism, I do think Ken Early gave it a bit too much credit in terms of its influence over this matter. The game-changer really in terms of northern players declaring for the FAI was FIFA's universal introduction in 2004 of a right for dual or multi-eligible players under the age of 21 to switch association once, as that allowed players who would otherwise have been cap-tied due to appearances for IFA youth teams to now switch, so long as they hadn't played for the IFA at senior competitive level. The age-cap of 21 was lifted altogether in 2009.


The article you linked does not state the wording of the questions asked. It says nearly three in four would like to see a merger and 73% would support an all-Ireland team. That reads as if they are using the same 73% figure to make two claims; ie 73% would like to see a merger and 73% would support a merger. They are not the same thing.

Exactly. And saying that you'd like to see a single united team - as an ideal or aspiration where both sides would come together voluntarily - isn't the same thing as saying the NI team should be abolished against the wishes of its own supporters.

[Gather round]

I do think Ken Early gave it a bit too much credit in terms of its influence over this matter. The game-changer really in terms of northern players declaring for the FAI was FIFA's universal introduction in 2004 of a right for dual or multi-eligible players under the age of 21 to switch association once, as that allowed players who would otherwise have been cap-tied due to appearances for IFA youth teams to now switch, so long as they hadn't played for the IFA at senior competitive level. The age-cap of 21 was lifted altogether in 2009

Agreed. I know KE from the WSC forum and I don't remember him ever mentioning that 2004 change


And saying that you'd like to see a single united team - as an ideal or aspiration where both sides would come together voluntarily - isn't the same thing as saying the NI team should be abolished against the wishes of its own supporters

Is there any room to join the pair of ye on that pinhead? I've already covered the distinction you draw- playing dumb to avoid admitting a bias.

[ifk101]

The question asked btw was "would you support a merger between the ROI and NI soccer teams to create one All-Ireland soccer team?" That question is open to interpretation - for example yours.

https://twitter.com/ClaireByrneLive/status/930352858796568576

[Gather round]

The question asked btw was "would you support a merger between the ROI and NI soccer teams to create one All-Ireland soccer team?" That question is open to interpretation - for example yours.

https://twitter.com/ClaireByrneLive/status/930352858796568576

And your different interpretation is?

[tetsujin1979]

That could easily be interpreted as supporting the dissolution of the Republic of Ireland team

[ifk101]

And your different interpretation is?

Your interpretation of the question is that it ....
always specifies or implies that such a change would be with the agreement of NI fans, rather than imposed on the nasty bigots

I don't interpret the question as implying NI fans are nasty bigots.

[Closed Account]

That could easily be interpreted as supporting the dissolution of the Republic of Ireland team
I would have answered yes to that poll, however had the question been phrased
"Do you think the the Northern Ireland football team shouldn't exist?" , then of course my answer would have been no, so the suggestion that question 1 logically leads to the other is disingenuous.
I can't say what the result of a poll for question 2 above would be but neither can Gather Round so it's not fair to say this:

and a majority of yours think our team shouldn't exist
even if that is his own interpretation.

[Gather round]

That could easily be interpreted as supporting the dissolution of the Republic of Ireland team

Very droll. OK, as Mary Lou would say you've got a massive mandate, so go right ahead and dissolve before the next qualifiers start ;)


I would have answered yes to that poll, however had the question been phrased "Do you think the the Northern Ireland football team shouldn't exist?" , then of course my answer would have been no

You'd have answered yes to there being no more NI team, then "of course" no to there being no more NI team, basically. The exact wording of the question doesn't matter that much. I end up with no team to support, you justify yourself with the fantasy that it's all some agreed, idealised future as DI put it.


it's not fair to say this

It's perfectly fair and logical, unlike your response above. I'll keep on saying it and you'll keep on deluding yourselves, probably...

[Closed Account]

Very droll. OK, as Mary Lou would say you've got a massive mandate, so go right ahead and dissolve before the next qualifiers start ;)



You'd have answered yes to there being no more NI team, then "of course" no to there being no more NI team, basically. The exact wording of the question doesn't matter that much. I end up with no team to support, you justify yourself with the fantasy that it's all some agreed, idealised future as DI put it.



It's perfectly fair and logical, unlike your response above. I'll keep on saying it and you'll keep on deluding yourselves, probably...

Why couldn't you support an All-Ireland team?

However you've got there, you are under the opinion that ROI fans don't want the NI team to exist. (and logically you think that 73% of ROI fans don't want the ROI team to exist)
2 questions:
1. Are you willing to change this opinion?
2. What evidence would satisfy this change of opinion.

[third policeman]

There's already an 'All Ireland' team that we all recognise. That poll is asking people about something different- ie quite clearly ONLY the AI team representing players from NI. So by association no more NI team. It should be easy to grasp.

As I may have mentioned on here before, people thinking like this fall into three broad groups

a) bored stirrers

b) daydreaming Shinners

c) simpletons who think merging 2 mediocre teams will provide a World beater almost by definition

I know you don't have a problem, but if 73% of the populationin a wide survey say otherwise you have to admit you may be untypical (and of course those of us who frequent semi anonymous chat boards aren't typical of 'fans' generally)

And I guess that makes you untypical of the NI population as well, as according to another wide survey the majority there also favour a single team.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/majority-in-northern-ireland-want-allireland-football-team-survey-suggests-34255124.html

I suspect your argument will be that these are not real NI supporters but a concoction of simpletons, day dreamers and shinners, but who exactly are the real supporters? They are in danger of becoming a self-selected minority whose primary allegiance is to what the team represents in terms of a narrow and exclusive unionist identity. I'm old enough to remember when there was cross community support for the NI team - even when politics and society in the North was more divided than it is today. That situation applied certainly up to the 82 and 86 world cups but seemed to dissipate soon afterwards. Maybe the fact that Ireland (ROI) had a better team made them a more conspicuous and attractive option for Northern Nationalists, but the IFA did little to help. Its dunderheaded inflexibility on anthem, flags and dealing with the sectarian antics of some of the NI support base, sent out a very clear signal that this is a Protestant team for a Protestant wee country. This is sad and tragic, as I grew up supporting NI and still want to see them doing well. I was warned a couple of years ago by a journalist friend against travelling to an NI away game because "it might get awkward." I actually went to NI games before most of its current supporters were born, and as far as I know, GR, before even you were born - so no lectures please.

I think you are just plain wrong about who wants an All Ireland Team. No doubt some of them are nationalists with a political agenda, but many are people who just want to see football stripped of the kind of nasty sectarianism that has blighted it in recent years, and look to sports like rugby, boxing and cricket and think why not?. And before you say, that they are not entitled to a view because they are not real NI football supporters, it's their wee country too.

[DannyInvincible]

The Irish Independent are reporting that Bamford is ready to answer the call (although there are no quotes from the player and only quotes from O'Neill saying he's been keeping an eye on the player): https://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/international-soccer/inform-patrick-bamford-ready-to-answer-ireland-call-36703005.html

[DeLorean]

Small discussion on that in his own thread, Danny.

He's ours to regain.

[DannyInvincible]

Agreed. I know KE from the WSC forum and I don't remember him ever mentioning that 2004 change

No, he certainly didn't mention that change on the podcast anyway. I've highlighted it to him on Twitter, which I've returned to in the past week after a lengthy hiatus. :eek:


Is there any room to join the pair of ye on that pinhead? I've already covered the distinction you draw- playing dumb to avoid admitting a bias.

What bias am I not admitting? I don't think I've ever been secretive about my leanings.


Very droll. OK, as Mary Lou would say you've got a massive mandate, so go right ahead and dissolve before the next qualifiers start ;)

But the point is that if a merger was to occur, it's likely that both associations and sets of supporters would have to compromise in some for or another. I don't see how it would be a case of your team being subsumed by our team (and associated symbols). I like the fact we have our anthem, flag and symbols - I would certainly like to maintain them if possible and sacrificing them might have posed me difficulty in the past - but I've come to believe that merging the teams (voluntarily and most likely requiring compromise) would be in the interests of the greater good, if achievable. (I appreciate you may disagree.)


You'd have answered yes to there being no more NI team, then "of course" no to there being no more NI team, basically. The exact wording of the question doesn't matter that much. I end up with no team to support, you justify yourself with the fantasy that it's all some agreed, idealised future as DI put it.

You would have the new merged team to support because it would hopefully cater for your identity and tradition too. In the past (before Brexit even, if I recall correctly), you said that you could be persuaded to support Irish unity and I'm pretty sure you mentioned Tory rule (neoliberalism and privatisation of services like the NHS) as being at the root of that apparent change in heart. That wasn't a fantasy. Would you expect the NI team to continue existing in the event of this united Ireland? (Now, that might be a fantasy.) If you could potentially support a united Ireland politically, why wouldn't you be able to support its (single) football team?

[DannyInvincible]

Small discussion on that in his own thread, Danny.

He's ours to regain.

Sorry, hadn't seen it yet. :o

[Gather round]

@JD- I got there by reading the evidence I quoted. Not getting your logic and anyway it's predictable what the majority in that poll want- ie a single UI team playing at Lansdowne Road under a tric in front of Michael D, or whoever. But don't take my word for it, just ask around at the next game

I could support any other team but would rather keep the one I have. No emotional link to others, you'll understand. Generally, I base my opinion on evidence as above. If that evidence changes...

@TP- thanks for telling me what I think. If the people you quote want to support UI teams, go ahead. If they- unnecessarily and vindictively- want to get rid of the existing one then yes, they're as I described. I'd prefer the NI side had wider support but it's a divided society and the present set up gives a choice. All sports fans are self-selecting and numbers through the gate hardly the only factor- plenty of UI teams have a tiny following but no-one suggests getting rid of them.

While I'm always willing to criticise the IFA and NI fans I give them some credit for improving the atmosphere at game and beyond. And while every large group of people reflects wider society I don't blame them in isolation for the Troubles or for being the sporting wing of the DUP or UDA. Your opinions are overwrought and having a memory of football in the 1960s doesn't make them less so. It's lazy rank-pulling. And why would an NI away game in 2016 or whenever it was have been awkward? I mean Marty McGuinness was willing to go to the Euros...

As I said, I have no problem with anyone supporting UI team. Your claim that getting rid of the NI team would reduce sectarianism isn't just naive- it's divisive to the point of being sectarian. Live and let live, baby ;)

I've never denied any rugby or boxing fan an opinion on anything. I don't see them as any more or less sectarian than other groups. I'm a cricket fan so them too, looking forward to a trip to Malahide.

@DI- if what you call a merger happens why would you need to compromise? It's only likely to happen if NI no longer exists. So why would it be different to what I answered JD with above? While I recognise the greater chance of a UI after Brexit, for reasons nowt to do with sport I expect that to take rather longer than you do. During which I hope to keep supporting NI, maybe until I'm as old as TP?

I think you're overstating my 'support' for a UI a bit. As above I can see it happening but won't have a vote and probably won't live there. I will keep up my sub to Comhantas Glas though. I supported Yes in the Scot Ref for the reasons you mention

As I said to JD, there's no emotional pull from a UI team any more than from England (or Germany where I lived briefly)

[ifk101]

As I said to JD, there's no emotional pull from a UI team any more than from England (or Germany where I lived briefly)

Isn't an united Ireland team effectively an aspirational cross-community team for all who identify as Irish? And what's the common pull for supporters of the Northern Ireland team if not their Irish identity?

[Stuttgart88]

I'm a cricket fan so them too, looking forward to a trip to Malahide.
Ireland are making a monumental balls up of their 211 target chase in Harare. Zim were on the racks mid-way through their own innings but we let it slip.

[Gather round]

Isn't an united Ireland team effectively an aspirational cross-community team for all who identify as Irish?

Er, no. There's an already an effective all-Ireland-plus-others team so you don't need to aspire to another one. Not everyone identifying as Irish supports the first team, although I wish it well


And what's the common pull for supporters of the Northern Ireland team if not their Irish identity?

Their Northern Irish identity?

[Wolfman]

What identity...

[third policeman]

Their Northern Irish identity?[/QUOTE]

Can you define that? I presume you are currently celebrating Ireland’s Grand Slam. A practical expression of s shared identity. The difference is that the Nortgern zirush identity isn’t shared. It’s unionist newspeak for British.

[third policeman]

Their Northern Irish identity?

Can you define that? I presume you are currently celebrating Ireland’s Grand Slam. A practical expression of s shared identity. The difference is that the Nortgern zirush identity isn’t shared. It’s unionist newspeak for British.[/QUOTE]

[third policeman]

Their Northern Irish identity?

Can you define that? I presume you are currently celebrating Ireland’s Grand Slam. A practical expression of s shared identity. The difference is that the Nortgern zirush identity isn’t shared. It’s unionist newspeak for British.[/QUOTE]


Can you define that? I presume you are currently celebrating Ireland’s Grand Slam. A practical expression of s shared identity. The difference is that the Nortgern zirush identity isn’t shared. It’s unionist newspeak for British.[/QUOTE]
Sorry for typos, possibly the effect of recent celebration of Irishness

[Gather round]

Well done on yer win lads. I saw the last 15 mins while waiting for the Irish League scores.

Don't worry about the typos, they were no harder to follow than yer other posts on this issue ;)

[Olé Olé]

"Yer win"? Thanks Jacob Stockdale.