NI boss targets Republic's Gibson

[EalingGreen]

Northern Ireland is an exception. You've already admitted that in other posts. Let's stick to the case at hand.

The soul of your argument seems to be based around The fact is, if Gibson does not meet FIFA's criteria to represent another Association, then he should not be allowed to do so.

Do you not feel that for FIFA to force Gibson or any other player in the same situtation to represent Nothern Ireland, compromises somewhat his civil right of choice of Nationality?

By the same token, could you acknowledge that the IFA lobbying FIFA to ammend the criteria could be percieved by some people born in Northern Ireland as attempts by the IFA to compromise their right of choice of Nationality for their own gain?


Your post shows a clear misunderstanding of the situation.

Northern Ireland (IFA), along with the other three British Associations, IS an exception - it is made clear in black and white in FIFA's Articles and Regulations. Whereas, the ROI (FAI) is nowhere excepted or exempted from any of FIFA's Arts and Regs. Those are two simple, incontrovertible facts.

And FIFA is NOT forcing Gibson or anyone else to represent NI. It could not do so, even if it wanted to. Rather, it is considering whether he might be allowed also to represent another Association, as well as NI. The two are not the same.

Nor is "the IFA lobbying FIFA to ammend the criteria". FIFA made an addition to its eligibility criteria last year, entirely without reference to the IFA. The IFA is consequently seeking clarification as to the applicability of these new criteria, particularly in respect of players born within its footballing jurisdiction.

I don't know whether you are incapable of understanding these not very difficult concepts, or whether it is that you are so determined to apply your own particular (political) preferences to this case, that you are wilfully ignoring the real (regulatory) issues here.

[EalingGreen]

Anyway, in answer, so too was Gibson's Irish international career (at youth level) initiated prior to this annex. So if Taylor's career has continued, so will Gibson's.

I'm interested in whether the IFA can still trawl England for players desperate enough to play for you on the technicality that they are British, yet have no connection with the O6C. If they still do, then it's still good old IFA double standards.

Apples and pears. Taylor was eligible under the regulations for senior international football which existed at the time, just like Gibson (presumably) qualified for under-age international football at the time he was picked.

Had Gibson been capped at Senior level before the Annex came in, then presumably he would have been OK.

As for your supplementary interest, I don't see what Taylor has got to do with Gibson's case. FIFA is hardly going to operate some sort of offset, or quota system, along the lines of "The IFA is allowed one non-NI born UK Passportholder for every NI-born Irish Passport holder who plays for the FAI"

If you are really so concerned about Maik Taylor, having brought him up repeatedly, why don't you start a separate thread for his case and others like it?

Or lobby FIFA?

[EalingGreen]

eg

Leaving to one side the fact that February was seven months ago

Yeah it easy to leave things to the side when the reporter/IFA are telling lies.

I suggest if you are looking for some answers regarding Darron's commitment to his country you should contact Kenny Shiels, the north's u17 manager back in 2003-2004.

The last man to coach Darron Gibson in Northern Ireland colours feels the Derry teenager will not be the last to go south of the border.

Kenny Shiels was in charge of the under-17 side when the Manchester United defender decided that his international career lay with the Republic.

Shiels though knew that from a young age, Gibson had his heart set on playing for the Republic.

"He enjoyed his time with us but he always wanted to play for the Republic," he explained.

I see some over on 'Are We A Country' are also having a go at young Evans for daring to speak outside the box. How sad.

I am not claiming that the passing of seven months means that whatever happened previously doesn't matter, merely pointing out that a lot can change in that time, especially with a new manager and President.

As for Kenny Shiels, I really don't know exactly what went on, but it is hardly beyond the bounds of possibility that when a particularly promising youngster suddenly ups sticks and leaves for another team, his manager at the time will feel obliged to cover his ass by saying that there was nothing anyone could have done to prevent it.

And as for those individuals on OWC who may be having a pop at Evans, they certainly don't speak for me, nor (I would guess), the great majority of the GAWA.

[co. down green]

I am not claiming that the passing of seven months means that whatever happened previously doesn't matter, merely pointing out that a lot can change in that time, especially with a new manager and President.

As for Kenny Shiels, I really don't know exactly what went on, but it is hardly beyond the bounds of possibility that when a particularly promising youngster suddenly ups sticks and leaves for another team, his manager at the time will feel obliged to cover his ass by saying that there was nothing anyone could have done to prevent it.

And as for those individuals on OWC who may be having a pop at Evans, they certainly don't speak for me, nor (I would guess), the great majority of the GAWA.

So it was Kenny Shiels fault :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[cheifo]

Why don't you go somewhere else and bore the ball s off someone else? This is the only thread you ever post on! Get a life FFS.
In fairness Paddy he is not the only one not interested in regular football threads.With Potter out and Kilbane possibly playing at lb there is a fair chance Gibson could be playing some role in these forhcoming games.Because he is so inexperienced that would worry me but it would be fascinating to see how he would get on.We really need midfielders to come through.How about Garvan to be promoted to senior squad.:)

[tetsujin1979]

Anyone catch the representative from the IFA on NewsTalk tonight? Said a whole lot of nothing.

[kingdomkerry]

Id love if gibson got a run in one of the games. It might stop the boys over in 'are weea country' moaning about an irish man opting to play for Ireland!!

[geysir]

Anyone catch the representative from the IFA on NewsTalk tonight? Said a whole lot of nothing.

Welcome to the bizarre world of Howard Wells.

He said more than nothing. Barefaced lies according to accounts. The guy has no integrity.

He was asked a direct question about FIFA's reply and said he has received none.
He refused to come clean that FIFA have already replied to the IFA in October.
He refused to admit that the IFA have received a direct reply on the eligibility situation last october
He said the FAI have received some letter but said no more.

He also claimed that the FAI have received some questions from FIFA which they have failed to reply.

The FAI for their part said that they are in regular communication with FIFA but have not received one question or request about the eligibility situation.

Bluster and blarney.

[Torn-Ado]

I have a question.

Is it possible for Darren Gibson to play for the North after already being capped for the Republic.

Because Im a bit confused.

[kingdomkerry]

I think if your capped at A level with one country you cant change to another country. Not that im recognising the north as a country or anything!

[Noelys Guitar]

I'd be amazed if Gibson does not play some part over the next 2 games. Very good player imo. And the "wee, wee" chaps will be burning bonfires and frothing at the mouth so thats a double bonus. And there will be double nay triple threats of FIFA expulsions from Howie. And docking of points. Beheadings even. Our darkest hour is upon us.

[Not Brazil]

I heard the voice of Wells in a radio interview this evening
What a pompous condescending prxk.

On that, my friend, we can wholeheartedly agree.:)

[dr_peepee]

Your post shows a clear misunderstanding of the situation.

Northern Ireland (IFA), along with the other three British Associations, IS an exception - it is made clear in black and white in FIFA's Articles and Regulations. Whereas, the ROI (FAI) is nowhere excepted or exempted from any of FIFA's Arts and Regs. Those are two simple, incontrovertible facts.

And FIFA is NOT forcing Gibson or anyone else to represent NI. It could not do so, even if it wanted to. Rather, it is considering whether he might be allowed also to represent another Association, as well as NI. The two are not the same.

Nor is "the IFA lobbying FIFA to ammend the criteria". FIFA made an addition to its eligibility criteria last year, entirely without reference to the IFA. The IFA is consequently seeking clarification as to the applicability of these new criteria, particularly in respect of players born within its footballing jurisdiction.

I don't know whether you are incapable of understanding these not very difficult concepts, or whether it is that you are so determined to apply your own particular (political) preferences to this case, that you are wilfully ignoring the real (regulatory) issues here.

I am in no way ignoring the regulatory issues. I'm simply saying they are A factor in this situation, not THE factor, as you seem to cite above and for me base your entire argument on.

I made the mistake of asking a question that could be pulled appart rather than answered, when you (should at least) know what was the intended question.

I'm asking you to commit to something in terms of the implications of ammended/clarified FIFA regulations, instead of burying a responses in non commital jargain and thinly veiled insults. I'll coin my argument once more in three lines.

I feel that if FIFA regulations are amended/clarified to remove players like Darron Gibsons' choice of representation, despite the choice of Nationality afforded to them, that this compromises their civil rights. It diminishes the relevence of their choice.

There it is. I ask you to do coin yours. In a few lines please. You've spent alot of posts telling people what you're NOT saying and attacking our cappacity to understand. What do they say in college about not being able to coin your argument in a few lines?

And politics? If my perceived politics mean that I respect choice in this situation and expect FIFA to do the same, then I don't think I'll be loosing much sleep. However going by what I think you intended by bringing my politics into this, I admit that whilst I take pleasure in the choice of Gibson to represent us, I also lament missing out on likes Kevin Nolan and welcome players like Clinton Morrison into our team. Easily proven. Hardly the postings of a true 'Fenian'. Why did you have to 'go there'?

[lopez]

Apples and pears. Taylor was eligible under the regulations for senior international football which existed at the time, just like Gibson (presumably) qualified for under-age international football at the time he was picked.

Had Gibson been capped at Senior level before the Annex came in, then presumably he would have been OK.
Still talking out of your tradesman's entrance I see. Gibson's international career at youth level is totally irrelevant? Keep dreaming!

As for your supplementary interest, I don't see what Taylor has got to do with Gibson's case. FIFA is hardly going to operate some sort of offset, or quota system, along the lines of "The IFA is allowed one non-NI born UK Passportholder for every NI-born Irish Passport holder who plays for the FAI"
They'll (or rather have already) come to conclusion that as NI can pick players that don't pass the three points mentioned by our missing 'wee mind', so too can Ireland. Why? Because both accept players on their passport.

You can keep going on about this, but there is absolutely no chance of denying Gibson an international career and continuing to pick naturalised Britons who have never been to the O6C, let alone have any connection or love for the place.

If you are really so concerned about Maik Taylor, having brought him up repeatedly, why don't you start a separate thread for his case
This is a repeated line with you. Bring in something connected with the thread, you want it taken out, if you can't answer. I've said it before, it's the mods that have the right to ban stuff, so you can either answer or go into one of your hissy fits and pretend you've put me on the ignore list.

Or lobby FIFA?The FAI will be lobbying FIFA, and I dare say the Spanish and Swedish FAs will aswell. But one word of warning, Europe isn't as black and white, where everyone born within a state belongs to that nation. You might fancy Slovakia, Czech republic, Germany and Cyprus (even San Marino), wetting their lips at Gibson's inclusion, but leaving aside the fact that FIFA have already approved his place in the team (so that the best you can hope for is a future cut off), we might see these teams with their own Gibson of the past or present, because the first four have had history of communities living outside its present state borders, while Sweden has a minority within Finland.

[EalingGreen]

I am in no way ignoring the regulatory issues. I'm simply saying they are A factor in this situation, not THE factor, as you seem to cite above and for me base your entire argument on.

There it is. I ask you to do coin yours. In a few lines please.

If FIFA should deviate in this instance from their usual practice of resolving this dispute solely by reference to their Articles and Regulations, then that will be unprecedented. That is why I consider the regulatory issues not just to be THE factor in all this, but the ONLY factor..

As for the following:
"I feel that if FIFA regulations are amended/clarified to remove players like Darron Gibsons' choice of representation, despite the choice of Nationality afforded to them, that this compromises their civil rights. It diminishes the relevence of their choice"
You may consider it to be a "civil right" to play international football for one Association rather than another, but (irrespective of the personal sympathy I feel for Gibson) I do not. Neither do FIFA.
Therefore, if they consider that the Annex does not apply to him due to his "Dual Nationality", then his switch to the ROI will be ratified, but if they consider it does apply, it will not. The player's "civil rights" do not come into it.

[ifk101]

Why is Gibson eligible to play underage football for Ireland but (supposedly) not senior football?

[EalingGreen]

Why is Gibson eligible to play underage football for Ireland but (supposedly) not senior football?

The regulations are different, particularly with regard to switching Associations, being tied in etc. He may, however, be eligible for the ROI at both levels.

[ifk101]

The regulations are different, particularly with regard to switching Associations, being tied in etc. He may, however, be eligible for the ROI at both levels.

So the fact that he has played competitively for Ireland at different underage levels has no bearing on his eligibility for the senior team?

[geysir]

Why is Gibson eligible to play underage football for Ireland but (supposedly) not senior football?
A supposition is based on a presumption without certain knowledge.
That certain knowledge is absent.

The certain knowledge is that Gibson is eligible. Dogma gets in the way of some peoples perception of that certainty.

[EalingGreen]

So the fact that he has played competitively for Ireland at different underage levels has no bearing on his eligibility for the senior team?

It is not that it has "no bearing" (it may have); rather, you cannot conclude that just because he has represented the ROI at under-age level, he must be allowed to represent them at senior level.

Besides, he first represented Northern Ireland at under-age level! ;)

[lopez]

...You may consider it to be a "civil right" to play international football for one Association rather than another, but (irrespective of the personal sympathy I feel for Gibson) I do not. Neither do FIFA...More rubbish. It's endless isn't it? Endless.

Yet another example of manipulating the truth to suit your argument. FIFA have no objection to playing for the national team of your choice. It asks for a minimum residence period of 2 years instead. If you were good enough, and you wanted to play for Brazil, you could move to Brazil and 2 years you're ready. Qatar only need to pay for a team of Brazilians to live in the country for two years, and they have bypassed the annex.

FIFA wouldn't dare move any further than this (i.e. restricting international football to either birthplace or recent ancestry) because all the major players in FIFA have used this rule (England, France, Spain, Italy, Germany).

[EalingGreen]

A supposition is based on a presumption without certain knowledge.
That certain knowledge is absent.

The certain knowledge is that Gibson is eligible. Dogma gets in the way of some peoples perception of that certainty.

The only "certain knowledge" in this whole affair is that DG was always eligible to represent Northern Ireland at whatever level he chose, due to his having been born within the (footballing) jurisdiction of the IFA.

Of course, should it be confirmed by FIFA that he is/was eligible for his senior cap v Denmark, that door to senior representation for NI will now be closed to him. However, whilst that may be a matter of "certain opinion" within the FAI, it is not yet "certain knowledge", nor may never be.

[dr_peepee]

You may consider it to be a "civil right" to play international football for one Association rather than another..

Pathetic attempt at trivialising my point by attributing the above statement to me. Read again what I posted. I ask again..

Does removing his choice of representation not diminish the relevence of the "civil right" of choice of Nationality afforded to him?

I feel it does!

[cheifo]

Whatever int team you supported as a kid should be the side you declare your alliegence to.Bit difficult from a regulation point of view:) but it would be the correct moral one.

[EalingGreen]

FIFA have no objection to playing for the national team of your choice. It asks for a minimum residence period of 2 years instead. If you were good enough, and you wanted to play for Brazil, you could move to Brazil and 2 years you're ready. Qatar only need to pay for a team of Brazilians to live in the country for two years, and they have bypassed the annex.

FIFA wouldn't dare move any further than this (i.e. restricting international football to either birthplace or recent ancestry) because all the major players in FIFA have used this rule (England, France, Spain, Italy, Germany).

I originally stated that it is not a "civil right" for anyone to play senior international football for any given Association. If I am wrong, show me where it says so, in any footballing, political or civil/human rights document or source.

As for the rest of the above, your post is utterly contradictory. You state that:
"FIFA have no objection to playing for the national team of your choice"
and immediately in your next sentence demonstrate how FIFA restrict that self-same choice! (By imposing birth/parent/grandparent/residence criteria)

Therefore, if they decide the Annex applies to Gibson, then he will have no choice to represent the ROI unless he goes and lives there continuously for a minimum of two years!

As for Qatar paying Brazilians etc, they will not have "bypassed the Annex", rather the players will themselves have complied with the restrictions placed by FIFA on their "choice" [sic]

Finally, your contention that the "major players" will stop any further restrictions is oben to debate, since the restrictions were originally introduced following objections by the Kenyan and Cape Verde FA's - hardly giants of the modern game - to Togo capping Brazilians. (Note that the Brazil FA didn't actually object)

And if this problem should continue to fester, it is most likely to arise from "lesser" FA's - predominantly in poorer, 3rd world countries - requiring restrictions to stop their best talents being lured by wealthy "major" FA's - mostly in Europe or the Gulf. And since even the smallest FA has exactly the same voting rights in FIFA as the largest, with a membership of 52 Associations, UEFA is liable to be heavily outnumbered in any vote on this by the other 150+ Associations in FIFA.

[EalingGreen]

Pathetic attempt at trivialising my point by attributing the above statement to me. Read again what I posted. I ask again..

Does removing his choice of representation not diminish the relevence of the "civil right" of choice of Nationality afforded to him?

I feel it does!

Of course it would restrict his rights (though I prefer the term "choice"). I just don't see it as a civil (or human) right, in the way you and other posters on here characterise it. Nor do any of the recognised civil/human rights organisations anywhere in the world that I can see.

But if you can come up with a source that declares it a basic civil (or human) right to represent any given Football Association at international football, I would be very interested to see it.

I won't be holding my breath, mind...

[EalingGreen]

Whatever int team you supported as a kid should be the side you declare your alliegence to.Bit difficult from a regulation point of view:) but it would be the correct moral one.

Even if one could overcome the regulatory (evidential, actually) difficulties, this doesn't help Gibson's case, since as a kid he first "declared his allegiance to" Northern Ireland, by the fact of his agreeing to represent them! ;)

[dr_peepee]

But if you can come up with a source that declares it a basic civil (or human) right to represent any given Football Association at international football, I would be very interested to see it.

I won't be holding my breath, mind...

Pathetic attempt at trivialising my point by attributing the above statement to me. Another sidestep.

His civil right extends as far as his choice of Nationality.... To remove choice of representation diminishes the relevence of his choice of Nationality.

[lopez]

I originally stated that it is not a "civil right" for anyone to play senior international football for any given Association. If I am wrong, show me where it says so, in any footballing, political or civil/human rights document or source.
Never mind what you call it, the choice to play for whoever you want is there. Gibson's situation is the same as Maik Taylor's (oh no don't bring him in as it might make the IFA look like a bunch of hypocrites). He qualify's through citizenship, not through residency in NI, ancestry to NI, or born in NI. Now I know you British like to think that you're a law unto yourself, but you're not. Therefore if you have an exemption to the rules, you can't complain about someone else having an exemption too. FIFA have already confirmed this; only a complete moron could compare Togo, Kenya, Qatar or anywhere else with Ireland; and seeing that Gibson's qualification was rubber stamped before 2004, you've got no hope of getting him. You're best hope is for a moratorium on further 'defections'. If sucessful, in view of the special exemption you have, your days of picking Johnny Asylum Seeker at will are over


As for the rest of the above, your post is utterly contradictory...You hope. We're talking about your nugget of an a*se malteser about players not being able to choose the country they want at will (a common piece of cr*p that is aired ad nauseum on 'are we a country?'. It doesn't change what FIFA think about Gibson. He's Irish, and once again, it's you that has to lobby FIFA to close this loophole, in which case the loophole of picking naturalised Britons not resident in NI will also come to an end. Because, you are one arrogant tw*t if you think that little arrangement is going to continue if by some fluke of a chance you win.

But you're right, Gibson's residency in the 26C would of course shut up you bunch of whinging babies. I'm sure that with the distance from Manchester to Dublin considerably closer than Qatar to Rio de Janeiro, we can all fiddle the books so that all Irish player's get their dream of playing for their country, should you ever be successful. Aren't taxes lower in Ireland for sportsmen too? ;)

[co. down green]

Welcome to the bizarre world of Howard Wells.

He said more than nothing. Barefaced lies according to accounts. The guy has no integrity.

He was asked a direct question about FIFA's reply and said he has received none.
He refused to come clean that FIFA have already replied to the IFA in October.
He refused to admit that the IFA have received a direct reply on the eligibility situation last october
He said the FAI have received some letter but said no more.

He also claimed that the FAI have received some questions from FIFA which they have failed to reply.

The FAI for their part said that they are in regular communication with FIFA but have not received one question or request about the eligibility situation.

Bluster and blarney.


As i mentioned 20 pages ago, The IFA were made fully aware of the situation twice during 2006 (Alex Bruce first & then Darron Gibson).

The answer from FIFA was the same on both occasions. The ruling was made by Fifa's Heinz Tannler, Director of the Legal Division, and Corina Luck, Head of General Legal, in a joint letter to the IFA, which was copied to the FAI," in October 2006.

"In it, they informed the IFA that 'the existing situation in Northern Ireland allows players to choose whether they wish to represent Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland'

I think you will find the previous determination, is still the determination and they posturing of the IFA is simply a way to try and save face after the ruling, as determined by FIFA's top leagal brain Heinz Tannler stated that players from the North of Ireland can represent either team internationally.

The FAI response to 'Hard' Wells yesterday sums up how pathetic the IFA and its manager have been over the issue.

The FAI for their part said that they are in regular communication with FIFA but have not received one question or request about the eligibility situation.

No communication from FIFA because the issue has already been ruled on.

End of story.

[kingdomkerry]

As i mentioned 20 pages ago, The IFA were made fully aware of the situation twice during 2006 (Alex Bruce first & then Darron Gibson).

The answer from FIFA was the same on both occasions. The ruling was made by Fifa's Heinz Tannler, Director of the Legal Division, and Corina Luck, Head of General Legal, in a joint letter to the IFA, which was copied to the FAI," in October 2006.

"In it, they informed the IFA that 'the existing situation in Northern Ireland allows players to choose whether they wish to represent Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland'

I think you will find the previous determination, is still the determination and they posturing of the IFA is simply a way to try and save face after the ruling, as determined by FIFA's top leagal brain Heinz Tannler stated that players from the North of Ireland can represent either team internationally.

The FAI response to 'Hard' Wells yesterday sums up how pathetic the IFA and its manager have been over the issue.

The FAI for their part said that they are in regular communication with FIFA but have not received one question or request about the eligibility situation.

No communication from FIFA because the issue has already been ruled on.

End of story.

Thats the bottom line so. Is'nt it.

P.S Admin in OWC have threatened me with legal action because i said "Are weea country" rather than "Our Wee Country".

Could you imagine? What are you in for????

[lopez]

P.S Admin in OWC have threatened me with legal action because i said "Are weea country" rather than "Our Wee Country".

Could you imagine? What are you in for????
[/INDENT]Tell us more! :eek:

This has got to be a real low for the Army groupie. Truly, truly sad! I can't believe he'd stoop to that level, but it's been hard knowing that it's now open season on all NI players from the poachers at Merrion Square (sorry Abbottstown). I'm going to change my reference to this gobsh*te site to 'are we a country?' in solidarity with you. They'd have a struggle claimng the O6C are, let alone doing you for libel or whatever. Was it Oscar Wilde that said libel is a rich man's sport?

[geysir]

Of course it would restrict his rights (though I prefer the term "choice"). I just don't see it as a civil (or human) right, in the way you and other posters on here characterise it. Nor do any of the recognised civil/human rights organisations anywhere in the world that I can see.

But if you can come up with a source that declares it a basic civil (or human) right to represent any given Football Association at international football, I would be very interested to see it.

I won't be holding my breath, mind...
The circle is complete again
Article 15 of FIFA´s statutes protect the civil rights of players that have dual nationality.

Naturalized players have to follow these rules
Circular 901, a one and a half page document is the clear guideline by which FIFA arbitrate on naturalization issue


http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/ps%5f901%5fen%5f90.pdf

The document (aka the annex) clearly refers to players assuming a new nationality irrespective of age or changing a nationality.

[lopez]

The circle is complete again
Article 15 of FIFA´s statutes protect the civil rights of players that have dual nationality.

Naturalized players have to follow these rules
Circular 901, a one and a half page document is the clear guideline by which FIFA arbitrate on naturalization issue



The document (aka the annex) clearly refers to players assuming a new nationality irrespective of age or changing a nationality.
For the children on 'are we a country?' , this is what it means.

FIFA's legal department have come to the conclusion mentioned (the letter to the IFA and FAI) re the situation in the O6C in accordance with this document
Everyone in the O6C (except those born contrary to the change in the Irish constitution regarding Jus Solie of 2004) is entitled to Irish citizenship, as defined in the GFA, and agreed by the Irish and British governments.
Anyone from the O6C (except those born contrary to the change in the Irish constitution regarding Jus Solie of 2004) seeking Irish citizenship does not have to be naturalised to get Irish citizenship.
FIFA states quite clearly that this annex is for those players gaining naturalisation only to a new country. Note the first line: '...intended to assume a New nationality...'
Darren Gibson et al, are not naturalised citizens, and so this does not affect them

Dream on EG! Dream on!

[EalingGreen]

Pathetic attempt at trivialising my point by attributing the above statement to me. Read again what I posted. I ask again..

Does removing his choice of representation not diminish the relevence of the "civil right" of choice of Nationality afforded to him?

I feel it does!

I didn't "trivialise" anything, instead I gave you my considered answer, whether you accept it or not.

Anyhow, I'll try one more time. Of course DG has the perfect right to Irish citizenship/nationality etc, since that is within the gift of the Irish Government, a gift, moreover, which has existed since the founding of the Free State and which was reinforced by its recognition internationally in the GFA etc. Therefore I have not got a problem with DG exercising his civil and human rights in this regard.

However, where I differ from you is that I do not see those rights as being inherently and inextricably bound up in what Football Association he chooses to represent, still less do I see the two as being identical.

And the fact that FIFA has Regulations governing footballing eligibility which do not coincide exactly with international law on this matter merely demonstrates that they think the same. Otherwise, they would simply declare that any one who has legally acquired nationality of a country, or obtained one of their Passports, would automatically be allowed to represent the FA of that particular country. And as we have seen with the "Togolese" and "Qatari" Brazilians, that is simply not the case. Moreover, it may not be the case with DG, either, though I grant that his case is more complex.

Indeed, to take a different view from that of FIFA would cause at least as many problems as it would solve - not least for many of your fellow Irishmen and women. Otherwise, the logical consequence of your saying Irish = FAI (and vice versa) must be that British = IFA (and v.v.), which would come as a considerable surprise to hundreds of proud Irishmen, Irish Passports and all, who have represented or supported NI down the decades.

Indeed, in another sporting context, it would also cause similar problems for any number of Ulstermen and women who have, e.g. proudly followed the Ireland Rugby Team*, Tricolour and Soldiers Song and all, to be told that their expressing their Irishness in this context must somehow diminish, even contradict, their human and civil right to be British! And cricket. And hockey. And any other number of sports.

The way I prefer to characterise it is quite simple. Someone electing to represent the IFA at football is not making a declaration that he is "British", or "not Irish", or anything else, other than that he is a footballer who plays his international football for Northern Ireland, because that is where he is from.

As such, there is a requirement on him that he leave his personal political convictions in the dressing room, before he takes the field of play, a requirement which must apply equally to all players of all political convictions or none, btw.

In return, each player has the right to expect fair and equal treatment by his Association, management and fans etc, on purely footballing grounds, each time he dons the green and white shirt.

Otherwise, in the absence of any such political discrimination, any player who refuses to represent NI on account of his own political preconceptions, is actually the one who is making this a political issue, not the IFA, nor FIFA, nor the game of football generally (imo). [And on this last point, I am not casting any aspersions on Gibson, since it is not entirely clear to me exactly what his motives were for rejecting the IFA and choosing the FAI.]



* - Notwithstanding that following the recent match at Ravenhill, the IRFU currently seems to feel Belfast is no longer in Ireland! :eek:

[EalingGreen]

P.S Admin in OWC have threatened me with legal action because i said "Are weea country" rather than "Our Wee Country".

Could you imagine? What are you in for????


Legal Action? For mangling their name? I'd be very interested to see that! So come on, KK, let's have it. :cool:

[EalingGreen]

The circle is complete again
Article 15 of FIFA´s statutes protect the civil rights of players that have dual nationality.

Naturalized players have to follow these rules
Circular 901, a one and a half page document is the clear guideline by which FIFA arbitrate on naturalization issue



The document (aka the annex) clearly refers to players assuming a new nationality irrespective of age or changing a nationality.

All that the Annex (Letter) does is to outline a person's footballing rights re. eligibility. Nowhere does it deem it these to be "civil" (or "human") in character. Otherwise, the Brazilians in question could claim that FIFA is compromising their civil and human rights to take up Qatari or Togolese naturalisation without needing to meet a residency requiremnt etc.

And whilst you may be correct in your interpretation that the Annex applies to people "changing nationality" in a way which does not apply to Gibson, I would not be so sure about that as you.

[greendeiseboy]

Any one want to start a petition for an all ireland team............. if only to put an end to this thread:):D

[EalingGreen]

P.S Admin in OWC have threatened me with legal action because i said "Are weea country" rather than "Our Wee Country".

Could you imagine? What are you in for????


Hmmm. When the above allegation was brought to Marty's attention, his verbatim comment was:

"Eh? Some new law come in that I missed?

Tell the wee sh*t from me he is now banned for that."

[kingdomkerry]

Any one want to start a petition for an all ireland team............. if only to put an end to this thread:):D

I'll be the first to sign.

[kingdomkerry]

Legal Action? For mangling their name? I'd be very interested to see that! So come on, KK, let's have it. :cool:

I went in to the personal message that i got via e-mail this morning from the admin of "are weea country"only with the intention of copying and pasting it here only to find I am banned!!! Shock horror.

The e-mail went something like this.

"It might stop those over in "are weea country" moaning".

You are entitled to engage in debate............................................ blah blah blah

Insulting the name of our forum, bringing name in to disrepute............blah blah blah

Full force of the law.........will not hesitate to take action....yerra yerra yerra.

Your IP address is Eircom ****************






They had it spot on too.

Just a wild guess Ealing Green. It was never you who brought it to marys attention was it? :eek:

[kingdomkerry]

None of them would even get in the squad anyways :0)

Healy might get on instead of Doyle. I honestly dont think anyone else would even come close to the team.

[lopez]

...Indeed, in another sporting context, it would also cause similar problems for any number of Ulstermen and women who have, e.g. proudly followed the Ireland Rugby Team*, Tricolour and Soldiers Song and all, to be told that their expressing their Irishness in this context must somehow diminish, even contradict, their human and civil right to be British! And cricket. And hockey. And any other number of sports...
What in the name of G*d are you on about now? These teams are all - Ireland so they span two political entities, and notwithstanding two ethnic communities. Even if there was one political state, it is still the right of those who want to be British to stay British. Trouble with that lies with the British government who have cut off anyone who had British citizenship to pass it on unless they live in Britain - the Asians of East Africa a classic case. This is something that has happened to those unionists left behind by the border.

I'm intrigued about these FIFA regs. Are they connected to nationality or not? Because even with an ancestral connection, this does not allow automatic citizenship. Spain up until recently did not allow someone like me to have automatic citizenship as my right to this only comes with a Spanish father, not mother. Also, two years doesn't always guarantee citizenship. Does that mean that FIFA allows people to play for a country that doesn't have citizenship for it. If it doesn't, its rules are meaningless and FIFA do succumb to political reality.

On the other hand, as Britain does not grant citizenship further than one's parents, a player with NI ancestry born and living outside the UK (say Canada) and desperately wants to play for NI, can only do so through Irish citizenship.

Finally, NI can - if it wishes - pick players born anywhere in the UK. I can't see their right to pick those with no ancestral connection with the O6C being confined to those of naturalised Britons, even though technically they can no longer pick players like Maik Taylor.

[lopez]

I went in to the personal message that i got via e-mail this morning from the admin of "are weea country"only with the intention of copying and pasting it here only to find I am banned!!! Shock horror.

The e-mail went something like this.

"It might stop those over in "are weea country" moaning".

You are entitled to engage in debate............................................ blah blah blah

Insulting the name of our forum, bringing name in to disrepute............blah blah blah

Full force of the law.........will not hesitate to take action....yerra yerra yerra.

Your IP address is Eircom ****************






They had it spot on too.

Just a wild guess Ealing Green. It was never you who brought it to marys attention was it? :eek:


Be careful. Mary knows some heavy geezers in the army, who he goes to visit a their barracks when on his hols. :rolleyes:





Healy might get on instead of Doyle. I honestly dont think anyone else would even come close to the team.
Darren Gibson? :D

[EalingGreen]

I went in to the personal message that i got via e-mail this morning from the admin of "are weea country"only with the intention of copying and pasting it here only to find I am banned!!! Shock horror.

The e-mail went something like this.

"It might stop those over in "are weea country" moaning".

You are entitled to engage in debate............................................ blah blah blah

Insulting the name of our forum, bringing name in to disrepute............blah blah blah

Full force of the law.........will not hesitate to take action....yerra yerra yerra.

Your IP address is Eircom ****************






They had it spot on too.

Just a wild guess Ealing Green. It was never you who brought it to marys attention was it? :eek:




The sequence as I understand it was as follows: you were posting unhindered on OWC, despite including a load of uninformed, even malicious, nonsense such as the claim that UVF flags fly at NI matches at Windsor. A few posters called for you to be shown the road, though more, including myself, argued that you should stay ("for entertainment value").

The next thing I know is that you posted on here this pm saying you had had legal action threatened against you for taking the p iss out of the OWC name.

Finding that somewhat hard to believe(!), I sent Marty, via PM, a verbatim copy of what you had posted here. You then saw his response, which I posted here, (i.e. that you were now banned for talking sh*ite)

So unless one of the other Mods banned you this morning, unbeknownst to Marty, then your version doesn't stand up.

And I still don't believe that anyone from OWC threatened you with legal action on the grounds you alleged.

[soccerc]

Hmmm. When the above allegation was brought to Marty's attention, his verbatim comment was:

"Eh? Some new law come in that I missed?

Tell the wee sh*t from me he is now banned for that. "



a verbatim copy of what you had posted here. You then saw his response, which I posted here, (i.e. that you were now banned for talking sh*ite)

So unless one of the other Mods banned you this morning, unbeknownst to Marty, then your version doesn't stand up.

And I still don't believe that anyone from OWC threatened you with legal action on the grounds you alleged.


And they are both verbatim from the same source. :D

Which one is the article and which the annex?

RAFLMAO

[EalingGreen]

I'll be the first to sign [i.e. for an All-Ireland team]


Hmmm, I wouldn't be too sure about your selection, or dare I say it, eligibility
criteria for such a side, if the following extract from your (brief) career posting on OWC is anything to go by:

QUOTE(kingdomkerry @ Aug 30 2007, 02:14 PM)
"The Irish team is not sectarian, it is inclusive and everyone is welcome, NI is highly sectarian. Ye know it and I know it. Waving union jacks and the occasional uvf flag (not as often as in the past admitedly) not to mention the sectarian chants and an english anthem. Not very welcoming to players from a nationalist persuasion. I would like ireland to have an inclusive team whoever wants to play and is choosen. Yes I would prefer if no catholic players played for ye. They should play for their own country (Ireland)"

Nearly a week later and I still can't make up my mind whether I should be outraged at your advocacy of intitutionalised sectarianism in Irish football, or amused by your ability in the one paragraph to proclaim that "the Irish [sic] team is not sectarian", whilst urging that all "catholics" from NI, should play for them, with no mention of the Prods. Perhaps the likes of George Best, Norman Whiteside and David Healy just aren't good enough?

On balance, you still get the balance of the doubt, on the grounds that you shouldn't be blamed for something you can't help.

(Mind you, I bet the other good people of Kerry are embarrassed at your choice of moniker, seeing as how they've had to endure the usual stereotypes for so long...)

[kingdomkerry]

The sequence as I understand it was as follows: you were posting unhindered on OWC, despite including a load of uninformed, even malicious, nonsense such as the claim that UVF flags fly at NI matches at Windsor. A few posters called for you to be shown the road, though more, including myself, argued that you should stay ("for entertainment value").

The next thing I know is that you posted on here this pm saying you had had legal action threatened against you for taking the p iss out of the OWC name.

Finding that somewhat hard to believe(!), I sent Marty, via PM, a verbatim copy of what you had posted here. You then saw his response, which I posted here, (i.e. that you were now banned for talking sh*ite)

So unless one of the other Mods banned you this morning, unbeknownst to Marty, then your version doesn't stand up.

And I still don't believe that anyone from OWC threatened you with legal action on the grounds you alleged.


Well id hardly make it up for the sake of it would I. I gave as good as i got on are weea country, thats all. I cant help it if those anti irish biggots could'nt handle someone having different opinions to them.

Yes I implied that in the past UVF flags were flown at windsor park, as recently as when ireland beat the north 4-0 in belfast as i said under an atmosphere of the most vile secetarian hatred ever witnessed at a football match in Ireland. Provoked my bull about what happened when ireland played israel.

As for sqeeling to admin. Your some rat!!!

[kingdomkerry]

Very selective there EG. I also stated I could'nt care less what colour creed or religion anyone who plays for Ireland is. Goes without sayin obviously. Just want to make sure you dont twist my words.

On hindsite I could of choosen my words better with the above bold quote. Simply meant due to the secetarian nature of the northern soccer team I do not understand why any irish man would play with them.

Now i can see you like to go on and on and on but i have no interest in getting involved in a meaningless debate with you.

[Not Brazil]

Simply meant due to the secetarian nature of the northern soccer team I do not understand why any irish man would play with them.


This Irishman is proud that Irishmen (of differing backgrounds) do play together for the Irish Football Association representative sides.:cool: