Player eligibility row

[EalingGreen]

are you against Irish nationals by birth representing their country?I am against any National exploiting what is essentially a political stance, in order to subvert the basic footballing principles re eligibility etc., especially when that proves inequitable to fellow footballing countries.
That was the position I held when I heard that eg the Government of Qatar was giving out Passports to Brazilian-born footballers, so that they might subvert the normal eligibility criteria to represent their "new" country. If nothing else, this was liable to give Qatar an unfair advantage over their African neighbours.

If so, you are against the true essence of what international football seeks to and should represent.Nice try to box me into a corner, but it doesn't work. For me, the opportunity to represent a country in international football is not a "right", it is a privilege. Moreover, since in essence it is determined by place of birth, it ought not to be a matter of "choice", as demanded eg by Darron Gibson, since one cannot choose to be born in any particular location (though one may choose to reside in such location...).
The fact that FIFA appears to allow NI-born people a choice does not make it any fairer (imo), especially when it does not offer the same choice to anyone born within the jurisdiction of any of its other 207 Member Associations.

[EalingGreen]

I think you will find that Gorman qualifies for both Irish teams via his Co. Derry born mother.I was unaware that that is how he qualified to represent the FAI, just as i had thought it was his grandmother, rather than his mother, so thanks for that.
Beyond that, I was always under the impression that Coleraine was in Co. Londonderry, the former county of "Coleraine" having been abolished when the local authorities reorganised the county system which they had imported from England and no "Co. Derry" ever having existed.


I suggest you contact FIFA's legal department with any queries regarding eligibility, although i would have thought that the penny would have dropped by now, after FIFA have clearly stated on a number of occasions, that players born in the North continue to be eligible to represent Ireland.I am quite aware that players born in what you term "the North" (Northern Ireland) are deemed eligible by FIFA to represent the FAI.
But young Gorman was not born in NI. Therefore, having been born outside Ireland, I am genuinely unsure how he avoids the need to satisfy the normal Dual Nationality requirements of having a parent/grandparent/residence in the Irish Republic.
(Oh, and there has been no international association football team called "Ireland" since the IFA voluntarily desisted from using that name for their team in friendly matches, sometime around 1980)

Edit: Re Gorman, I have just noticed DI's interesting post on the matter, above (#846). I should be interested to know what justification is used by ROI fans who feel he legitimately represented the FAI.

[ifk101]

Moreover, since in essence it is determined by place of birth, it ought not to be a matter of "choice", as demanded eg by Darron Gibson, since one cannot choose to be born in any particular location (though one may choose to reside in such location...).

Eligibility is not determined by place of birth.


The fact that FIFA appears to allow NI-born people a choice does not make it any fairer (imo), especially when it does not offer the same choice to anyone born within the jurisdiction of any of its other 207 Member Associations.

But FIFA isn't making an exception for NI-born people.

[Drumcondra 69er]

I was not attempting to pass off the basic premise of international eligibility (i.e. born within the jurisdiction of a Member Association of FIFA) as being specifically reflected in FIFA's Articles, merely pointing to its (premise) existence, in order to highlight the anomalous and inequitable situation re the IFA. This premise might prove inconvenient for you, but that does not alter it, never mind refute its existence.
It does, indeed, appear to be unique; moreover it is recognised by FIFA. That does not mean it is fair* or equitable.

* - Just like Gallas's goal in Paris was recognised by FIFA as being "legitimate"...

Bit like the United Kingdom being allowed to have 4 seperate representative teams rather then just one so.....

[co. down green]

IBut young Gorman was not born in NI. Therefore, having been born outside Ireland, I am genuinely unsure how he avoids the need to satisfy the normal Dual Nationality requirements of having a parent/grandparent/residence in the Irish Republic..

I'm fairly sure FIFA's legal department covered this in their response to the IFA in March 2006, when the IFA appealed against the eligibility of Alex Bruce to play for Ireland (although in truth, the appeal was as much about sour grapes on the IFA part, as Bruce had rejected four approaches from the IFA management team in the previous twelve months).

The response received from the IFA stated that In order for the player Bruce to be able to play for a representative team of the Republic of Ireland, he shall be required to hold a passport of the Republic of Ireland.

[EalingGreen]

Eligibility is not determined by place of birth. Nor did I say it was, either. (You are ignoring my qualification of "in essence").


But FIFA isn't making an exception for NI-born people.Not in so many words, no. But can you point me towards any other territory anywhere else in the world which as a place of birth automatically qualifies a player to represent two different National; Associations?
From what I can see, the only one out of the 208 MA's of FIFA is NI (IFA).
That seems pretty exceptional to me.

[EalingGreen]

Bit like the United Kingdom being allowed to have 4 seperate representative teams rather then just one so.....
Quite.
Mind you, if FIFA were to renege on the special status granted to the four UK Associations in return for bailing it out of bankruptcy, their only recourse would be to replace them with one, single UK team.
In which case, having removed that exception, if they were also to remove the exception whereby someone born in NI may choose to represent another Association than that within whose jurisdiction he was born, you would find that the likes of Darron Gibson would only be eligible to represent the UK.
You know, the country to whom he pays his taxes, which provided his free education and health services, allows him to vote for its Government, plus provides him and his family with pension rights and other social security benefits etc.

[EalingGreen]

I'm fairly sure FIFA's legal department covered this in their response to the IFA in March 2006, when the IFA appealed against the eligibility of Alex Bruce to play for IrelandYou may be correct. However, I should be very interested to know exactly on what grounds FIFA permitted Bruce to play for the ROI, since on the face of it, his case (and Gorman's) would appear to be excluded specifically by the provisions of Article 17.
Any ideas?

P.S. Bruce does not play for "Ireland", he only looks like a rugby player sometimes...


The response received from the IFA stated that In order for the player Bruce to be able to play for a representative team of the Republic of Ireland, he shall be required to hold a passport of the Republic of Ireland.Is that all he was required to do?
For if that is the case, I fail to see how FIFA could prevent someone holding a valid Passport of Qatar from representing the Qatar FA, for instance.
Btw, you appear to be quoting from some sort of document or report etc. Can you cite the source, or is that some construction you came up with from memory?

[ifk101]

Nor did I say it was, either. (You are ignoring my qualification of "in essence").

I didn't ignore. Eligibility is not determined by place of birth.


Not in so many words, no. But can you point me towards any other territory anywhere else in the world which as a place of birth automatically qualifies a player to represent two different National; Associations?

Relevancy?


That seems pretty exceptional to me.

Not as exceptional as denying nationals by birth the right to play for their country.

[dantheman]

The GFA is utterly irrelevant to the question of international eligibility of Irish-born players, for two reasons (at least).
1. The GFA makes no reference to Football, neither do FIFA's Statutes etc make reference to the GFA;
2. FIFA presently recognises the right of someone born within NI to represent the FAI outwith the normal parentage/residence requirements, on account of the fact that such people are automatically entitled to Republic of Ireland citiizenship as a birthright. This birthright has been available since 1921 i.e. 77 years before the GFA was even conceived.

If you read my post correctly, you would have seen that I agree that the GFA did in fact change nothing in law.

What it did show was that EVERYONE had agreed to the fact that anyone born in NI had the right to Irish citizenship, and Irish citizenship alone. Which is not possible by playing for a British team, Northern Ireland. Therefore you have no grounds to complain, as your community and (admittedly) yourself voted for it.

I see you did not take me up on my point about petitioning the Irish goverment to change its constitution. This can be done in isolation from the GFA by them mechanism I have demonstrated. This is the course you should pursue. If you do not wish this, I suggest you humbly (lol) drop the issue. Neither the CAS nor FIFA can/will change the irish constitution.

By the way, you do have much more of a case regarding and English born player, with a grandparent from NI, playing for the ROI. However that is not the case you are taking. To be perfectly honest, after reading your supporters forum, you don't seem to have a coherent plan at all, and no idea what you want. You even know you're bringing the wrong case to the CAS.
The only thing that the NI fans have in common, is a deep seated (unreciprocated) hatred of the Irish nationality with which 43% of the people in your state/country/province (& **5% of the island) identify. This is manifested in part by attacking the, more successful, Republic of Ireland. Such an attitude will not serve you well in the long term.

Expect more weeping and gnashing of teeth in loyal Ulster. Agree the banner is a joke btw

[DannyInvincible]

You confuse "Irredentism" amd "Citizenship".
An example of the former was when the Irish Republic Government claimed territorial jurisdiction over Northern Ireland, even despite such a claim being nowhere recognised under international law. (In that respect, it was a little like eg Turkey claiming jurisdiction over Northern Cyprus.) Anyhow, this irredentist claim was removed as part of the GFA negotiations, which the population of Ireland North and South (including myself, btw) supported overwhelmingly.
As for Citizenship, it is open to any Nation State to grant citizenship to whomsoever it likes, for any reason or none. This basic principle was unchanged by the GFA, other than the Government of the UK specifically acknowledged that right, rather than tacitly accepting it, as previously.
Personally, I always thought the former Irredentism of the Irish Republic to be unwelcome, unhelpful and even marginally offensive. However, I couldn't care less about their Citizenship policy (aside from the way that the FAI uses that anomaly to exploit FIFA's eligibility criteria to select players who were not born within their own jurisdiction and who also do not meet the additional parent/grandparent/residence criteria which apply to players born outwith the jurisdiction of every other of FIFA's 207 Member Associations)

The constitutional claim over the entire island was declaratory and aspirational in nature - not actually enforceable - and was restrained further from being achieved via anything other than peaceful, diplomatic means by other constitutional provisions upholding the binding nature of international law upon the actions of the Irish state. Besides, the Irish courts found, possibly on more than one occasion - I would need to confirm - that there was no legal obligation placed upon the state to actively seek the re-unification of the whole island.

I don't think anyone could ever have thought the claim over the whole island as the national territory might have manifested itself in aggressive military action or anything of the sort anyway. The notion of the Irish state militarily taking on the UK in a territorial conflict makes me chuckle more than anything; the idea of it ever being anywhere near a real prospect would have been preposterous, in spite of the rather romantic and optimistic street-rumours that circulated the Bogside of the Irish army marching in the Letterkenny Road the day Jack Lynch announced that he "could not stand by and watch innocent people injured and perhaps worse" during the events there in August of 1969 that came to be known as the Battle of the Bogside. This statement of "intent", which was interpreted by the outraged unionist community as an announcement of impending military invasion, amounted to little more than the Irish army setting up medical outposts for the injured residents of the Bogside along the Irish side of the border in Donegal.

Regardless, I do fully acknowledge how the former wording wouldn't have sat well with the unionist community in the north. I'd be going down a rather disingenuous route to attempt the argue that the claim wasn't an irredentist one under international law prior to 1999. That's something of which I can't deny the legal reality no matter what my own personal political stance might be regarding the aspirations of the my country with relation to Northern Ireland. The amendment of both worded intent and actions are, of course, a significant aspect of winning over hearts and minds in any conflict resolution.

Anyway, as you point out, the territorial claim has long been removed, but I still frequently encounter accusations that the extra-territorial applicability of Irish citizenship amounts to some sort of hostile irredentism. There are connotations in that that it might be illegitimate or legally questionable. Unfortunately, it's been expressly described as such by some of the more vocal and articulate posters on this issue on OWC, who one might have hoped would have been able to maintain a more level head, especially since its extraterritorial applicability was democratically vindicated (I think that's a fair enough description to use) in the north and further acknowledged by the UK government. In fact, you above, have just described it as an "anomaly" used to "exploit" FIFA's statutes, as if to de-legitimise it altogether. The laws regarding Irish citizenship, which have existed long before FIFA drew up its latest set of statutes, were not worded with the idea of exploiting or "subverting" the statutes of any external sports governing body in mind, as seems to be your implication, especially with your raising of the Qatari passport issue. The statutes that this body - FIFA - have composed themselves happen to permit the citizenship laws' application in the footballing sphere, which is perfectly natural, and maybe even something that FIFA took into account when wording their current statutes, seeing as they have always indicated through both words and action that they support the FAI's outlook on matters relating to this issue. A seemingly unique situation as regards the applicability of citizenship, yes, but to describe it as an anomaly would nearly suggest FIFA had made an error in overlooking something when formulating their rules. That patently isn't the case at all.

[paul_oshea]

If by "certain articles" you are referring to the application by FIFA of their Eligibility Articles etc to the Irish situation, then I would point out that not once have I ever stated in any of my numerous posts on this topic on this forum that FIFA would come down on the side of the IFA.
In fact, I was always careful to state that I thought that they might go either way - even after John Delaney was quoted by RTE at Dublin Airport as stating that the FAI had "won the battle" (Gibson), but "lost the war" (eligibility generally) as he flew home to sack Steve Staunton the following day.
Neither have I denied it when FIFA subsequently appeared to do a U-turn from Delaney's understanding and come down ultimately on the side of the FAI.

Of course, accepting that something may be so, and accepting that something should be so, are two different things entirely - even if you appear incapable of discerning it from what I and others post in this respect.

I never said you did,EG, I was referring to your interpretation and understanding of the rules. In the arguments you had a couple of years ago with Geysir, he had to point out on many occassions that your understanding was incorrect. Then when the ruling came out, you didnt appear on here for months. That in itself shows 1 and/of 2 things, a) you couldnt handle that Fifa had come down on the side of the FAI b) that you beleived that FIFA would come down on the side of the IFA and a)

But let me guess that was because you were on a sabbatical or expedition deep in the amazon rainforest with no access to the outside world - or a computer.

[dantheman]

BTW, does anyone think that NI is a great feeder club for the proper Ireland team?
What with the new motorway network in the south (M3 in Enniskillen direction opened last Friday), and Sinn Fein MP Conor Murphy working on the roads around Newry, the masterplan is kicking in. Just need to work on the A5 road now to get Duffy/Gibson safely home after match.

I;d also like to thank the good work Nigel and co did on keeping our young lads ticking over, until they made step up in to proper international football, with a proper team in a (choice of) proper stadiums...

[Charlie Darwin]

Does that mean that pre-GFA, you considered the Irish Republic Government's policy of granting citizenship automatically to people born within NI to have been less than legitimate? If so, it is ironic, even bizarre that you might think so, whilst I do not!
No, but in international relations legitimacy is derived from the recognition of other nations and the GFA was the first instance in which the British and NI governments formally recognised the Republic's right to offer automatic entitlement to those born in NI.


I did not state/imply, nor do I believe, that these were "superior"; rather they are additional or ancilliary.
Superior in the sense that residency and parentage would qualify a player to line-out for the ROI in a football match but the birthright entitlement would not.

[DannyInvincible]

I was not attempting to pass off the basic premise of international eligibility (i.e. born within the jurisdiction of a Member Association of FIFA) as being specifically reflected in FIFA's Articles, merely pointing to its (premise) existence, in order to highlight the anomalous and inequitable situation re the IFA. This premise might prove inconvenient for you, but that does not alter it, never mind refute its existence.
It does, indeed, appear to be unique; moreover it is recognised by FIFA. That does not mean it is fair* or equitable.

* - Just like Gallas's goal in Paris was recognised by FIFA as being "legitimate"...

As ifk101 correctly and continually highlights, there is no "basic premise". It doesn't have any "existence". It's a figment of your imagination, so there is no inconvenience here for me other than trying to convince you to acknowledge this fact. Why you have given it oxygen in your imagination is because the huge inconvenience to be found in this issue lies on your side; that being that the rules support the FAI's stance. There is no need to imagine some "basic premise" invoking a player's birthplace when you have the express rule telling you otherwise right in front of you.

As for fairness and equity, we all know that they are entirely subjective matters. I could just as easily argue that it would be highly unfair to prevent an Irish national from representing his country, yes?

[dantheman]

The law is on the FAI's side, it's as clear as day.
Just because you don't like it EG, doesn't mean it isn't true.

The IFA will lose the case
More players will "defect"

Stop digging...

[SkStu]

The law is on the FAI's side, it's as clear as day.
Just because you don't like it EG, doesn't mean it isn't true.

The IFA will lose the case
More players will "defect"

Stop digging...

it realy is that simple. Everything else is just noise.

[DannyInvincible]

Really? According to Duffy, his opting to represent the FAI was at least partly on account of his being a Catholic, that apparently being the natural consequence of his holding whatever religious convictions he maintains.
Fortunately, the very many other Cathoics who represent NI at all the various levels do not take the same essentially sectarian view of things.

That's just muddying the waters and sullying Duffy's name. What Duffy said was something rather casual and benign along the lines of, "Everyone knew I was a Catholic and naturally wanted to play for Ireland". I'm sure you can correct me on the exact quote, but that was certainly the nature of it and nothing more. What his comment was was an explanation of identity or background and indicative of the socio-cultural reality in Northern Ireland where the tendency of those within the nationalist community - generally used interchangeably with "Catholic community" in common local parlance, as well as by academics, historians and sociologists, for the sake of convenience - is to profess an Irish identity as opposed to a British one, so, being from the Catholic/nationalist community, choosing to play with the team that best represented his nationality, no doubt, seemed to him like a natural thing to do.

Of course, that's not to say that all Catholics are nationalists and so forth, but the general trend is that a Catholic in the north will tend to consider himself Irish rather than British. And that's in no way due to some mass communal expression of sectarianism, but rather due to cultural history. Wishing to play for the Republic's team seems like one of the more obvious manifestations of this for a footballer who need not be concerned by the potential limits of his abilities; maybe why the likes of Paddy McCourt declared for Northern Ireland. Maybe I'm entirely wrong, but despite all the assurances from those on OWC about how Paddy loves lining out on the hallowed turf of Windsor to belt out "God Save the Queen" - ;) - I'd hazard a guess that he considers himself anything but British.

Admittedly, maybe not the greatest choice of words used by Duffy and obviously somewhat naïve considering the over-willing zeal of his detractors to jump on anything he might say in order to take away from the lad's credibility - see the reaction of supposed outrage on OWC - but certainly not indicative of some bigoted or sectarian intent. He wasn't saying anything remotely along the lines of, "I'm a Catholic, so therefore hate Protestants and the very existence of Northern Ireland itself, and couldn't even imagine the prospect of lining out with them ever again, so, obviously, declaring for the all-Catholic FAI team once the opportunity arose was something my deeply-rooted hatred forced me to do". Although, you'd nearly think that reading OWC. It's just very petty, bitter stuff. Likewise, is attacking the lad's perceived level of intelligence from interviews conducted shortly after life-saving surgery, along with his moral character and that of his father's, without any knowledge or understanding of mental turmoil making the change-over might have caused him.

[DannyInvincible]

Nice try to box me into a corner, but it doesn't work. For me, the opportunity to represent a country in international football is not a "right", it is a privilege. Moreover, since in essence it is determined by place of birth, it ought not to be a matter of "choice", as demanded eg by Darron Gibson, since one cannot choose to be born in any particular location (though one may choose to reside in such location...).

Once again, you're trying to pass off how you think it should be with how it actually is.


I was unaware that that is how he qualified to represent the FAI, just as i had thought it was his grandmother, rather than his mother, so thanks for that.

...

I am quite aware that players born in what you term "the North" (Northern Ireland) are deemed eligible by FIFA to represent the FAI.
But young Gorman was not born in NI. Therefore, having been born outside Ireland, I am genuinely unsure how he avoids the need to satisfy the normal Dual Nationality requirements of having a parent/grandparent/residence in the Irish Republic.

...

Edit: Re Gorman, I have just noticed DI's interesting post on the matter, above (#846). I should be interested to know what justification is used by ROI fans who feel he legitimately represented the FAI.

I had been unaware that it was his mother through whom he qualifies also. I misread and assumed otherwise; my mistake. If so, the case might be slightly different as Irish citizenship is transferred automatically upon birth from parent to child if that parent is an Irish citizen born in Ireland. My understanding is that this may satisfy the requirements set down by FIFA in article 15 due to its automatic and permanent nature. For the transference of citizenship from a grandparent, an applicant must undergo a slightly different process and will take on the new nationality from the point of it being granted, rather than it being considered legally permanent from birth.

Still, if I'm going to appeal to the express rules as worded in FIFA's statutes to argue my case regarding the right of northern-borns to represent Ireland, I must acknowledge that the text of the related subsequent rules doesn't completely satisfy questions surrounding the likes of Alex Bruce's eligibility, as despite FIFA's alleged affirmation of his eligibility in April 2006, it still seems at odds with what they actually have written in their rule-book.


Quite.
Mind you, if FIFA were to renege on the special status granted to the four UK Associations in return for bailing it out of bankruptcy, their only recourse would be to replace them with one, single UK team.
In which case, having removed that exception, if they were also to remove the exception whereby someone born in NI may choose to represent another Association than that within whose jurisdiction he was born, you would find that the likes of Darron Gibson would only be eligible to represent the UK.

You've confused me. I don't see why that would be the case at all. Those born in Northern Ireland would still be perfectly entitled under Irish citizenship law to exercise their birthright to Irish nationality. Therefore, it would change nothing as far as the FAI were concerned, surely.


You know, the country to whom he pays his taxes, which provided his free education and health services, allows him to vote for its Government, plus provides him and his family with pension rights and other social security benefits etc.

Relevance?

[Drumcondra 69er]

You've confused me. I don't see why that would be the case at all. Those born in Northern Ireland would still be perfectly entitled under Irish citizenship law to exercise their birthright to Irish nationality. Therefore, it would change nothing as far as the FAI were concerned, surely.


Relevance?

Only back from a trip to the flicks and was about to respond but you've pretty much saved me the bother. Although it seems EG is dealing in ifs and buts by stating that IF FIFA were to take away the special status of the 4 UK nations that may lead to them also removing the 'exception' that enables 6 county born players to represent Ireland. My original post was just to raise the fact that the NI football team only exists due to an exception granted by FIFA so it's therefore a bit rich for their fans to moan about an 'exception' in another area. Incidently, my contention would be that it's not an exception that enables Gibson et al to play for us but is down to the uniqueness of the citizenship laws that profess Irish nationality automatically on anyone born on the island. Cheers anyway! <thumbs up>

[Sullivinho]

BTW, does anyone think that NI is a great feeder club for the proper Ireland team?
What with the new motorway network in the south (M3 in Enniskillen direction opened last Friday), and Sinn Fein MP Conor Murphy working on the roads around Newry, the masterplan is kicking in. Just need to work on the A5 road now to get Duffy/Gibson safely home after match.

I;d also like to thank the good work Nigel and co did on keeping our young lads ticking over, until they made step up in to proper international football, with a proper team in a (choice of) proper stadiums...

Video here of Shane Duffy arriving home in Derry.

http://www.u.tv/UTVMediaPlayer/Default.aspx?vidid=130540&chapid=106378&arti_id=318ff2f0-3261-4d1b-ba90-7b905f9af8bc

Fair play to the lady who suggests he'll captain Ireland one day. I'd be inclined to agree with her.

[Charlie Darwin]

My favourite part was when the kid in the Ireland shirt gave him a hug and you could see Duffy almost double over in pain. Kids, eh!

[Crosby87]

Danny no offense but you have been writing some serious novels on here lately. You should summarize your thoughts in a blog post. :angry2:

[ArdeeBhoy]

Really? According to Duffy, his opting to represent the FAI was at least partly on account of his being a Catholic, that apparently being the natural consequence of his holding whatever religious convictions he maintains.
Fortunately, the very many other Cathoics who represent NI at all the various levels do not take the same essentially sectarian view of things.

No great "effort" at all (you know, computers and that); in fact, it might better have been described as a 'Labour of Love'.
Of course, such cost and effort as was expended might have been more onerous had it not had the full desired effect. But seeing as how you and others were apparently so outraged by it, I think we may safely call it "Mission Accomplished!"

If you have inferred that from anything I have ever posted, then it is you who is in need of medication, not me...

To answer your 'points', just because someone is an Irish Catholic makes them sectarian, hmm.... I'd make silly men in bowler hats, say, more so. Your arrogant attitude that nationalists have to benignly accept British rule, exemplifies all that is wrong with the unionist community in the North. People now have the right to choose and these people are no longer 'owned' by the British state or their unsavoury institutions.

In the case of the such amusing banner, even if it was donated, somebody still contributed to the time and expense of emphasing the chip on the shoulder you have about the real Ireland team. Why not make them for Scotland, then you'd have dozens of the things....
;)

And you did imply an element of legitimacy re. a certain Frenchman which is bully for you, but I would seek attention for amnesia as well as myopia! Which seems a common trait in that community. Maybe it's the embitteredness??

[Gather round]

The only thing that the NI fans have in common, is a deep seated (unreciprocated) hatred of the Irish nationality with which 43% of the people in your state/country/province (& **5% of the island) identify. This is manifested in part by attacking the, more successful, Republic of Ireland. Such an attitude will not serve you well in the long term

The only thing all NI fans have in common is, er, supporting NI. I don't have a deep seated hatred of anyone's Irish Republic nationality, I haven't repeatedly suggested the Irish Republic's national side be abolished or forcibly merged with anyone else, and without wishing to upset anyone else on here I'd suggest that a team which has qualified for one of the last eight international tournaments and hasn't beaten a higher-ranked team in a qualifier since 2001 wouldn't immediately be identified as "more successful". It's about a third as successful as Slovenia.

PS Glad to see Duffy is making a quick recovery.


My original post was just to raise the fact that the NI football team only exists due to an exception granted by FIFA

It's a bit convoluted this, isn't it? The Irish FA and its international side predate FIFA and have always followed its rules. You might as well say that RoI football team only picks players from all across Britain due to an excpetion granted by FIFA.


the uniqueness of the citizenship laws that profess Irish nationality automatically on anyone born on the island

Apart from the Irish-born who don't get it automatically as supported by nearly 80% in a referendum, you mean?

[ifk101]

I don't have a deep seated hatred of anyone's Irish Republic nationality,

Irish nationality isn't defined by Ireland's form of governance.


.... and without wishing to upset anyone else on here I'd suggest that a team which has qualified for one of the last eight international tournaments and hasn't beaten a higher-ranked team in a qualifier since 2001 wouldn't immediately be identified as "more successful". It's about a third as successful as Slovenia.

Must. Try. Harder. :rolleyes:


It's a bit convoluted this, isn't it? The Irish FA and its international side predate FIFA and have always followed its rules. You might as well say that RoI football team only picks players from all across Britain due to an excpetion granted by FIFA.

???

[ArdeeBhoy]

I'd suggest that a team which has qualified for one of the last eight international tournaments and hasn't beaten a higher-ranked team in a qualifier since 2001 wouldn't immediately be identified as "more successful".

As opposed to a team that has not qualified for anything in 25 years & counting....
They may as well disband, FFS.
Given their 'own' players are deserting them!

[geysir]

I was not referring to what is stated in FIFA's Articles etc, ot how they have been interpreted/applied.
I was merely stating that the basic premise for international eligibility is that a player is eligible due to birthplace (only) to represent solely the National Association within whose jurisdiction he was born. For 207 Member Associations of FIFA, this means just one Member Association, but the 208th (NI), it means two (IFA and FAI).
Are you saying that this is incorrect?
Yes, of course that is incorrect, what planet are you on?:D
The basic premise for automatic eligibility is an automatic nationality - not dependant on residence.

to cut to the thrust of a later post


2. FIFA presently recognises the right of someone born within NI to represent the FAI outwith the normal parentage/residence requirements, on account of the fact that such people are automatically entitled to Republic of Ireland citiizenship as a birthright. This birthright has been available since 1921 i.e. 77 years before the GFA was even conceived.

It has been previously explained in detail by me (somewhere) that the GFA did cause a change the law and an important enough distinction in regards to the citizenship rights.
NI born were not automatic citizens of Ireland before the GFA.
Pre GFA , according to the citizenship act of 1955?, NI born were automatically entitled to apply for citizenship. They were not automatically entitled to citizenship just by being born in NI

Post GFA, NI born were automatically entitled to citizenship. That is why the citizenship laws had to be changed in the Republic, when the GFA was signed.

[DannyInvincible]

Danny no offense but you have been writing some serious novels on here lately. You should summarize your thoughts in a blog post. :angry2:

Sorry to have angered you. I suppose you could block me if it's that bad. :confused:


Apart from the Irish-born who don't get it automatically as supported by nearly 80% in a referendum, you mean?

My good man, ever the pedant. :D

[Drumcondra 69er]

My good man, ever the pedant. :D

Saved me the bother again Danny, good man! :)

[dantheman]

Irish nationality isn't defined by Ireland's form of governance.

Once the OWC fans get their heads round this, then they will realise they have no case as the IFA is a BRITISH association

[ArdeeBhoy]

The only thing all NI fans have in common is, er, supporting NI. I don't have a deep seated hatred of anyone's Irish Republic nationality
Hmm, that's not what I remember from a certain qualifier in The Pale, prior to the 1990 World Cup....


It's a bit convoluted this, isn't it? The Irish FA and its international side predate FIFA and have always followed its rules. You might as well say that RoI football team only picks players from all across Britain due to an excpetion granted by FIFA.
Yes, that's why they had all those players born in Germany, Zambia & Norway, not to mention trying to 'poach' Ade Adebola who'd never even been to The Theme Park, simply on the pretext of a Brit passport. Not to mention numerous journeyman youth internationals who were also eligible for Ireland or the 3 British teams but ultimately may have chosen a future with the North?
Incidentally, with the possible Cascarino exception, everyone else who played for Ireland was a citizen and eligible for a passport, even Paul Butler.
Nothing to do with a paranoid whim about FIFA.....:rolleyes:

[Charlie Darwin]

Cascarino's not even a possible exception - he was always fully eligible.

[DannyInvincible]

This is something that has only just struck me, but it seems an entirely possible scenario at some point in the future. It would be an interesting prospect were a northern-born player to line out for the FAI all the way through the youth ranks, but, upon failing to make the grade at senior level, decided to switch over to the IFA, assuming they were content to take the player. In theory, the IFA stand to benefit from these players' development through the FAI system as much the FAI stand to benefit from those going in the other direction. That's not to put a specific value on this so-called benefit, if even it is measurable or all that substantial, but it does seriously challenge the arguments and grievances of NI fans along with the cries for compensation for "defectors", contracts of loyalty for under-18s and all that baloney. Have I overlooked something? It seems too obvious to only have just struck me.

Counter-poaching, I suppose you could call it, then. ;)

[ArdeeBhoy]

DI,
That's what one or two others have tried to say on OWB, but they've been 'shot down' in no uncertain terms, such is the tunnel vision on there....
And there must be other examples of people switching availabilty or eligibility around the world, before a full competitive appearance, without the same level of paranoid anguish??
We should all be grateful the criteria for soccer generally, to date, is not as lax as that for cricket or rugby union!!

[DannyInvincible]

DI,
That's what one or two others have tried to say on OWB, but they've been 'shot down' in no uncertain terms, such is the tunnel vision on there....

From what I've read on there of late, the levels of delusion, ignorance and misinformation have reached chronic levels. It's an absolute quagmire of confusion and you'd have to commend anyone with the patience to suffer it.

Of course, the IFA were perfectly happy to take back Tony Kane and Michael O'Connor under the former statutes after their professional development had benefited from time spent with the FAI's under-21 set-up. A slight hint of hypocrisy there somewhere? :rolleyes:

[ArdeeBhoy]

Noticed on there, what they called the 'Brazilian loophole' has now been closed, but am highly sceptical this is the case as every month or so, read about Brazilans playing for other international sides, nominally on the basis of residency or citizenship based on marriage. And similarly with various Nigerians, though to a far lesser extent.
And even if FIFA claim these loopholes are now closed, am expecting in the next few years to read about far more players switching nationality or eligibility, in keeping with the trends in rigby and cricket.....
:-(

[Not Brazil]

Noticed on there, what they called the 'Brazilian loophole' has now been closed, but am highly sceptical this is the case as every month or so, read about Brazilans playing for other international sides, nominally on the basis of residency or citizenship based on marriage. And similarly with various Nigerians, though to a far lesser extent.
And even if FIFA claim these loopholes are now closed, am expecting in the next few years to read about far more players switching nationality or eligibility, in keeping with the trends in rigby and cricket.....
:-(

You need to check out Article 17 of the FIFA Eligibility Statutes.

[ArdeeBhoy]

I have. And don't believe FIFA will enforce this, or not as they should. Or countries will find other ways round this......
Surprised there is so much faith in the machinations of such an august governing body!!

[Not Brazil]

I have. And don't believe FIFA will enforce this, or not as they should.


Are you suggesting that FIFA will turn a blind eye to their own Eligibility Rules?

If so, what are the ramifications of that, in your opinion?

[ArdeeBhoy]

Well they're not excatly free of corruption or inconsistency. Not saying it'll definitely happen but be pretty surprised if doesn't repeat itself.
The 'ramifications' are such, that them and most teams will muddle on as always. All rules have relative anomalies, which doubtless will be confirmed shortly.

[ifk101]

Why the reference to article 17?

[Not Brazil]

Well they're not excatly free of corruption or inconsistency. Not saying it'll definitely happen but be pretty surprised if doesn't repeat itself.


What was that you were saying about "a paranoid whim about FIFA"?

[Not Brazil]

Why the reference to article 17?

AB was making some point or other about Brazilians.

[ArdeeBhoy]

What was that you were saying about "a paranoid whim about FIFA"?
But I'm/we're not paranoid about FIFA like your crowd. We've seen how they work, 'warts and all' in recent times....

@IFK, their whole premise on Duffy seems to be based on Article 17 of FIFA's eligibility statutes. But then seeing the bigger picture is beyond most of that myopic fanbase.....

[ifk101]

@IFK, their whole premise on Duffy seems to be based on Article 17 of FIFA's eligibility statutes. But then seeing the bigger picture is beyond most of that myopic fanbase.....

Article 17 = acquisition of a new nationality.

[geysir]

I have. And don't believe FIFA will enforce this, or not as they should. Or countries will find other ways round this......
Surprised there is so much faith in the machinations of such an august governing body!!

As Not Brazil alluded to, the loophole allowing players to switch from one association to another was made more restrictive in 2003 and further tightened up later. A Brazilian who qualifies for another association since 2003, does so by fulfilling the requirements outlined in article 17. If there are any dodgy examples then it would have to require dodgy paperwork. I seriously doubt if FIFA would participate in such a swindle, too much to lose with dubious gain if any.

Pretty much, Blatter and FIFA took a strong and decisive action over this issue in 2003. Later in June 2008, after the revamping the eligibility rules, Blatter stated at a press conference that the issues like the passports for sale to Brazilians was FIFA's main cause of concern in the revamping of the eligibility statutes, not bona fide dual nationals like the Irish/Gibson who qualified automatically.

[Not Brazil]

@IFK, their whole premise on Duffy seems to be based on Article 17 of FIFA's eligibility statutes. But then seeing the bigger picture is beyond most of that myopic fanbase.....

You're wrong.

Duffy is, quite clearly, eligible to play for the Republic Of Ireland. You misrepresent the majority opinion on OWC regarding Duffy - most agree that he is eligible for the Republic Of Ireland.

The IFA's, misguided IMO, premise regarding those they see as having no linkage to the Republic Of Ireland, is based on Articles 15 & 16.

A statement from the IFA read: "We do not take this course of action lightly but, in light of recent events and potential future issues, it believes it has no other choice regarding the resolution of player eligibility.

"The decision is taken purely on the grounds of upholding the FIFA statues of article 15 and 16 and that the current situation that exists puts the IFA at a clear disadvantage over all other 206 associations."

It was you who introduced the issue of Brazilians, and I referred you to Article 17 which deals with that kind of situation.

[ArdeeBhoy]

As Not Brazil alluded to, the loophole allowing players to switch from one association to another was made more restrictive in 2003 and further tightened up later. A Brazilian who qualifies for another association since 2003, does so by fulfilling the requirements outlined in article 17. If there are any dodgy examples then it would have to require dodgy paperwork. I seriously doubt if FIFA would participate in such a swindle, too much to lose with dubious gain if any.

Pretty much, Blatter and FIFA took a strong and decisive action over this issue in 2003. Later in June 2008, after the revamping the eligibility rules, Blatter stated at a press conference that the issues like the passports for sale to Brazilians was FIFA's main cause of concern in the revamping of the eligibility statutes, not bona fide dual nationals like the Irish/Gibson who qualified automatically.

Anyone who trusts Bl*tter, FIFA or the other dubious characters involved are more naive than a class of infants if they reckon that's an end to it.

As for being wrong NB, if you accept it fair enough, but maybe you need to explain this elsewhere!

[Not Brazil]

Anyone who trusts Bl*tter, FIFA or the other dubious charcters involved are more naive than a class of infants if they reckon that's an end to it.

As for being wrong NB, if you accept it fair enough, but maybe you need to explain this elsewhere!

Strange comments from someone who describes others scepticism about FIFA as a "paranoid whim".

However, moving on...


You stated that:

" their whole premise on Duffy seems to be based on Article 17 of FIFA's eligibility statutes"

I have refuted that assertion, stating that the majority of Northern Ireland fans on OWC accept that Duffy is eligible for the Republic Of Ireland.

If you wish to refute my statement, please produce evidence to prove that the majority of OWC posters think that Duffy is not eligible to play for the Republic Of Ireland.

Furthermore, if you can link any post that equates Duffy not being eligible for the Republic Of Ireland with Article 17, please do so.