Norn Iron rubbish part 23452346526

[EalingGreen]

Effectively the IFA considered itself the FA for the whole island even after the formation of the FAI in 1921 (then the Football Association of the Irish Free state).

Not entirely so (though the IFA considered itself the "senior" body). For in "re-union" meetings held in the 20's etc, the IFA was prepared to recognise the authority of the FAIFS within its own jurisdiction etc, subject to certain conditions (see more, below).




The FAI did pick Northern players for the games in Spain & Portugal in 1946 but otherwise didn't.
Not so (as CDG correctly points out). In fact, the FAI picked a number of NI-born players, including before 1946 (eg Harry Chatton).
For more information, see JCD's excellent blog entry:
http://nifootball.blogspot.com/2006/10/dual-internationalists.html




FIFA had to get involved because the Home Nations entered the 1950 World Cup albeit using the Home Championship as qualifiers. The FAI asked FIFA to intervene and stop NI from picking RoI born players. Influence was also used with certain English clubs to stop them releasing southern playewrs for what is now NI. This is all documented in the FAI's official history by Peter Byrne 1996. FIFA couldn't allow players to play for 2 different countries in the World Cup so effectiuvely the NI team that played Wales in Wrexham in 1950 was the last official team to represent this island as a whole in a football match.

Readers may be interested to know why the FAI intervened and "influence" had to be brought to bear; indeed more generally, why so many ROI-born players volunteered to play for the IFA - sometimes even when this clashed with FAI call-ups.

Between Partition and the 1950's (at least), IFA games in the Home Championships were often much more prestigious than those played by the FAI - remember, England and Scotland were giants of the game in those days.

Secondly, IFA away games in Eng/Scot/Wales were usually more convenient for Irish players with GB clubs.

Third, many such players were earning their living with Belfast clubs, including Linfield(!), Belfast Celtic and Glentoran - arguably three of the four biggest clubs in Ireland at the time.

Moreover, the IFA treated "Free State" players at least as well as those from NI.
For evidence, click on the individual Blog entry (above) for Tommy Breen.
Or see the career of the great Johnny Carey. For not only was Carey made Captain by the IFA, choosing to play for them over the FAI, but he even joined the British Army when WWII broke out, on the basis that Britain (Man.U) had given him a warm welcome and a good living, so he owed it to them to reciprocate!
Or there is this extract from an interview with Aston Villa's Con Martin (another IFA Captain):

Con was another dual internationalist. He played six times for Northern Ireland from 1946 to 1950 when the split was finally made between the FAI and the northern IFA who from then on were only able to recruit players born in their respective jurisdictions. Matters had come to a head during the 1950 World Cup campaign when some players (including Martin) represented both countries. Extreme pressure was put on the Irish players involved by the FAI to declare themselves in future only for the Republic.
Con was very unhappy about it: “I always had a great relationship with the IFA. We were treated very well and I always liked playing for them but the night before the game in Wrexham (when Northern Ireland played Wales in a World Cup tie) I got a call from Dublin asking me to refuse to play. I said that it was difficult to give an answer because this was my work, my profession.
“However, when I returned to Aston Villa the morning after the game I was approached by the chairman who asked me to refuse to play for Northern Ireland again. Surprised at this coming from him I asked why and he said that Villa would not be welcome in the Republic if I continued to play for Northern Ireland. At the time there was a big connection between Villa and Shamrock Rovers and it was Rovers who were making the running on this issue… and about his time I had got a lot of threatening letters and was called a Judas for playing for 20 pieces of silver. Some of the other players were reluctant to follow me but eventually they all did.”
http://irishabroad.com/news/irishpost/sport/NorthAndSouthOf220308.asp

* - Remember, too, that many of the Southern players picked by the IFA after 1921 had actually been born in the 26 counties before Partition i.e. whilst it (IFA) was unquestionably the sole authority over football in Ireland.




There was another battle resolved by FIFA in 1954 over the term "Ireland" which was resolved with the terms Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland being used for Internationals outsid eof the home championship. Northern Ireland used "Ireland" still for the Home Championship as late as 1978.
I may be wrong, but I don't think it was only HC games where the IFA was allowed by FIFA to call itself "Ireland". I have a feeling it was all non-World Cup (and subsequently) European Championship matches i.e. competitions in which both Associations may enter teams. Therefore IFA Friendlies may also have been "Ireland" games.
Anyhow, having attended my first NI game in 1970, chants of "C'mon Ireland" were still often heard at Windsor in the succeeding few years, or songs where "Ireland" scanned better than "Northern Ireland".
In fact, I'm sure the first proper football song I remember was "Ireland, Ireland, I'd walk a million miles, for one of your goals, Oh Ireland" (Kids should ask their Granda about Al Jolson's Mammy!)

Anyhow, all of the above will no doubt be dismissed by 'the usual suspects' on this Board as just more "Orange-tinted bigotry" on the part of the IFA and its fans...:rolleyes:

[seanfhear]

Not entirely so (though the IFA considered itself the "senior" body. For in "re-union" meetings held in the 20's etc, the IFA was prepared to recognise the authority of the FAIFS within its own jurisdiction etc, subject to certain conditions (see more, below).

Not so (as CDG correctly points out). In fact, the FAI picked a number of NI-born players, including before 1946 (eg Harry Chatton).
For more information, see JCD's excellent blog entry:
http://nifootball.blogspot.com/2006/10/dual-internationalists.html



Readers may be interested to know why the FAI intervened and "influence" had to be brought to bear; indeed more generally, why so many ROI-born players volunteered to play for the IFA - sometimes even when this clashed with FAI call-ups.

Between Partition and the 1950's (at least), IFA games in the Home Championships were often much more prestigious than those played by the FAI - remember, England and Scotland were giants of the game in those days.

Secondly, IFA away games in Eng/Scot/Wales were usually more convenient for Irish players with GB clubs.

Third, many such players were earning their living with Belfast clubs, including Linfield(!), Belfast Celtic and Glentoran - arguably three of the four biggest clubs in Ireland at the time.

Moreover, the IFA treated "Free State" players at least as well as those from NI.
For evidence, click on the individual Blog entry (above) for Tommy Breen.
Or see the career of the great Johnny Carey. For not only was Carey made Captain by the IFA, choosing to play for them over the FAI, but he even joined the British Army when WWII broke out, on the basis that Britain (Man.U) had given him a warm welcome and a good living, so he owed it to them to reciprocate!
Or this there is this extract from an interview with Aston Villa's Con Martin (another IFA Captain):

Con was another dual internationalist. He played six times for Northern Ireland from 1946 to 1950 when the split was finally made between the FAI and the northern IFA who from then on were only able to recruit players born in their respective jurisdictions. Matters had come to a head during the 1950 World Cup campaign when some players (including Martin) represented both countries. Extreme pressure was put on the Irish players involved by the FAI to declare themselves in future only for the Republic.

Con was very unhappy about it: “I always had a great relationship with the IFA. We were treated very well and I always liked playing for them but the night before the game in Wrexham (when Northern Ireland played Wales in a World Cup tie) I got a call from Dublin asking me to refuse to play. I said that it was difficult to give an answer because this was my work, my profession.

“However, when I returned to Aston Villa the morning after the game I was approached by the chairman who asked me to refuse to play for Northern Ireland again. Surprised at this coming from him I asked why and he said that Villa would not be welcome in the Republic if I continued to play for Northern Ireland. At the time there was a big connection between Villa and Shamrock Rovers and it was Rovers who were making the running on this issue… and about his time I had got a lot of threatening letters and was called a Judas for playing for 20 pieces of silver. Some of the other players were reluctant to follow me but eventually they all did.”
http://irishabroad.com/news/irishpost/sport/NorthAndSouthOf220308.asp

* - Remember, too, that many of the Southern players picked by the IFA after 1921 had actually been born in the 26 counties before Partition i.e. whilst it (IFA) was unquestionably the sole authority over football in Ireland.



I may be wrong, but I don't think it was only HC games where the IFA was allowed by FIFA to call itself "Ireland". I have a feeling it was all non-World Cup (and subsequently) European Championship matches i.e. competitions in which both Associations may enter teams. Therefore IFA Friendlies may also have been "Ireland" games.
Anyhow, having attended my first NI game in 1970, chants of "C'mon Ireland" were still often heard at Windsor in the succeeding few years, or songs where "Ireland" scanned better than "Northern Ireland".
In fact, I'm sure the first proper football song I remember was "Ireland, Ireland, I'd walk a million miles, for one of your goals, Ireland, Ireland" (Kids should ask their Granda about Al Jolson's Mammy!)

Anyhow, all of the above will no doubt be dismissed by 'the usual suspects' on this Board as just more "Orange-tinted bigotry" on the part of the IFA and its fans...:rolleyes:
I do not see how or why anyone would want to argue with your post.

[gspain]

Fair enough.

However the FAI was formed prior to the creation of the Irish Free State and the stated mandate you mention above seems to be that of the Football Association of the Irish Free State (formed as a condition for FIFA membership) rather than the motivation behind the establishment of the FAI a couple of years earlier. The Football Association of the Irish Free State reverted back to calling itself the FAI in the 1930s and it's here we see the FAI resuming a role as FA for the whole island challenging the IFA's perceived position as such.


The FAI was formed on June 1st 1921 in Molesworth Hall.

This was before the Treaty negotiations but 2 years after the first Dail which wasn't Internationally recognized.

A French club travelled to Dublin in 1923 to play Bohemians and Pioneers which was the first International recognition. We didn't play Internationals until 1924.

Where is the evidence for the FAI challenging the IFA as the Football association for the whole island? According to Byrne it was the IFA that considered itself the FA for the whole island and the FAI who were trying to establish their independence.

I would be very interested in this from a point of historical accuracy.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Not entirely so (though the IFA considered itself the "senior" body). For in "re-union" meetings held in the 20's etc, the IFA was prepared to recognise the authority of the FAIFS within its own jurisdiction etc, subject to certain conditions (see more, below).

Not so (as CDG correctly points out). In fact, the FAI picked a number of NI-born players, including before 1946 (eg Harry Chatton).
For more information, see JCD's excellent blog entry:
http://nifootball.blogspot.com/2006/10/dual-internationalists.html



Readers may be interested to know why the FAI intervened and "influence" had to be brought to bear; indeed more generally, why so many ROI-born players volunteered to play for the IFA - sometimes even when this clashed with FAI call-ups.

Between Partition and the 1950's (at least), IFA games in the Home Championships were often much more prestigious than those played by the FAI - remember, England and Scotland were giants of the game in those days.

Secondly, IFA away games in Eng/Scot/Wales were usually more convenient for Irish players with GB clubs.

Third, many such players were earning their living with Belfast clubs, including Linfield(!), Belfast Celtic and Glentoran - arguably three of the four biggest clubs in Ireland at the time.

Moreover, the IFA treated "Free State" players at least as well as those from NI.
For evidence, click on the individual Blog entry (above) for Tommy Breen.
Or see the career of the great Johnny Carey. For not only was Carey made Captain by the IFA, choosing to play for them over the FAI, but he even joined the British Army when WWII broke out, on the basis that Britain (Man.U) had given him a warm welcome and a good living, so he owed it to them to reciprocate!
Or there is this extract from an interview with Aston Villa's Con Martin (another IFA Captain):

Con was another dual internationalist. He played six times for Northern Ireland from 1946 to 1950 when the split was finally made between the FAI and the northern IFA who from then on were only able to recruit players born in their respective jurisdictions. Matters had come to a head during the 1950 World Cup campaign when some players (including Martin) represented both countries. Extreme pressure was put on the Irish players involved by the FAI to declare themselves in future only for the Republic.
Con was very unhappy about it: “I always had a great relationship with the IFA. We were treated very well and I always liked playing for them but the night before the game in Wrexham (when Northern Ireland played Wales in a World Cup tie) I got a call from Dublin asking me to refuse to play. I said that it was difficult to give an answer because this was my work, my profession.
“However, when I returned to Aston Villa the morning after the game I was approached by the chairman who asked me to refuse to play for Northern Ireland again. Surprised at this coming from him I asked why and he said that Villa would not be welcome in the Republic if I continued to play for Northern Ireland. At the time there was a big connection between Villa and Shamrock Rovers and it was Rovers who were making the running on this issue… and about his time I had got a lot of threatening letters and was called a Judas for playing for 20 pieces of silver. Some of the other players were reluctant to follow me but eventually they all did.”
http://irishabroad.com/news/irishpost/sport/NorthAndSouthOf220308.asp

* - Remember, too, that many of the Southern players picked by the IFA after 1921 had actually been born in the 26 counties before Partition i.e. whilst it (IFA) was unquestionably the sole authority over football in Ireland.



I may be wrong, but I don't think it was only HC games where the IFA was allowed by FIFA to call itself "Ireland". I have a feeling it was all non-World Cup (and subsequently) European Championship matches i.e. competitions in which both Associations may enter teams. Therefore IFA Friendlies may also have been "Ireland" games.
Anyhow, having attended my first NI game in 1970, chants of "C'mon Ireland" were still often heard at Windsor in the succeeding few years, or songs where "Ireland" scanned better than "Northern Ireland".
In fact, I'm sure the first proper football song I remember was "Ireland, Ireland, I'd walk a million miles, for one of your goals, Oh Ireland" (Kids should ask their Granda about Al Jolson's Mammy!)

Anyhow, all of the above will no doubt be dismissed by 'the usual suspects' on this Board as just more "Orange-tinted bigotry" on the part of the IFA and its fans...:rolleyes:



Wouldn't have a problem. In fact it begs the question in the past why more efforts were not made to reunite the teams back in the last half-century, over and above some of the spurious 'rationale' trotted out on here, earlier in the thread.

Because from a sporting viewpoint it's been to both associations detriment in that longer-term. When there could have only been one;Eleven men from the Shankhill for all that matters.

[EalingGreen]

I do not see how or why anyone would want to argue with your post.
That's because you're not one of what I term "the usual suspects", Sean! ;)

[ifk101]

Where is the evidence for the FAI challenging the IFA as the Football association for the whole island? According to Byrne it was the IFA that considered itself the FA for the whole island and the FAI who were trying to establish their independence.

I would be very interested in this from a point of historical accuracy.

The FAI was formed prior to signing of the Anglo-Irish Treaty and the establishment of the Irish Free State (which briefly included Northern Ireland). Unless the FAI was formed by a group of clairvoyants they could not have known how the island would be divided up or indeed, if the island was to be divided. The name change of the FAI to the FA of the Irish Free State and back again to the FAI coincides with important political events. The first name change coincides with the establishment of the Irish Free State and the change back to the FAI coincides with the Constitution of Ireland which claimed sovereignty over Northern Ireland.

[gspain]

Not entirely so (though the IFA considered itself the "senior" body). For in "re-union" meetings held in the 20's etc, the IFA was prepared to recognise the authority of the FAIFS within its own jurisdiction etc, subject to certain conditions (see more, below).

Not so (as CDG correctly points out). In fact, the FAI picked a number of NI-born players, including before 1946 (eg Harry Chatton).
For more information, see JCD's excellent blog entry:
http://nifootball.blogspot.com/2006/10/dual-internationalists.html



Readers may be interested to know why the FAI intervened and "influence" had to be brought to bear; indeed more generally, why so many ROI-born players volunteered to play for the IFA - sometimes even when this clashed with FAI call-ups.

Between Partition and the 1950's (at least), IFA games in the Home Championships were often much more prestigious than those played by the FAI - remember, England and Scotland were giants of the game in those days.

Secondly, IFA away games in Eng/Scot/Wales were usually more convenient for Irish players with GB clubs.

Third, many such players were earning their living with Belfast clubs, including Linfield(!), Belfast Celtic and Glentoran - arguably three of the four biggest clubs in Ireland at the time.

Moreover, the IFA treated "Free State" players at least as well as those from NI.
For evidence, click on the individual Blog entry (above) for Tommy Breen.
Or see the career of the great Johnny Carey. For not only was Carey made Captain by the IFA, choosing to play for them over the FAI, but he even joined the British Army when WWII broke out, on the basis that Britain (Man.U) had given him a warm welcome and a good living, so he owed it to them to reciprocate!
Or there is this extract from an interview with Aston Villa's Con Martin (another IFA Captain):

Con was another dual internationalist. He played six times for Northern Ireland from 1946 to 1950 when the split was finally made between the FAI and the northern IFA who from then on were only able to recruit players born in their respective jurisdictions. Matters had come to a head during the 1950 World Cup campaign when some players (including Martin) represented both countries. Extreme pressure was put on the Irish players involved by the FAI to declare themselves in future only for the Republic.
Con was very unhappy about it: “I always had a great relationship with the IFA. We were treated very well and I always liked playing for them but the night before the game in Wrexham (when Northern Ireland played Wales in a World Cup tie) I got a call from Dublin asking me to refuse to play. I said that it was difficult to give an answer because this was my work, my profession.
“However, when I returned to Aston Villa the morning after the game I was approached by the chairman who asked me to refuse to play for Northern Ireland again. Surprised at this coming from him I asked why and he said that Villa would not be welcome in the Republic if I continued to play for Northern Ireland. At the time there was a big connection between Villa and Shamrock Rovers and it was Rovers who were making the running on this issue… and about his time I had got a lot of threatening letters and was called a Judas for playing for 20 pieces of silver. Some of the other players were reluctant to follow me but eventually they all did.”
http://irishabroad.com/news/irishpost/sport/NorthAndSouthOf220308.asp

* - Remember, too, that many of the Southern players picked by the IFA after 1921 had actually been born in the 26 counties before Partition i.e. whilst it (IFA) was unquestionably the sole authority over football in Ireland.



I may be wrong, but I don't think it was only HC games where the IFA was allowed by FIFA to call itself "Ireland". I have a feeling it was all non-World Cup (and subsequently) European Championship matches i.e. competitions in which both Associations may enter teams. Therefore IFA Friendlies may also have been "Ireland" games.
Anyhow, having attended my first NI game in 1970, chants of "C'mon Ireland" were still often heard at Windsor in the succeeding few years, or songs where "Ireland" scanned better than "Northern Ireland".
In fact, I'm sure the first proper football song I remember was "Ireland, Ireland, I'd walk a million miles, for one of your goals, Oh Ireland" (Kids should ask their Granda about Al Jolson's Mammy!)

Anyhow, all of the above will no doubt be dismissed by 'the usual suspects' on this Board as just more "Orange-tinted bigotry" on the part of the IFA and its fans...:rolleyes:


I obviously lost my train of thought above. I was aware of the NI born players from the 1930's. Indeed I've met the grandson and daughter of one of them. My understanding had been that the likes of Connolly, Hoy, Chatton, Lunn etc were picked because they were playing in the League of Ireland. Jackie Browne disproves that theory.

1946 was a clear policy shift as 5 NI players (Davy Cochrane withdrew injured) incl some with no obvious RoI connections were picked for the Iberia tour. Subsequent to that no NI born players were picked.

Games normally didn't clash in those days so it wasn't a case of having to make a choice.

BTW Glentoran weren't a particularly big club in the 30's & 40's. Only 1 title win in 1931 until they did the double in 1951.

There is some evidence notably in Jimmy Dunne and Alex Stevenson that the FAI didn't pick some southern born players in the 30's while they were being picked by NI. I never saw this explained but it seems strange that these players were not good enough for an FAI side.

[gspain]

The FAI was formed prior to signing of the Anglo-Irish Treaty and the establishment of the Irish Free State (which briefly included Northern Ireland). Unless the FAI was formed by a group of clairvoyants they could not have known how the island would be divided up or indeed, if the island was to be divided. The name change of the FAI to the FA of the Irish Free State and back again to the FAI coincides with important political events. The first name change coincides with the establishment of the Irish Free State and the change back to the FAI coincides with the Constitution of Ireland which claimed sovereignty over Northern Ireland.

Do you have any references or are you just trying to make political points?

The breakaway was by the Leinster Football Association with the backing of the Munster FA. It was because no northern clubs were travelling to Dublin for games (reason given was political unrest during the War of Independence).
The title used in Molesworth Hall was "The Football League of the Irish Free State".

Byrne also refers to an 8 point document in a reconciliation meeting between the 2 associations in the Shelbourne Hotel after the establishment of the Irish Free State. The FAI proposal was that the IFA become the North of Ireland FA and each maintain jurisdiction of the clubs in their areas. Shared control of International selections. The IFA reaction was "Impossible" and they proceeded to attempt to get the FAI blacklisted. French and subsequent FIFA recognition and the 1924 Olympic invite were key to the survival of the fledgling association.

[geysir]

The 8 points are interesting. Shared control over international selections?
Why did the IFA react so emphatically in the negative to the reconciliation overtures?

[EalingGreen]

Where is the evidence for the FAI challenging the IFA as the Football association for the whole island? According to Byrne it was the IFA that considered itself the FA for the whole island and the FAI who were trying to establish their independence.

I would be very interested in this from a point of historical accuracy.According to Malcolm Brodie in his (1980) "100 Years of Irish Football", there is evidence that the FAI did attempt to establish its own all-island jurisdiction, or at least establish itself as the senior authority on the island, with the IFA assuming a subordinate position.

There were a series of meetings in the 1920's, aimed at healing the split (or at least establishing good working relations between the two Associations).

Brodie implies that Minutes of these meetings were either not taken/agreed, or do not survive. One such meeting in the Shelbourne Hotel (1924?) typically ended with no agreement between the two sides.

However, the IFA delegation was described by Brodie as being "baffled" that immediately after the Meeting, the FAI delegation was able to produce a typed Statement, which outlined their conclusions (i.e. the clear implication being that this must have been prepared before they even met the IFA).

The Statement reads as follows (my own comments in bold):

1. All clubs and organisations having their headquarters in the Irish Free State to be under the control of the FAI;
Fair enough
2. Any club or organisation with its headquarters outside the Irish Free State to be eligible for membership of the FAI on the usual conditions;
Ah. Any reciprocal right for the IFA? No? Thought not.
3. The present Irish Football Association to become the North of Ireland FA (or some similarly named body);
Does anyone else see where this is going?
4. The relations between the FAI and the Northern Ireland FA to be similar to be similar to the relations between the FA of England and the Army FA;
Assuming they mean in that respective order, it should be noted that the Army FA has a subordinate relationship to the "FA of England" [sic]
(Note also the reluctance to refer to the "English FA"; too reminiscent to the "Irish FA"? Closer to the "FA of Ireland", perhaps?)
5. Except in competitions in which clubs from both associations participate, the North of Ireland FA to have full control over all clubs and other organisations directly affiliated to it;
Gee thanks.
6. In competitions open to and participated by clubs from the two Associations and in all international matters the controlling bodies to consist of representatives of the two Associations and a scale to be arranged;
Note that the relevant scale is to be "arranged", not "agreed"...
7. Suspensions of clubs, organisations and players, officials, etc, by the Association to which they are affiliated to be recognised and maintained by the other Association on a scale to be arranged;
Hmmm. I wonder would this singularly reciprocal and equal provision have anything to do with the fact that the IFA had previously been successful in using its influence within the International Board to suspend/de-register etc players from the Free State when playing in the UK?
8. The North of Ireland FA to have the right to nominate members on all International Selection Committees on a scale to be arranged.
No mention of the right of the FAI to nominate members then? I presume we must take that as a 'given', then. Hmmm, I wonder what the split on the (yet-to-be-arranged) scale was going to look like?

It is no wonder that Capt. Wilton, the leader of the IFA delegation, was to describe this Statement (I'm tempted to call it "Easter Proclamation II" :rolleyes:) as "Impossible" and "out of the question", causing them to leave the Conference.

Brodie goes on: "They [I]had advocated that instead of shifting the offices from Belfast to Dublin the IFA Executive Committe would meet alternately in Belfast and Dublin. That was rejected.So, too, was a promise that Divisional Associations in the South would have greater powers to deal with clubs under their control and a guarantee that there would be a reasonable share of matches in Dublin went unheeded as well. The gulf had widened"

Some background may explain why the IFA could/should not accept being the subordinate body to some new Association based in Dublin.

For one thing, Irish football having first been established in Belfast, that city was (is?) the "capital of Irish football". It had the oldest club (Cliftonville) and most of the major clubs (Linfield, Belfast Celtic, Glentoran). It also had superior stadia (Windsor, Paradise and Grosvenor). And within the Free State, only the Leinster FA had anything like the membership and organisation to challenge that in NI.
In fact, rather than being a 6 vs 26 dispute, this had at least as much the character of a "turf war" between two regions.
Or, as Larry Sheridan of the FAI delegation saw it:
"The Leinster FA is not prepared to play second fiddle to the Irish FA"
Of course, he might well "bang the drum" for Leinster, since he wasn't likely to get many followers from the rest of the Free State. For as Brodie points out, at this stage alone the Co.Antrim FA alone had 200 member clubs, whereas the whole of the Munster FA had 10 (yep, ten).
Nonetheless, the Antrim FA and the MFA were apparently expected to have equal representation on the Council!
(I wonder how many there were in Connaught? :rolleyes:)
Moreover, whilst the leading Dublin clubs had withdrawn from the Irish League in 1921, afaik several were to continue to enter the Irish Cup for a couple of years.
Meanwhile, newspapers in the Free State were describing matches in Dublin as being under the "Football League of Ireland", while games in Belfast were merely "Belfast and District"...

Now I have no doubt that the IFA had its own heavy representation of "hardliners", but whatever demands they were making, they at least kept them confined to the privacy of the Conference rooms.

Finally, in closing his Chapter on this matter, Brodie makes the following interesting observation:
"Relations are now more cordial. There is co-operation on most issues, whilst [B]a dialogue at office-bearer level has started on the possibility of a united team for international matches, although political unrest makes any agreement unlikely in the foreseeable future".

Regarding the latter point, if Brodie thought it "unlikely" in 1980, I wonder what term he'd use nearly thirty years later? ;)

[EalingGreen]

The 8 points are interesting. Shared control over international selections?
Why did the IFA react so emphatically in the negative to the reconciliation overtures?
See my post #1123, which crossed that of Gspain's "in the ether".

[gspain]

The 8 points are interesting. Shared control over international selections?
Why did the IFA react so emphatically in the negative to the reconciliation overtures?

Byrne refers to the IFA's response as predictable stating it responded with "Impossible" "These demands are out of the question"

I can only assume it saw the fledging FAI as an upstart with little hope of succeeding given the power of the IFA and in particular the FA & less so SFA at the time. The FAI was ostracised but luckily FIFA was formed and gave them an outlet.

The FAI were blacklisted and no matches agreed between any of the home countries and the FAI. No transfers were authorised between FAI clubs and UK clubs. I don't kno9w when this ban was lifted but Inte rLeague games v the Welsh League (1924) and Irish League (1925) did start within a ciouple of years.

[gspain]

According to Malcolm Brodie in his (1980) "100 Years of Irish Football", there is evidence that the FAI did attempt to establish its own all-island jurisdiction, or at least establish itself as the senior authority on the island, with the IFA assuming a subordinate position.

There were a series of meetings in the 1920's, aimed at healing the split (or at least establishing good working relations between the two Associations).

Brodie implies that Minutes of these meetings were either not taken/agreed, or do not survive. One such meeting in the Shelbourne Hotel (1924?) typically ended with no agreement between the two sides.

However, the IFA delegation was described by Brodie as being "baffled" that immediately after the Meeting, the FAI delegation was able to produce a typed Statement, which outlined their conclusions (i.e. the clear implication being that this must have been prepared before they even met the IFA).

The Statement reads as follows (my own comments in bold):

1. All clubs and organisations having their headquarters in the Irish Free State to be under the control of the FAI;
Fair enough
2. Any club or organisation with its headquarters outside the Irish Free State to be eligible for membership of the FAI on the usual conditions;
Ah. Any reciprocal right for the IFA? No? Thought not.
3. The present Irish Football Association to become the North of Ireland FA (or some similarly named body);
Does anyone else see where this is going?
4. The relations between the FAI and the Northern Ireland FA to be similar to be similar to the relations between the FA of England and the Army FA;
Assuming they mean in that respective order, it should be noted that the Army FA has a subordinate relationship to the "FA of England" [sic]
(Note also the reluctance to refer to the "English FA"; too reminiscent to the "Irish FA"? Closer to the "FA of Ireland", perhaps?)
5. Except in competitions in which clubs from both associations participate, the North of Ireland FA to have full control over all clubs and other organisations directly affiliated to it;
Gee thanks.
6. In competitions open to and participated by clubs from the two Associations and in all international matters the controlling bodies to consist of representatives of the two Associations and a scale to be arranged;
Note that the relevant scale is to be "arranged", not "agreed"...
7. Suspensions of clubs, organisations and players, officials, etc, by the Association to which they are affiliated to be recognised and maintained by the other Association on a scale to be arranged;
Hmmm. I wonder would this singularly reciprocal and equal provision have anything to do with the fact that the IFA had previously been successful in using its influence within the International Board to suspend/de-register etc players from the Free State when playing in the UK?
8. The North of Ireland FA to have the right to nominate members on all International Selection Committees on a scale to be arranged.
No mention of the right of the FAI to nominate members then? I presume we must take that as a 'given', then. Hmmm, I wonder what the split on the (yet-to-be-arranged) scale was going to look like?

It is no wonder that Capt. Wilton, the leader of the IFA delegation, was to describe this Statement (I'm tempted to call it "Easter Proclamation II" :rolleyes:) as "Impossible" and "out of the question", causing them to leave the Conference.

Brodie goes on: "They [I]had advocated that instead of shifting the offices from Belfast to Dublin the IFA Executive Committe would meet alternately in Belfast and Dublin. That was rejected.So, too, was a promise that Divisional Associations in the South would have greater powers to deal with clubs under their control and a guarantee that there would be a reasonable share of matches in Dublin went unheeded as well. The gulf had widened"

Some background may explain why the IFA could/should not accept being the subordinate body to some new Association based in Dublin.

For one thing, Irish football having first been established in Belfast, that city was (is?) the "capital of Irish football". It had the oldest club (Cliftonville) and most of the major clubs (Linfield, Belfast Celtic, Glentoran). It also had superior stadia (Windsor, Paradise and Grosvenor). And within the Free State, only the Leinster FA had anything like the membership and organisation to challenge that in NI.
In fact, rather than being a 6 vs 26 dispute, this had at least as much the character of a "turf war" between two regions.
Or, as Larry Sheridan of the FAI delegation saw it:
"The Leinster FA is not prepared to play second fiddle to the Irish FA"
Of course, he might well "bang the drum" for Leinster, since he wasn't likely to get many followers from the rest of the Free State. For as Brodie points out, at this stage alone the Co.Antrim FA alone had 200 member clubs, whereas the whole of the Munster FA had 10 (yep, ten).
Nonetheless, the Antrim FA and the MFA were apparently expected to have equal representation on the Council!
(I wonder how many there were in Connaught? :rolleyes:)
Moreover, whilst the leading Dublin clubs had withdrawn from the Irish League in 1921, afaik several were to continue to enter the Irish Cup for a couple of years.
Meanwhile, newspapers in the Free State were describing matches in Dublin as being under the "Football League of Ireland", while games in Belfast were merely "Belfast and District"...

Now I have no doubt that the IFA had its own heavy representation of "hardliners", but whatever demands they were making, they at least kept them confined to the privacy of the Conference rooms.

Finally, in closing his Chapter on this matter, Brodie makes the following interesting observation:
"Relations are now more cordial. There is co-operation on most issues, whilst [B]a dialogue at office-bearer level has started on the possibility of a united team for international matches, although political unrest makes any agreement unlikely in the foreseeable future".

Regarding the latter point, if Brodie thought it "unlikely" in 1980, I wonder what term he'd use nearly thirty years later? ;)

I don't have Brodie to hand but obviously a very credible reference. Byrne differs slightly on some points but they are mainly in agreement.

1 & 2) refer only to clubs within the Irish Free state.

The blacklisting and suspensions etc seem to have happened after this meeting according to Byrne.

No year given by Byrne but he seems to imply that the visit of French club AC of Gallia to Dublin in March 1923 was subsequent to this meeting.

The first International outlet for the FAI (then Freestate Association) was in 1924 with the invitation to the Paris Olympics and subsequent games v Estonia (Paris) and USA (Dublin) . These were considered as full Internationals up until the 1960's. Now the FAI consider Italy 1926 as our first senior International.

[EalingGreen]

1 & 2) refer only to clubs within the Irish Free state.
Not according to Brodie, whereby No.2 clearly states that clubs outside the Free State be permitted to join the FAI.
I suspect that may refer to Belfast Celtic, whose Directors had previously recommended quitting the IFA over an Irish Cup dispute only to be outvoted by their Members, and possibly some other sides from Nationalist areas? It might conceivably also been directed at Cliftonville(!), on the basis that the President of the FAIFS was only a certain Sir Henry McLaughlin KBE, a Belfastman and former C'ville half-back (This is pure - and idle - speculation on my part, mind, in an effort to get Mr. Parker excited!).
Anyhow, there was no mention of a reciprocal right for FS clubs to remain with the IFA, even though it would greatly have facilitated clubs in Donegal, or those clubs south of the border who were members of the Fermanagh & Western FA, for example.



The blacklisting and suspensions etc seem to have happened after this meeting according to Byrne.

No year given by Byrne but he seems to imply that the visit of French club AC of Gallia to Dublin in March 1923 was subsequent to this meeting.
Fair enough. Brodie does not specify the date of the Shelbourne Hotel meeting.
In which case, the sanctions etc would indicate a clear hardening of attitudes by the IFA, following Shelbourne.

Nonetheless, from Point No.s 2 & 4, plus the terminology employed, allied with the fact that this Statement was produced immediately after the meeting broke up, the clear inference must be that the FAI at this stage only envisaged a new governing body for Ireland, which was to based in Dublin, with the IFA (or "North of Ireland FA" :eek:) to occupy a regional/subsidiary position, akin to that of eg the Leinster or Munster FA's.

Now I accept that several Leinster/Dublin clubs had grievances against the IFA in Belfast, many of them no doubt well-founded. Nonetheless, when one considers the history and distribution of the game in Ireland, plus the fact that NI was to remain within the UK (at least pro tem), never mind the influence the IFA enjoyed within the International Board, the combination of arrogance and naivety on behalf of the FAI is pretty breathtaking (imo).

Btw, the leader of the IFA delegation was Captain Wilton. From his background etc, he might be expected to have been a a hardliner, but as JCD's blog entry indicates, he was actually a conciliatory and widely respected individual (the "UVF" cited has no connection with the present-day gang of vermin, other than the name, I hasten to add):
http://nifootball.blogspot.com/2007/09/james-wilton.html

[gspain]

Not according to Brodie, whereby No.2 clearly states that clubs outside the Free State be permitted to join the FAI.
I suspect that may refer to Belfast Celtic, whose Directors had previously recommended quitting the IFA over an Irish Cup dispute only to be outvoted by their Members, and possibly some other sides from Nationalist areas? It might conceivably also been directed at Cliftonville(!), on the basis that the President of the FAIFS was only a certain Sir Henry McLaughlin KBE, a Belfastman and former C'ville half-back (This is pure - and idle - speculation on my part, mind, in an effort to get Mr. Parker excited!).
Anyhow, there was no mention of a reciprocal right for FS clubs to remain with the IFA, even though it would greatly have facilitated clubs in Donegal, or those clubs south of the border who were members of the Fermanagh & Western FA, for example.

Fair enough. Brodie does not specify the date of the Shelbourne Hotel meeting.
In which case, the sanctions etc would indicate a clear hardening of attitudes by the IFA, following Shelbourne.

Nonetheless, from Point No.s 2 & 4, plus the terminology employed, allied with the fact that this Statement was produced immediately after the meeting broke up, the clear inference must be that the FAI at this stage only envisaged a new governing body for Ireland, which was to based in Dublin, with the IFA (or "North of Ireland FA" :eek:) to occupy a regional/subsidiary position, akin to that of eg the Leinster or Munster FA's.

Now I accept that several Leinster/Dublin clubs had grievances against the IFA in Belfast, many of them no doubt well-founded. Nonetheless, when one considers the history and distribution of the game in Ireland, plus the fact that NI was to remain within the UK (at least pro tem), never mind the influence the IFA enjoyed within the International Board, the combination of arrogance and naivety on behalf of the FAI is pretty breathtaking (imo).

Btw, the leader of the IFA delegation was Captain Wilton. From his background etc, he might be expected to have been a a hardliner, but as JCD's blog entry indicates, he was actually a conciliatory and widely respected individual (the "UVF" cited has no connection with the present-day gang of vermin, other than the name, I hasten to add):
http://nifootball.blogspot.com/2007/09/james-wilton.html

I'd love to see such a document if it exists today.

Byrne mentions that Captain James Wilton was later to be knighted and Henry McLaughlin KBE was the FAI president and presenter. Wilton is quoted as saying "the new organisation would be ostracised internationally if they persisted in their foolhardiness" Maybe he knew about the 33 team World Cup. :D Byrne doesn't seem to have a date either but subsequently talks about the blacklisting and the visit of French side AC Gallia.

I very much doubt if Cliftonville were being considered despite Henry's connections. They would still have been a gentleman amateur team then and presumably mainly unionist.

Belfast Celtic were out of the Irish League at the time - left in 1920 returned for 24/5. A team from west Belfast Alton United entered and won the FAI Cup in 1923.

[The Fly]

GR, to bring the protracted 'discussion' between you and I full circle and back to the original point of contention - you agreed with the claim that people who oppose Northern Ireland's existance, i.e Nationalists, support/elect to play for ROI representative sides. You proceeded to provide "evidence" to support what is a spurious claim.

Once more, the reason is because those fans/players don't have a sense of statehood/national identity with Northern Ireland. Why?...there isn't one.
That's the problem!

[ArdeeBhoy]

Fly,
Please Don't.

As those contributions are the most patronising and contrived on this thread! :eek:
You're best off rationalising elsewhere.
;)

[geysir]

By the sounds of it, Sir Henry the FAI president was a Unionist.
Interesting story around the split. One or probably both parties were not with serious intent on maintaining football unity except under their umbrella.
I wonder how the other main sports like rugby didn't suffer the same (mis)fortune.

[co. down green]

Btw, the leader of the IFA delegation was Captain Wilton. From his background etc, he might be expected to have been a a hardliner, but as JCD's blog entry indicates, he was actually a conciliatory and widely respected individual (the "UVF" cited has no connection with the present-day gang of vermin, other than the name, I hasten to add):


Wilton's son Claude, was a prominemt member of the civil rights movement in Derry in 1968, and in later years became a member of ther SDLP.

Ivan Cooper, who was a close friend of Claude's, said: "He was one of the legends of this city. He did not choose the path of his family. His father was a Unionist Mayor of Derry but Claude chose a different path, the path of civil rights. Instead of playing rugby he played football with the common five eights of this city. He was there on October 5, 1968 and was prominent in every facet of working-class life in this city."

[gspain]

Wilton's son Claude, was a prominemt member of the civil rights movement in Derry in 1968, and in later years became a member of ther SDLP.

Ivan Cooper, who was a close friend of Claude's, said: "He was one of the legends of this city. He did not choose the path of his family. His father was a Unionist Mayor of Derry but Claude chose a different path, the path of civil rights. Instead of playing rugby he played football with the common five eights of this city. He was there on October 5, 1968 and was prominent in every facet of working-class life in this city."

Given his father was capped 7 times for Ireland - see EG's link

http://nifootball.blogspot.com/2007/09/james-wilton.html

he was hardly playing football instead of rugby to distance himself from his father. His father seems to have been well thought of by everyone as well judging from the blog above.

[gspain]

By the sounds of it, Sir Henry the FAI president was a Unionist.
Interesting story around the split. One or probably both parties were not with serious intent on maintaining football unity except under their umbrella.
I wonder how the other main sports like rugby didn't suffer the same (mis)fortune.

No idea of Sir Henry's politics but probably a fair assumption.

I think one of the important things to bear in mind that the split was very much club driven and club focussed and was because the southern clubs felt they were getting a raw deal. It was Shels being forced to go back to Belfast for a cup replay that was considered to be the straw that broke the camel's back. The IFA's argument was that Dublin was unsafe due to the War of Independence.

The IFA probably saw the FAI as upstarts who would come crawling back with their tail between their legs in a few years.

I think it is also fair to say that the FAI document referenced by Brodie & Byrne (even allowing for slight differences) was hardly one of reconciliation.
However given virtually nothing else seems to be known about the meetings it is hard to tell. Given the IFA came to Dublin for the last one would indicate that they at least were being serious albeit presumably on their terms.

The French and subsequent FIFA recognition in 1923 appears to have been key to the survival and future of the FAI.

[ArdeeBhoy]

The French and subsequent FIFA recognition in 1923 appears to have been key to the survival and future of the FAI.

Now there's irony.

[kingdomkerry]

Rather than base my analysis/hopes about "the big one" on crude sectarian headcounts, I would be more minded to study what peoples attitudes are.

eg,

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2007/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html

Furthermore, with the Celtic Tiger falling apart, I don't think a lot of the 66% of those favouring the Union, will be changing their mind any time soon.

By the way, if I can be convinced that me and my family would be better off in a "United" Ireland than by remaining part of the UK, i'll vote for it.

Similarly, if anyone can convince me why it would be a good idea that the International football team I support disappears, I'll buy the ticket.

Unfortunately, people demonising/vilifying/labelling me for making considered, grown up, decisions on such issues won't be going anyway towards convincing me that those people are right.

That NILT survey is rubbish. It also states that the percentage of people who would vote for SF in the north is 12-14% when it is in fact 26%.

Republicans/nationalists if asked by any stranger they did not know were asked if they were a Republican they would either not respond or lie.

A lot of Republicans keep their beliefs to themselves as they are anti-establishment and anti-status quo.

If you want proof of this just look at past surveys that polled large amounts of people during elections, the polls would state that SF were a small party yet when it came to voting in the privacy of the booth, people made SF the second largest party in the north.

[jinxy lilywhite]

With all due respect Kingdom Kerrry I do not believe the majority of folks in the north whether they be Catholic/Protestant, Loyalist/Republican, Nationalist/Unionist would vote to join the south. The border is there and alot of people are making alot of money out of the border whether it be legal or illegal. In this day and age money talks and i believe the average northerner would not see an advantage to joining the south because of the extra euros flooding in up there. on the flipside if and when the sterling strengthens again the reverse may happen.
as long as there is profit to be made out of the border then it will be there

[micls]

With all due respect Kingdom Kerrry I do not believe the majority of folks in the north whether they be Catholic/Protestant, Loyalist/Republican, Nationalist/Unionist would vote to join the south. The border is there and alot of people are making alot of money out of the border whether it be legal or illegal. In this day and age money talks and i believe the average northerner would not see an advantage to joining the south because of the extra euros flooding in up there. on the flipside if and when the sterling strengthens again the reverse may happen.
as long as there is profit to be made out of the border then it will be there

Not only that but its certainly not guaranteed that people down here will vote to take the North on either.

We cant afford ourselves, and NI is a huge drain on the British economy, imagine what it'd do to ours.

[kingdomkerry]

With all due respect Kingdom Kerrry I do not believe the majority of folks in the north whether they be Catholic/Protestant, Loyalist/Republican, Nationalist/Unionist would vote to join the south. The border is there and alot of people are making alot of money out of the border whether it be legal or illegal. In this day and age money talks and i believe the average northerner would not see an advantage to joining the south because of the extra euros flooding in up there. on the flipside if and when the sterling strengthens again the reverse may happen.
as long as there is profit to be made out of the border then it will be there

I agree a majority would not vote for unification in the present. It cant be ruled out in the future is all im saying considering the changing demographics.

Im only trying to argue this because I think it is relevant to the thread (merging IFA and FAI)

[geysir]

However, the IFA delegation was described by Brodie as being "baffled" that immediately after the Meeting, the FAI delegation was able to produce a typed Statement, which outlined their conclusions (i.e. the clear implication being that this must have been prepared before they even met the IFA).

.......................

It is no wonder that Capt. Wilton, the leader of the IFA delegation, was to describe this Statement (I'm tempted to call it "Easter Proclamation II" :rolleyes:) as "Impossible" and "out of the question", causing them to leave the Conference.

Sounds like Wilton was grandstanding.
I don't see the evidence pointing beyond the face value, the FAI prepared their points, typed them out before the meeting and presented the same points afterwards to any press. I see any special significance attached to that.

The bone of contention was what was contained in the 8 points and the lack of any compromise or resolutions.

[as_i_say]

Northern Ireland are crap.

[Straightstory]

[QUOTE=kingdomkerry;1294531
Republicans/nationalists if asked by any stranger they did not know were asked if they were a Republican they would either not respond or lie.
[/QUOTE]

Interesting mindset.

[Not Brazil]

That NILT survey is rubbish.


It's easy, and convenient, for you to dismiss it as "rubbish", as it blows apart some of your earlier assertions.

You'll find lots more detailed surveys conducted by NILT which may leave you scratching your head, and re-thinking your assertions.;)

[Gather round]

Interesting posts about the early football history from Messrs GSpain, Ealing and Co. Down.


That NILT survey is rubbish. It also states that the percentage of people who would vote for SF in the north is 12-14% when it is in fact 26%

We already know how many vote Sinn Fein. That's the best guide to how many will vote for them in the near future.


A lot of Republicans keep their beliefs to themselves as they are anti-establishment and anti-status quo

Why, are they ashamed of being republicans? ;)

This is common enough. Many DUP voters have long claimed to vote for other parties, ditto Conservative voters in England during Thatcherism, and I daresay much of Fianna Fail's support in the Republic.


I agree a majority would not vote for unification in the present. It cant be ruled out in the future is all im saying considering the changing demographics

Not ruling it out is rather less than your claim earlier- you seemed to think then that it was inevitable and anyone challenging this was in denial...


i believe the average northerner would not see an advantage to joining the south because of the extra euros flooding in up there. on the flipside if and when the sterling strengthens again the reverse may happen...as long as there is profit to be made out of the border then it will be there

That suggests support for a border (ie, unionism) should fluctuate sharply with currency exchange rates. In practice this is a minor factor compared to national identity.


We cant afford ourselves, and NI is a huge drain on the British economy, imagine what it'd do to ours

NI is rather less of a drain than during 30 years of political violence. And to stress, it's only 3% of the population of Britain (as opposed to 30% of Ireland). It's little more of a drain on the British economy than Tyneside or the Black Country (similarly sized areas with low income per head and high unemployment).

[Not Brazil]

I agree a majority would not vote for unification in the present. It cant be ruled out in the future is all im saying considering the changing demographics.


1998

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/1998/Political_Attitudes/NIRELAND.html

2008

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2008/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html

Not too much "change in demographics" there then.:)

Keep the dream alive - even when the evidence doesn't stack up.

[EalingGreen]

Wilton's son Claude, was a prominemt member of the civil rights movement in Derry in 1968, and in later years became a member of ther SDLP.

Ivan Cooper, who was a close friend of Claude's, said: "He was one of the legends of this city. He did not choose the path of his family. His father was a Unionist Mayor of Derry but Claude chose a different path, the path of civil rights. Instead of playing rugby he played football with the common five eights of this city. He was there on October 5, 1968 and was prominent in every facet of working-class life in this city."
Interesting observation, CDG. It gave me cause to root around a wee bit more for info on Claude, including finding the last part of that tribute by Cooper - i.e. his (Wilton's) campaigning slogan was "Vote for Claude, the Catholic Prod!" ;)

Anyhow, I feel that Cooper is incorrect when he implies that Claude's choice of football was a sign of his solidarity etc with the ordinary people of Derry.

For if you look at his background, he had a dual* sporting heritage. As a (middle-class) pupil at Foyle & Londonderry college, then a student at TCD, he was immersed in rugby.

But his father was a former NI international footballer, whose career in football administration later saw him become President of the IFA. Moreoever, his uncle Robert (James' brother) was also a noted footballing figure, including with Limavady United and the North West FA etc.

Anyhow, it would appear from the "Football" section of this Radio Foyle interview with Claude that he simply preferred football (or "sawkker" as he called it) to rugby, but not so much that it prevented him for playing the latter for City of Derry RFC for a while:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/radiofoyle/programmes/markpatterson/claude_wilton.shtml

Fascinating character all round.




* - Triple, actually, if you add Cricket

[kingdomkerry]

1998

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/1998/Political_Attitudes/NIRELAND.html

2008

http://www.ark.ac.uk/nilt/2008/Political_Attitudes/NIRELND2.html

Not too much "change in demographics" there then.:)

Keep the dream alive - even when the evidence doesn't stack up.

Evidence does'nt stack up eh :rolleyes:

I stated that demographic change is occuring in favour of nationalism. I provided evidence for this. http://ulstersdoomed.blogspot.com/search/label/Demography

Heres some more http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/ni/religion.htm#ni-rel-02 Note the catholic/nationalist population has gone up from approx 33% in 1921 to approx 43% at present.

You will find more here http://www.nisra.gov.uk/

I then got the repartition arguement. Im not even going to argue against this because in order for this to happen it would involve nationalist ireland and the irish gov to agree. Will never happen.

Your last throw of the dice was the NILT "opinion polls"
Im discrediting these polls not because "its easy and convenient" but

1.People lie in NI opinion polls.
The same poll showed 12-14% of the NI electorate vote for SF. In the election they got over 26%. This shows the poll is not accurate.

2.People do not know what they are voting for.
Even if these polls were accurate I would not be worried. To quote a poster on a different forum

Until such time as we receive a Unity paper, there is absolutely no point in asking anyone what they support.

Its true that historically a percentage of Catholics favoured the status quo , but this was always in absence of a detailed proposal of change.

Those who do not support unity now are not necessarily Unionists, they are people without a choice.
The only thing they know is the status quo.
Until you hand them an alternative with facts there is no point in polling them.

Would people have voted for the Lisbon treaty before they heard any details about it?
Why do people expect a biast poll to give an accurate result?
Its not a poll on the United Kingdom verses complete Independence of Ireland.
Its a poll on wether people want something they know, or something they know nothing about.
I'm surprised the polls get the results they do, its very encouraging for Republicanism.
We only need to convince about an extra 20% of the norths electorate with a unity paper.
Get the north and souths governments together and create a Unity paper.
Tell me what's in it and then you can ask me If I will vote for it.

Until such a time you are merely polling people on whether they want things to remain as they are, or to change into something they have zero information about.
A poll is void if it is devoid of detail of facts.

The only polls which will matter will be the polls that are asking the voters near a referendum, when they have facts and details.
We haven't reached that point so its all pointless, and pointless arguing about it.


As they say statistics dont lie but liars can use statistics;)

[co. down green]

That NILT survey is rubbish. It also states that the percentage of people who would vote for SF in the north is 12-14% when it is in fact 26%.

The survey linked by NB was basically rubbished my most commentators the week it was released in June 2009. I’m not sure why anyone would give a survey of 1000 odd people that much time anyway, especially when it consistently gets it so wrong.

The European election results the week after this survey was released ensured that it was seen as pointless and of little real benefit or use as an indicator of real trends or thoughts. The fact that it was so innacurate in gauging party support was probably the reason that its findings have been given so little coverage in the press or media.

Democratic elections are a much clearer indication of people’s beliefs and aspirations & the 42.5% turnout for Nationalism in ther last Euro elections is a real indication of where people stand on the National question.

The creation of a united Ireland football team is the declared policy of both the SDLP and Sinn Féin, as stated in their manifestos, and both parties have openly called for the creation a single team on the island. The SDLP especially, have been strong advocates of the creation of an all Ireland team.

[EalingGreen]

I think one of the important things to bear in mind that the split was very much club driven and club focussed and was because the southern clubs felt they were getting a raw deal. It was Shels being forced to go back to Belfast for a cup replay that was considered to be the straw that broke the camel's back. The IFA's argument was that Dublin was unsafe due to the War of Independence.
Dublin clubs being unhappy with their Association is hardly unheard of, is it? ;)
Anyhow, for various reasons, it seems there were all sorts of disagreements in the administration of the game during this period, as football experienced "growing pains".
Belfast clubs such as Linfield, Glentoran and Belfast Celtic also had grievances from time to time - see the row over the breakaway/alternative Gold Cup etc from a decade earlier, for instance.
Plus there were numerous "range wars" between the IFA and Irish League.
The struggle to cope with Professionalism also became more prominent around this period, along with the push to expand the game from its urban strongholds (Belfast, Dublin), especially in the face of competition from GAA and Rugby etc.
Therefore this was always going to be an unsettled period in Irish football; add the thorny issue of Politics/Civil War etc, then imo it was almost inevitably going to combust. (About which more, below)



The IFA probably saw the FAI as upstarts who would come crawling back with their tail between their legs in a few years.
I imagine that was one attitude - maybe even the concensus? - within the IFA. That said, they will likely have been at least partly influenced by the context in which these events took place.
From what I can gather, other than in Dublin and a few garrison towns, football had very little presence in the 26 counties - at least compared with in NE Ulster. In fact, whole swathes of Munster and Connaught had hardly a football team to their name.
To make a modern analogy, could you imagine Ulster Rugby falling out with the IRFU and making a breakaway to create a new NIRFU? Yet Rugby is considerably more established in NI in 2009 than football was throughout the Free State in 1921.



I think it is also fair to say that the FAI document referenced by Brodie & Byrne (even allowing for slight differences) was hardly one of reconciliation.
However given virtually nothing else seems to be known about the meetings it is hard to tell. Given the IFA came to Dublin for the last one would indicate that they at least were being serious albeit presumably on their terms.


Tbh, on re-reading Brodie, he indicates that whilst the Dublin clubs might have been the vehicle which carried the FAI towards breakaway, the engine which drove them was politics.

In his Chapter on the subject, he writes:

"What caused the split? Was it the dispute over Shelbourne? That no doubt was a contributory factor but the prime reason appeared to be the formation of the Irish Free State and the desire of the Leinster FA to break away from the parent body"

And to be fair, if a reluctance to see a halving of the number of "blazers" is sometimes cited as a reason why the two Associations do not want to unite today, might not the opportunity to double the number by exploiting political differences to create a new body, have tempted some Dublin-based individuals as well?

As for the FAI document, the implication by Brodie is that the IFA came down to Dublin to negotiate a resolution in good faith, but were dismayed when it appeared that this was never actually reciprocated by the FAI, since the latter had already determined to breakaway regardless. Therefore when the FAI presented a list of demands which would effectively mean that the IFA must take a subsidiary, rather than equal, position in any new body, they (FAI) must have known that this could/would not be acceptable to the IFA.

Of course, the IFA will doubtless have had its share of "dinosaurs", but from what little I can glean about Captain Wilton, he was a liberal, conciliatory type - at least by the standards of the day.

[Gather round]

I then got the repartition arguement. Im not even going to argue against this because in order for this to happen it would involve nationalist ireland and the irish gov to agree. Will never happen

Translation: 'it doesn't fit my fixed idea of what will happen in future, so I'll ignore it'. Be honest, you don't know what future politicians will do. It's a possibility.


Until such time as we receive a Unity paper, there is absolutely no point in asking anyone what they support

You don't think (possibly loaded) opinion polls are of any value? Fine, others disagree- they wouldn't take place otherwise. Incidentally, if any future NI election voted 51% to reunify, would you ignore because it wasn't specifically a 'unity paper'?


Those who do not support unity now are not necessarily Unionists, they are people without a choice

This is daft. Voters in Northern Ireland can choose between a variety of nationalist and unionist parties, plus Alliance, UK parties like Green, UKIP and soon Conservative, with Fianna Fail set to join in. Choice isn't unlimited, but hardly non-existent.


We only need to convince about an extra 20% of the norths electorate with a unity paper

Aye, like you just need to convince 20% of the Brit electorate to have permanent Lib Dem government. It's not quite as easy as you suggest...


As they say statistics dont lie but liars can use statistics

Statistics often self-contradict, which may amount to the same thing. If, say, 42% vote for abolish the border parties in an election then only 18% want to abolish it in a separate survey.


]I’m not sure why anyone would give a survey of 1000 odd people that much time anyway, especially when it consistently gets it so wrong

Generally, 1,000 is a standard sample size for opinion polling. MORI, Gallup etc. use it in Britain to reflect a population of 60 million.


The creation of a united Ireland football team is the declared policy of both the SDLP and Sinn Féin, as stated in their manifestos, and both parties have openly called for the creation a single team on the island. The SDLP especially, have been strong advocates of the creation of an all Ireland team

As you'd expect, they're single issue parties to abolish the border.

[gspain]

Tbh, on re-reading Brodie, he indicates that whilst the Dublin clubs might have been the vehicle which carried the FAI towards breakaway, the engine which drove them was politics.

In his Chapter on the subject, he writes:

"What caused the split? Was it the dispute over Shelbourne? That no doubt was a contributory factor but the prime reason appeared to be the formation of the Irish Free State and the desire of the Leinster FA to break away from the parent body"



There wasn't any Free State in June 1921. Michael Collins didn't go to London to negotiate the treaty until October.

[jinxy lilywhite]

With all due respect Kingdom Kerrry I do not believe the majority of folks in the north whether they be Catholic/Protestant, Loyalist/Republican, Nationalist/Unionist would vote to join the south. The border is there and alot of people are making alot of money out of the border whether it be legal or illegal. In this day and age money talks and i believe the average northerner would not see an advantage to joining the south because of the extra euros flooding in up there. on the flipside if and when the sterling strengthens again the reverse may happen.
as long as there is profit to be made out of the border then it will be there



That suggests support for a border (ie, unionism) should fluctuate sharply with currency exchange rates. In practice this is a minor factor compared to national identity.


Don't get me wrong I would love nothing more than Ireland to be one nation in one island but in truth when it does happen all i can see is, all hell beaking lose and unfortuneately I can never see that day nor would I ever then as a result would I want that day to happen. So I suppose maybe in a perverse way I'd be unionist, though I wouldn't have time for unionism per se
As a part of my bringing up I was never taught to believe in national identities or that I was different to anybody else because of my nationality or my religion (though i am not very religious).
Personally I would be off the belief that I would and could live anywhere under any flag as long as I had my basic human rights i.e the right to work, provide for my family and the right to vote in free and fair elections.
I do have to laugh at some folk though thinking that NI one will be looking to join the south. I think one day maybe the south may look to go back

[EalingGreen]

The survey linked by NB was basically rubbished my most commentators the week it was released in June 2009. I’m not sure why anyone would give a survey of 1000 odd people that much time anyway, especially when it consistently gets it so wrong.

The European election results the week after this survey was released ensured that it was seen as pointless and of little real benefit or use as an indicator of real trends or thoughts. The fact that it was so innacurate in gauging party support was probably the reason that its findings have been given so little coverage in the press or media.

Democratic elections are a much clearer indication of people’s beliefs and aspirations & the 42.5% turnout for Nationalism in ther last Euro elections is a real indication of where people stand on the National question.

The creation of a united Ireland football team is the declared policy of both the SDLP and Sinn Féin, as stated in their manifestos, and both parties have openly called for the creation a single team on the island. The SDLP especially, have been strong advocates of the creation of an all Ireland team.

I haven't had the time or inclination even to read the NILT survey to which NB referred, plus I am very loathe to enter into the political (i.e. non-footballing) side of this thread.

But for all that the Nationalist Parties are "strong advocates" of a single Irish team etc, they would appear to have rather more important matters to address.

For soon after the European elections to which you refer, SF held a series of roadshows in the USA, to appeal to Irish America for dollars, sorry, one last push towards a UI etc

Anyhow, one of their Platform Speakers was (Corkman) Professor Brendan O'Leary. If you Google him, you will see that O'Leary is a leading political psephologist/demographer, not just in the Irish context, but internationally. For example, he was New Labour's chief guru in GB during Tony Blair's electoral successes of the 1990's etc. And I think it fair to say he is no friend of Ulster Unionism!

Yet the Irish Times reported that O'Leary had disclosed at SF's San Francisco (or LA?) Conference that he felt that the European Election results indicated to him that electoral support for a UI in NI had now plateaued. Consequently, he did not foresee a 50%+1 majority for unification arising "in the foreseeable future" - a clear u-turn from his previous forecasts.

Strangely enough, when I looked for confirmation of this on SF's website, Press Releases etc soon after, this particular contribution by O'Leary was nowhere to be seen...:rolleyes:

Anyhow, I am always rather sceptical about attempts to predict such matters over the long-term, but if the likes of O'Leary is now admitting it, it can hardly be bad news for those who advocate retaining the Union!

And if the Union is secure, then more importantly, so must be the NI team! ;)

[EalingGreen]

There wasn't any Free State in June 1921. Michael Collins didn't go to London to negotiate the treaty until October.
I know. But that doesn't contradict Brodie's thesis.
In fact if anything, it reinforces it, assuming that the Shelbourne Hotel meeting was after October 1921.
For such a sequence might explain why the dispute went from initially being a set of grievances by a couple of individual Dublin clubs, to a full-scale movement to breakaway by the Leinster FA i.e. overriding political events caused (footballing) attitudes in the 26 counties to harden progressively.

[ifk101]

I know. But that doesn't contradict Brodie's thesis.
In fact if anything, it reinforces it, assuming that the Shelbourne Hotel meeting was after October 1921.
For such a sequence might explain why the dispute went from initially being a set of grievances by a couple of individual Dublin clubs, to a full-scale movement to breakaway by the Leinster FA i.e. overriding political events caused (footballing) attitudes in the 26 counties to harden progressively.

I don't believe the formation of the FAI was politically motivated. Rather the general politicial environment was used to facilitate and legitimise its establishment.

The establishment of the FAI was the end result of what was essentially a power struggle within the IFA. Setting up a rival FA is not a spur of the moment event, it seems it was a very calculated move that was planned (for some time?) in advance.

[co. down green]

I haven't had the time or inclination even to read the NILT survey to which NB referred, plus I am very loathe to enter into the political (i.e. non-footballing) side of this thread.

But for all that the Nationalist Parties are "strong advocates" of a single Irish team etc, they would appear to have rather more important matters to address.

For soon after the European elections to which you refer, SF held a series of roadshows in the USA, to appeal to Irish America for dollars, sorry, one last push towards a UI etc

Anyhow, one of their Platform Speakers was (Corkman) Professor Brendan O'Leary. If you Google him, you will see that O'Leary is a leading political psephologist/demographer, not just in the Irish context, but internationally. For example, he was New Labour's chief guru in GB during Tony Blair's electoral successes of the 1990's etc. And I think it fair to say he is no friend of Ulster Unionism!

Yet the Irish Times reported that O'Leary had disclosed at SF's San Francisco (or LA?) Conference that he felt that the European Election results indicated to him that electoral support for a UI in NI had now plateaued. Consequently, he did not foresee a 50%+1 majority for unification arising "in the foreseeable future" - a clear u-turn from his previous forecasts.)

EG, the point of my previous post was to point out that NB using some survey to try and indicate the future or present beliefs of people living in the North was a bit daft when they democratically exercised that right in June 2009, the same week as his survey was published.

Your other comments aren't really relevent to me or the thread, time will take care of the future governance of the North (as has been agreed by most of us living here), although O’Leary suggested that, if power-sharing is good for nationalists in the North today, it might be appropriate for Unionists too in a future, federal Ireland. Its all Crystal Ball stuff!

Anyway, I’ve much preferred the Irish football history comments over the last couple of pages, all very interesting and educational! :)

[EalingGreen]

I don't believe the formation of the FAI was politically motivated. Rather the general politicial environment was used to facilitate and legitimise its establishment.

The establishment of the FAI was the end result of what was essentially a power struggle within the IFA.
If it was, as you suggest, a political (small "p", not capital "P") power struggle within the IFA, then this overlooks the fact that the balance of power was very uneven.
So why would the Leinster FA make a bid for power, within a single entity, which they could not realistically win?
For not only were the six counties the clearly established stronghold of football in Ireland at the time, but the IFA had much greater resources, as well as the history of a senior Association and the influence of their Membership of the International Board.



Setting up a rival FA is not a spur of the moment event, it seems it was a very calculated move that was planned (for some time?) in advance.What is your evidence that they were following a long-term strategy to breakaway?

I'm not saying you are wrong, but the fact that the IFA was prepared to conduct negotiations over a long period, and was still taken by surprise by the Shelbourne Hotel document, doesn't make sense.
That is, it would have been in their (IFA's) interests to nip any prospective breakaway in the bud much earlier i.e. before the Leinster FA bolstered its forces.

My own guess (nothing more than that, mind) is that what started out as a dispute between a couple of Dublin clubs and the IFA, developed so that the Leinster FA took up the cudgel on behalf of their Members.

Then when political events caused a hardening of attitudes generally between North and South, that caused the Leinster (and Munster) FA(s) to determine to go the whole way towards secession.

(Without meaning to be controversial, it's a bit like events in NI in the late 60's/early 70's i.e. what started out as a campaign for Civil Rights within NI, supported even by some Unionists etc, eventually metamorphosed into a full-blown drive for a United Ireland, driven exclusively from within the Nationalist Community. But maybe that's only adding another 50 pages to this thread, for which I apologise in advance!)

[Not Brazil]

EG, the point of my previous post was to point out that NB using some survey to try and indicate the future or present beliefs of people living in the North was a bit daft when they democratically exercised that right in June 2009, the same week as his survey was published.


To be accurate, less than 43% eligible, exercised that right.

I was amongst the majority of voters who didn't.

[co. down green]

To be accurate, less than 43% eligible, exercised that right.

I was amongst the majority of voters who didn't.

Yawn!!

[gspain]

I know. But that doesn't contradict Brodie's thesis.
In fact if anything, it reinforces it, assuming that the Shelbourne Hotel meeting was after October 1921.
For such a sequence might explain why the dispute went from initially being a set of grievances by a couple of individual Dublin clubs, to a full-scale movement to breakaway by the Leinster FA i.e. overriding political events caused (footballing) attitudes in the 26 counties to harden progressively.

It's a reasonable assumption. I don't know and we probably never will for sure.

We did have a proiper league and cup from 1921/22 season albeit with all Dublin clubs.

BTW just to correct something a few pages back. NI did not play as Ireland in friendlies or at least didn't v Uruguay in 1964 - used "Northern Ireland" on the programme as per non BC games.

That would be consistent with the RoI as we used "Republic of Ireland" from 1954 on for both friendlies and competitive games.

[ifk101]

So why would the Leinster FA make a bid for power, within a single entity, which they could not realistically win?

I can only speculate but perhaps you answered your own question by highlighting that the balance of power was so one-sided (and that power was being abused?)

I'd question if the Leinster FA/ Dublin clubs had a nationalist sentiment strong enough to motivate the establishment of a separate FA on purely political grounds. After all football wasn't the nationalist sport of the day.



What is your evidence that they were following a long-term strategy to breakaway?

Well how do you define "long-term"? Obviously the involved parties needed a level of organisation to establish the FAI. A level of organisation that would have taken time. How much time? - anybody's guess.


My own guess (nothing more than that, mind) is that what started out as a dispute between a couple of Dublin clubs and the IFA, developed so that the Leinster FA took up the cudgel on behalf of their Members.

Then when political events caused a hardening of attitudes generally between North and South, that caused the Leinster (and Munster) FA(s) to determine to go the whole way towards secession.

Yes your suggestion is plausible.

I think there's enough clues there to suggest there was a determination from the FAI to replace the IFA as the island's FA and that was the motivation for its establishment. Whether this determination's engine was political is open to debate.

[kingdomkerry]

I haven't had the time or inclination even to read the NILT survey to which NB referred, plus I am very loathe to enter into the political (i.e. non-footballing) side of this thread.

But for all that the Nationalist Parties are "strong advocates" of a single Irish team etc, they would appear to have rather more important matters to address.

For soon after the European elections to which you refer, SF held a series of roadshows in the USA, to appeal to Irish America for dollars, sorry, one last push towards a UI etc

Anyhow, one of their Platform Speakers was (Corkman) Professor Brendan O'Leary. If you Google him, you will see that O'Leary is a leading political psephologist/demographer, not just in the Irish context, but internationally. For example, he was New Labour's chief guru in GB during Tony Blair's electoral successes of the 1990's etc. And I think it fair to say he is no friend of Ulster Unionism!

Yet the Irish Times reported that O'Leary had disclosed at SF's San Francisco (or LA?) Conference that he felt that the European Election results indicated to him that electoral support for a UI in NI had now plateaued. Consequently, he did not foresee a 50%+1 majority for unification arising "in the foreseeable future" - a clear u-turn from his previous forecasts.

Strangely enough, when I looked for confirmation of this on SF's website, Press Releases etc soon after, this particular contribution by O'Leary was nowhere to be seen...:rolleyes:

Anyhow, I am always rather sceptical about attempts to predict such matters over the long-term, but if the likes of O'Leary is now admitting it, it can hardly be bad news for those who advocate retaining the Union!

And if the Union is secure, then more importantly, so must be the NI team! ;)

Link? Didn't think so

[EastTerracer]

Fascinated by the history lesson being conducted here by EG and gspain - I've read many of the books related to the foundation of the FAI but it's interesting to hear the Brodie version of events and the various interpretations of the motivation for the breakaway.

Regardless of the broader discussion on here about the prospects for an All-Ireland team I think this constructive discussion proves that there is far more that unites us than divides us. Thanks lads.