Eligibility proposal

[Drumcondra 69er]

Which is a misnomer.


Many people, especially those of the older generation, refer to the NI team as "Ireland". It is the inheritor of the original Ireland team, of course, and therefore has more right to the name.

It's not a misnomer, it's a fact. But it is a complexn issue reagrding what was considered for years an illegal occupation etc but I doubt any of us realluy want to go there. A misnomer would be people from NI calling themselves British as they're not actually from Great Britain.

How old are we talking here, people in their 90's? And are we just talking about people from the North? Don't see it happening anywhere else. I've never heard a chant of 'Ireland' at an NI game either, serious question, do you chant 'Ireland' or 'Northern Ireland'?

[ifk101]

Wikipedia doesn't clear it up much.

The sentence I've emboldened is interesting.

It's the sentence that you didn't highlight that's in issue - the official name of the state ie Ireland. According to Blanchflower this is a misnomer but "a misnomer is a term which suggests an interpretation that is known to be untrue."

[Blanchflower]

How is it a misnomer?

Is that a serious question?

You don't understand how using the name for the entire island to describe only part of the island is a misnomer?

[Blanchflower]

It's not a misnomer, it's a fact.

Jeez.:(No-one doubts that it is a fact. That doesn't stop it being a misnomer!


How old are we talking here, people in their 90's?

Middle-aged and upwards. Sammy McIlroy, for example, refers to us as Ireland.


I've never heard a chant of 'Ireland' at an NI game either, serious question, do you chant 'Ireland' or 'Northern Ireland'?
"Ireland" was chanted regularly until the early 70s. Not now.

[osarusan]

It's the sentence that you didn't highlight that's in issue - the official name of the state ie Ireland. According to Blanchflower this is a misnomer but "a misnomer is a term which suggests an interpretation that is known to be untrue."
I'm just pointing out that those who ask people like Blanchflower not to use the term "Republic of Ireland" are being, in my own far from humble opinion, pedantic*.

*Not that a discussion of the name of the state is pedantic. But the usage by Blanchflower etc on this thread seems perfectly logical to me in terms of differentiation of two entities.

[osarusan]

Jeez.:(No-one doubts that it is a fact. That doesn't stop it being a misnomer!


To be honest, this is nonsense. A misnomer is a commonly held perception which is actually incorrect.

A factually correct term cannot be a misnomer.

[Drumcondra 69er]

Jeez.:(No-one doubts that it is a fact. That doesn't stop it being a misnomer!



Middle-aged and upwards. Sammy McIlroy, for example, refers to us as Ireland.


"Ireland" was chanted regularly until the early 70s. Not now.

When Alsace Lorraine in France was ceeded to Prussia after the Franco Prussian war should the rest of France have stopped refering to itself as 'France'. Not suggesting this is an exact comparison by any means.

[Blanchflower]

To be honest, this is nonsense. A misnomer is a commonly held perception which is actually incorrect.

A factually correct term cannot be a misnomer.

No. It is a fact that the official name of the Southern state is "Ireland". That, however, does not mean that the name is not a misnomer, for the Southern state covers only a part of Ireland.

Collins: an incorrect or unsuitable name for a person or thing.

[Blanchflower]

When Alsace Lorraine in France was ceeded to Prussia after the Franco Prussian war should the rest of France have stopped refering to itself as 'France'. Not suggesting this is an exact comparison by any means.

The boundaries of France have fluctuated through time: the boundaries of Ireland are physical (it's an island) and have not fluctuated. Belfast, for example, did not cease to be in Ireland when the Free State was established (much as the IRFU might like to think it).

[Stuttgart88]

Is the capitalisation of "S" in "Southern" not an error?

[endabob1]

Cyprus

[osarusan]

Drumcondra's original post (part of it)
However, the name of the 26 county State is also Ireland.

Your reply
Which is a misnomer.



No. It is a fact that the official name of the Southern state is "Ireland". That, however, does not mean that the name is not a misnomer

Collins: an incorrect or unsuitable name for a person or thing.

Even by the definition you've given, it is clearly not a misnomer. As the name of the state is "Ireland", then "Ireland" is a correct and suitable name for it, so it is not a misnomer.

The fact that "Ireland" is the name of both the island itself, and the state which comprises only a part of that island may be confusing, but it is not a misnomer. This is why I quoted from Wikipedia in an earlier post-

The state known today as the 'Republic of Ireland' is, and has been, known by a number of names, some of which have been controversial. The state's official title, as in the Irish constitution, is simply Ireland (in English) and Éire (in the Irish language). The term the Republic of Ireland (Irish: Poblacht na hÉireann) is rather the official 'description' of the state, as defined by law. The Republic of Ireland is generally used in any context in which it is necessary to distinguish between the state and the island of Ireland as a whole. Short-hand terms such as the Republic,the State and the South, are also used for the same purpose.

[Blanchflower]

Is the capitalisation of "S" in "Southern" not an error?

No more so than, say, "South Korea".

[Drumcondra 69er]

Cyprus

Far better example then mine.

[Blanchflower]

Even by the definition you've given, it is clearly not a misnomer.

Clearly, it is: the state is misnamed because it has given itself a name which describes an entity of which it makes up only part.



As the name of the state is "Ireland", then "Ireland" is a correct and suitable name for it, so it is not a misnomer.
It's not suitable since the state only makes up part of the name it has given itself.

[galwayhoop]

Clearly, it is: the state is misnamed because it has given itself a name which describes an entity of which it makes up only part.


It's not suitable since the state only makes up part of the name it has given itself.

CYPRUS??????????????????

[Stuttgart88]

Even as a descriptive term "south" isn't wholly accurate and I've always felt that just because part of the island is known as "Northern Ireland" it shouldn't by default suggest that the rest of the island is "Southern Ireland".

Here in London I'm always asked if I'm from "the North" or "the south" and I always say "the east". I get funny looks.

[galwayhoop]

No more so than, say, "South Korea".

that would account for the capitol N in Norn Iron, but not the S in Southern state you insuinated. there has never been nor will there ever be a state known as Southern Ireland, despite how some ignorant Brits try to make out!!!

[Blanchflower]

Cyprus is de jure (if not de facto) one state covering the whole island. In football terms, the Cyprus team officially represents the whole island.

If, however, you recognise the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus then, presumably you don't describe the Republic of Cyprus as "Cyprus".

Equally, when discussing the two parts of Cyprus, it is unlikely that you refer to "Cyprus" and "Northern Cyprus".

[osarusan]

Clearly, it is: the state is misnamed because it has given itself a name which describes an entity of which it makes up only part.


no, the name of the state refers to the state only, not the whole island.

Is "Northern Ireland" a misnomer?

[galwayhoop]

Is "Northern Ireland" a misnomer?

Obviously, as it doesn't cover the entire northern part of the island ;)

anyway lot of older people refer to it as Ireland anyway :):)

[osarusan]

Obviously, as it doesn't cover the entire northern part of the island ;)

Goddam it Galway Hoop, he was supposed to say "no", then I could cunningly point out exactly what you've written.

Anyway, this debate has gone waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic, as the names of the states are irrelevant to the eligibility criteria.

Weren't Uefa supposed to release their ruling last week? Or is it this week?

[Blanchflower]

no, the name of the state refers to the state only, not the whole island.

But it uses the name for the whole island, hence it is misnamed.



Is "Northern Ireland" a misnomer?
No. It is in Ireland (hence "Ireland") and in the northern part of Ireland (hence "Northern"). Fairly accurate, I should have thought. More pertinently, though, there is no other "Northern Ireland" so it is quite clear to what the name refers.

[Blanchflower]

Weren't Uefa supposed to release their ruling last week? Or is it this week?

Is it not a FIFA issue? What is UEFA's role?

[Stuttgart88]

This reminds me of David Trimble years ago on telly. I can't recall if it was BBC, UTV or RTE. The presenter was pressing him to say whether he was "Irish" and it was put to him that if he was on holiday and a foreigner asked him where he was from what would he say? His answer was that that "I'm from that part of the United Kingdom that is called Northern Ireland". "But is that Irish?" came the response and Trimble came up with the same line. It doesn't exactly roll off the tongue anyway.

[osarusan]

Is it not a FIFA issue? What is UEFA's role?

Yes, I meant FIFA.


No. It is in Ireland (hence "Ireland") and in the northern part of Ireland (hence "Northern"). Fairly accurate, I should have thought. More pertinently, though, there is no other "Northern Ireland" so it is quite clear to what the name refers.

Where is Donegal, geographically?

But anyway,

Anyway, this debate has gone waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off topic, as the names of the states are irrelevant to the eligibility criteria.

[Blanchflower]

Where is Donegal, geographically?



In the big scheme of things, the 6 counties relative to the 26 as a whole are "northern". You might think it better to have called NI "North-Eastern Ireland", or whatever, and that's not an unreasonable opinion. But "Northern Ireland" was chosen, there is no other "Northern Ireland", and it is clear to what you are referring when you use the term. If you are referring to a geographical area you can use "northern Ireland" or "the north of Ireland". The meaning will be clear.

[antrimgreen]

This reminds me of David Trimble years ago on telly. I can't recall if it was BBC, UTV or RTE. The presenter was pressing him to say whether he was "Irish" and it was put to him that if he was on holiday and a foreigner asked him where he was from what would he say? His answer was that that "I'm from that part of the United Kingdom that is called Northern Ireland". "But is that Irish?" came the response and Trimble came up with the same line. It doesn't exactly roll off the tongue anyway.

That's the problem, Irish when it suits them British when it suits them, caught in a place called no man's land. Ireland is Ireland, people born in the 6 occupied counties off Ireland are as Irish as anyone born in the other 26.

[osarusan]

there is no other "Northern Ireland", and it is clear to what you are referring when you use the term. If you are referring to a geographical area you can use "northern Ireland"

This is a bit contradictory I'd say. It's hard to discern capital letters in spoken English

[endabob1]

No. It is in Ireland (hence "Ireland") and in the northern part of Ireland (hence "Northern"). Fairly accurate, I should have thought. More pertinently, though, there is no other "Northern Ireland" so it is quite clear to what the name refers.


To use that logic
It is on the island of Ireland, it takes up circa 80% of the landmass of the Island of Ireland there is no other state named "Ireland" therefore "Ireland" is "Fairly accurate".

[osarusan]

alright, no more comments from me on state names. I'm getting as pedantic as others.

I'll wait until FIFA release their ruling to comment again. I'd advise others to do likewise.

[Pád Von Tirpitz]

Equally, when discussing the two parts of Cyprus, it is unlikely that you refer to "Cyprus" and "Northern Cyprus".

How about Virginia and West Virginia?

[Drumcondra 69er]

This reminds me of David Trimble years ago on telly. I can't recall if it was BBC, UTV or RTE. The presenter was pressing him to say whether he was "Irish" and it was put to him that if he was on holiday and a foreigner asked him where he was from what would he say? His answer was that that "I'm from that part of the United Kingdom that is called Northern Ireland". "But is that Irish?" came the response and Trimble came up with the same line. It doesn't exactly roll off the tongue anyway.

That's because he knows he's not British. At least he was aware of that misnomer!

[Pád Von Tirpitz]

But it uses the name for the whole island, hence it is misnamed.


No. It is in Ireland (hence "Ireland") and in the northern part of Ireland (hence "Northern"). Fairly accurate, I should have thought. More pertinently, though, there is no other "Northern Ireland" so it is quite clear to what the name refers.

But we gladly select players from the whole island, therefore at least attempting to achieve the required geographical spread. Isn't this what the thread was about in the first place?

[galwayhoop]

Cyprus is de jure (if not de facto) one state covering the whole island. In football terms, the Cyprus team officially represents the whole island.

If, however, you recognise the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus then, presumably you don't describe the Republic of Cyprus as "Cyprus".

Equally, when discussing the two parts of Cyprus, it is unlikely that you refer to "Cyprus" and "Northern Cyprus".

yes i do call it (the non-occupied part) cyprus, it had always been a united island state but a hostile neighbour invaded and now occupy a portion of the north of the island. to create the distinction i do, as it happens, refer to it as northern cyprus and cyprus. although i, like the majority realise that as it is an island it should have no partition and be one independant state - cyprus. until the day of unification however i will refer to the non-occupied part as cyprus.

this actually sounds familar to something..........

[Dodge]

Wikipedia doesn't clear it up much.

Beware the zealots on wikipedia regarding Ireland. A huge amount of them on both sides of the arguement.

LOL @ Blanchflower

[Blanchflower]

Ireland is Ireland, people born in the 6 occupied counties off Ireland are as Irish as anyone born in the other 26.
Well said - amazing how so many here can't grasp that.

[Blanchflower]

This is a bit contradictory I'd say. It's hard to discern capital letters in spoken English

If speaking, you'd need to use different terminology or explain what you mean.

[kingdomkerry]

When can we expect an official conformation of the proposal/ruling from FIFA?

[lopez]

Obviously the ROI has a monopoly on ROI citizenship! Care to make any other statements of the obvious?

Your statement of the obvious doesn't diminish in any way the outrageous chauvinism of your statements about some people being "more" Irish than others on account of their political views.
It's not political views that makes them less Irish. It's relegating Ireland to a region of another country, and opting for citizenship of another country that does.


Indeed, but it is, in fact, citizenship only of the ROI. NI is not part of the ROI.
Irish citizenship is open to all born in NI (subject to their parents residence status). This is agreed both by the British government and the 6C assembly in Article 1 (vi) states '[The two Governments] recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland.' No mention of ROI citizenship. No mention of NI citizenship either.


Ireland is an island. Northern Ireland is part of the UK. The Republic is an independent state. Those are indisputable facts. It does not follow that those who acknowledge and state such facts "relegate" Ireland to "something little better than the old county of Yorkshire" (whatever on earth you mean by that).
What I mean is relegating Ireland (or the 6c) to a region of another country. That is what Yorkshire was, and plenty people consider themselves Yorkshireman/woman and British, but there is no such country as Yorkshire or Yorkshire citizenship.


I merely observe that I find it odd that someone who is 3/4 British and 1/4 Irish claims to be 100% Irish.
Yet you are 100% Irish but consider yourself British.


That observation is not inconsistent with my "advice" (which wasn't advice, but a retort to your irrational charge of my having an identity crisis). It remains my view that those who are intellectually capable of understanding and discerning multiple identities are at less risk of having an identity crisis than those who are only able to view the world one-dimensionally and cannot understand how someone's identity might be more subtle and nuanced than simply "Irish" or "British" or any other identity. Ironically, the example that you quote actually backs up this view!
Well we all have a unique identity, but this thread is about citizenship


I have never told anyone who has a passport of a country that he is not a citizen of that country, so your question has no basis.
You've been going on about the 'grannies' for the past few pages being less than Irish.

In the case of the Charlton team, the problem is merely that many people didn't take them as seriously as they ought to have done due to all the granny-rulers. Took away from their success to a degree.
People didn't take 'the Charlton team' seriously due to ignorance and jealousy. Ignorance of Irish emigration. Jealousy that a side from a country with 1/19th the population beat them twice and drew with them another three times. It never took away anything from our sucess because the same detractors picked players with even less connection with the 'country' they were playing for.


I'm not in the habit of responding to inane questions.

No - I think it's been pointed out several times that NI didn't avail of the granny rule for many years. Indeed, they had much tighter eligibility criteria than the South.Much tighter eligibility criteria? You are taking the p*ss here. Picking players with not one ancestor from the 6C is a tighter eligibility criteria? You must be some sort of amadam if you think that's a tighter eligibility criteria.
Are there two Frances? Two Germanies? Two Spains? Two Israels?

The answer to those questions might give you a clue!Yeah, One! The other area in the North east of Ireland is currently a region of Britain, which just happens to have a team playing international football.


That's the problem, Irish when it suits them British when it suits them, caught in a place called no man's land. Ireland is Ireland, people born in the 6 occupied counties off Ireland are as Irish as anyone born in the other 26.Which brings us back to the thread subject and the right for everyone in Ireland to play for Ireland.


Well said - amazing how so many here can't grasp that.Glad you finally agree! :rolleyes:

[Blanchflower]

It's not political views that makes them less Irish. It's relegating Ireland to a region of another country, and opting for citizenship of another country that does.

By "relegating Ireland to a region of another country" you mean wishing Northern Ireland or, for that matter, Ireland, to be a part of the UK or, in short, being a unionist. That is a political view. Hence it is your position that a person can be "more" or "less" Irish than another on account of his or her political views. That is repugnant.:mad:


Irish citizenship is open to all born in NI (subject to their parents residence status).
Yes, we know that [sigh].


This is agreed both by the British government and the 6C assembly in Article 1 (vi) states '[The two Governments] recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland.' No mention of ROI citizenship. No mention of NI citizenship either.

As you know, ROI citizenship is known as "Irish citizenship". That does not, however, mean that it is not ROI citizenship. There is no all-Ireland state, therefore there can be no all-Ireland citizenship.


Yet you are 100% Irish but consider yourself British.

And? The two aren't mutually exclusive! You're revealing an incredibly simplistic understanding of identity.



Well we all have a unique identity, but this thread is about citizenship

So why are you discussing identity?


You've been going on about the 'grannies' for the past few pages being less than Irish.
I have never told anyone who has a passport of a country that he is not a citizen of that country - this is the charge you made against me and you have failed to back it up.

On granny-rulers, I merely observed that they had less connection to the ROI than those born and bred there. That doesn't mean they weren't ROI citizens.


People didn't take 'the Charlton team' seriously due to ignorance and jealousy. Ignorance of Irish emigration. Jealousy that a side from a country with 1/19th the population beat them twice and drew with them another three times. It never took away anything from our sucess because the same detractors picked players with even less connection with the 'country' they were playing for.
There is doubtless much truth in that.

Incidentally, when you count all the people with Irish grannies, the population of ROI becomes much more than 1/19th. You can't have it both ways!


Much tighter eligibility criteria? You are taking the p*ss here.
If one country only picks someone born there or with a father from there, and another country picks anyone born there, with a father or mother from there, or with a grandfather or grandmother from there, how is it "taking the ****" to say that the former's eligibility criteria are tighter than the latter's?


Picking players with not one ancestor from the 6C is a tighter eligibility criteria? You must be some sort of amadam if you think that's a tighter eligibility criteria.Yeah, One! The other area in the North east of Ireland is currently a region of Britain, which just happens to have a team playing international football.

Er, those criteria were not in place at the time under discussion. No-one is claiming that NI doesn't avail of looser criteria now than in the recent past!



Glad you finally agree!
I have never disagreed - on the contrary it is those who claim Ireland equates to the ROI who disagreed. I have been arguing the opposite.

[Drumcondra 69er]

And? The two aren't mutually exclusive! You're revealing an incredibly simplistic understanding of identity.



I have never disagreed - on the contrary it is those who claim Ireland equates to the ROI who disagreed. I have been arguing the opposite.

Is there not a contradiction here? If you are saying that Ireland should only be used in the context of the island then how can one be both British and Irish given that Britain is a sepearte island and should therefore, by your logic be viewed as a separate entity. No part of Ireland has ever been part of Britain, North, South, East or West since at least the last ice age and even then was just part of the mass of mainland Europe....

[geysir]

When can we expect an official conformation of the proposal/ruling from FIFA?
No time deadline was made public afaik.
The next FIFA Executive Board meeting is in the middle of December in Japan.
I could imagine that they will only have something to decide upon if the Legal Board (a standing committee) submit recommendations that require their approval.

[Blanchflower]

Is there not a contradiction here? If you are saying that Ireland should only be used in the context of the island then how can one be both British and Irish given that Britain is a sepearte island and should therefore, by your logic be viewed as a separate entity.


Great Britain is, indeed, a separate island. And I agree that "Britain" or "Great Britain" should not be used to include Ireland or Northern Ireland. I see no contradiction!


No part of Ireland has ever been part of Britain, North, South, East or West since at least the last ice age and even then was just part of the mass of mainland Europe....
It has, though, been part of the British Isles, and part of the United Kingdom.

[lopez]

By "relegating Ireland to a region of another country" you mean wishing Northern Ireland or, for that matter, Ireland, to be a part of the UK or, in short, being a unionist. That is a political view. Hence it is your position that a person can be "more" or "less" Irish than another on account of his or her political views. That is repugnant.:mad:
I love those 'mad' smilies you keep putting up

As you know, ROI citizenship is known as "Irish citizenship". That does not, however, mean that it is not ROI citizenship. There is no all-Ireland state, therefore there can be no all-Ireland citizenship.
There is an all-Ireland availability to Irish citizenship, and the reason there is no all-Ireland state has nothing to do with the democratic wish of the people upon partition. As someone has already stated, 'we don't want to go there.'

And? The two aren't mutually exclusive! You're revealing an incredibly simplistic understanding of identity.
I didn't say that being British and Irish are mutually exclusive of each other. What I said is, if you reduce one country to a region of the other, you relegate what could be termed a co-nationality to a regionality. It might offend you, but sad as it may appear, it's the truth.

So why are you discussing identity?
You brought it up with the 'granny rule' and some English person with a granny claiming to be Irish and his identity crisis. Before that we were talking about citizenship being a requirement to play for Ireland. It is pretty pathetic from someone who claims to be Northern Irish, Irish and British all in one, and no doubt like all Ulster Unionists, wheels whatever one out at their convenience (today it's Irish just to win an argument on an internet forum), to criticise others.

I have never told anyone who has a passport of a country that he is not a citizen of that country - this is the charge you made against me and you have failed to back it up.
To quote you: '...the Charlton team in the popular consciousness was a team of English and Scotsmen with tenuous links to Ireland. That wasn't far off being accurate. (Note this was never the case in the 70s or before when the ROI had wonderful teams of genuine Irishmen like Brady, Stapleton, Giles, etc.)...There were a lot of granny rulers and the majority of the team was made up of players from England and Scotland...I find it strange that someone with 3 English grandparents and 1 Irish grandparent would consider himself "100% Irish" and have no affinity with Britain. Such a person must be very poor at arithmetic or have some kind of identity crisis.'

On granny-rulers, I merely observed that they had less connection to the ROI than those born and bred there. That doesn't mean they weren't ROI citizens.
You said a bit more than that, and you know you did. You were reiterating well worn tabloid soundbites and going on about 'popular conciousness'. All very good until 'popular consciousness' also feels that NI fans are a bunch of religious bigots who boo their own players simply because of their religion. I don't believe it, before you throw another mad smilie at me, but Marie Jones - a Protestant (you mentioned the polarity of religion and nationalism in the 6C, no?) -believed it enough to bring out a play which is on another tour round Britain with Patrick Kielty as our hero.

There is doubtless much truth in that.

Incidentally, when you count all the people with Irish grannies, the population of ROI becomes much more than 1/19th. You can't have it both ways!
When you count all the English 'grannies', colonials, Owen Hargreaves and Zola f*cking Budds then what does that make the British population. No you can't have it both ways, even though you seem to want it one way - pick players with no connection with Northern Ireland while preventing Irish citizens playing for their country.

If one country only picks someone born there or with a father from there, and another country picks anyone born there, with a father or mother from there, or with a grandfather or grandmother from there, how is it "taking the ****" to say that the former's eligibility criteria are tighter than the latter's?
You're taking the p*ss by stating NI eligibility criteria is stricter than the Republic's. You lost that moral highground, not when you started choosing the grannies, but when you started picking players with no ancestral or residential connection to the 6C.

Er, those criteria were not in place at the time under discussion. No-one is claiming that NI doesn't avail of looser criteria now than in the recent past!
Oh the time lord returns? When we talk about Lennon and being booed, it's in the past. When we talk about NI not picking the 'grannies', that's OK we can talk about the past then.

I have never disagreed - on the contrary it is those who claim Ireland equates to the ROI who disagreed. I have been arguing the opposite.The ROI as you describe it is Ireland.

[lopez]

It has, though, been part of the British Isles...Oh now we have that old chestnut: The fact that the two islands stand beside each other must make them part of a greater entity, named after the big one of course. You're statement sounds as irrendentist as saying the 6C and the independent state are one country.

[Gather round]

It's not political views that makes them less Irish. It's relegating Ireland to a region of another country, and opting for citizenship of another country that does

Only part of Ireland is 'relegated' within another country with separate nationality. In no reasonable way does this make us less Irish. I don't really see where you can go with this one, Lopez?

you are 100% Irish but consider yourself British

I consider myself 100% both. What's da problem? It's entirely reasonable and logical.

People didn't take 'the Charlton team' seriously due to ignorance and jealousy

Broadly agreed, although don't assume all the jealous were ignorant. They played to their strengths, sometimes it wasn't pretty (not entirely different to the current NI team ;) )

Yeah, One! The other area in the North east of Ireland is currently a region of Britain, which just happens to have a team playing international football

It's just happened since the 19th century. (or sometime between the late 12th and early 17th century, if ye mean its current regional status...

[Blanchflower]

I love those 'mad' smilies you keep putting up.
Your love or otherwise doesn't diminish the ugly chauvinism revealed by your comments.


There is an all-Ireland availability to Irish citizenship,
An "all-Ireland availability" to ROI citizenship.


I didn't say that being British and Irish are mutually exclusive of each other. What I said is, if you reduce one country to a region of the other, you relegate what could be termed a co-nationality to a regionality. It might offend you, but sad as it may appear, it's the truth.

Nonsense. A Scot is no less a Scot because Scotland is in the UK. An Englishman no less an Englishman, etc.



You brought it up with the 'granny rule' and some English person with a granny claiming to be Irish and his identity crisis.

I believe we were talking about identity before that. I only referred to 'identity crisis' because you - or someone else - had unfairly introduced the idea.



Before that we were talking about citizenship being a requirement to play for Ireland. It is pretty pathetic from someone who claims to be Northern Irish, Irish and British all in one, and no doubt like all Ulster Unionists, wheels whatever one out at their convenience (today it's Irish just to win an argument on an internet forum), to criticise others.

Your comments indicate that you have a problem with anyone who doesn't conform to your simplistic and binary understanding of identity. I think it would be more reasonable to conclude that your limited understanding, and not my identity, is "pathetic".


To quote you: '...the Charlton team in the popular consciousness was a team of English and Scotsmen with tenuous links to Ireland. That wasn't far off being accurate. (Note this was never the case in the 70s or before when the ROI had wonderful teams of genuine Irishmen like Brady, Stapleton, Giles, etc.)...There were a lot of granny rulers and the majority of the team was made up of players from England and Scotland...I find it strange that someone with 3 English grandparents and 1 Irish grandparent would consider himself "100% Irish" and have no affinity with Britain. Such a person must be very poor at arithmetic or have some kind of identity crisis.'

And? In none of those quotes did I tell anyone who has a passport of a country that he is not a citizen of that country! Please stop making things up.


You said a bit more than that, and you know you did. You were reiterating well worn tabloid soundbites and going on about 'popular conciousness'. All very good until 'popular consciousness' also feels that NI fans are a bunch of religious bigots who boo their own players simply because of their religion.
I think it is true that in the popular consciousness until recently, that is how NI fans were viewed. I think that has changed, though.


When you count all the English 'grannies', colonials, Owen Hargreaves and Zola f*cking Budds then what does that make the British population.
Strange question. The British population is the British population - made up of all who live there.


No you can't have it both ways, even though you seem to want it one way - pick players with no connection with Northern Ireland while preventing Irish citizens playing for their country.

I don't think NI should pick players with no connection to NI. And, if you accept that you can't have it both ways, then you can't claim a figure of 1/19th of the population.


You're taking the p*ss by stating NI eligibility criteria is stricter than the Republic's.
Why are you deliberately misrepresenting what I say? Your behaviour indicates that you are struggling to engage in a rational discussion. I said the NI eligibility was stricter than the Republic's. That is a fact.


You lost that moral highground, not when you started choosing the grannies, but when you started picking players with no ancestral or residential connection to the 6C.

I have never said that we are on the moral high ground.


Oh the time lord returns? When we talk about Lennon and being booed, it's in the past. When we talk about NI not picking the 'grannies', that's OK we can talk about the past then.
If we're talking about the 80s and 90s, then we're talking about the 80s and 90s. If we're talking about the time Lennon got booed, then we're talking about the time Lennon got booed. If we're talking about now, then we're not talking about the 80s and 90s. If we're talking about now, then we're not talking about the time Lennon got booed. I see no difficulty in being able to distinguish between time when discussing various issues.

The ROI as you describe it is Ireland.
No. When I refer to ROI I only refer to the 26 counties. When I say Ireland, I mean ... well, Ireland (all 32 counties).

[Blanchflower]

Oh now we have that old chestnut: The fact that the two islands stand beside each other must make them part of a greater entity, named after the big one of course. You're statement sounds as irrendentist as saying the 6C and the independent state are one country.
You deny that Great Britain, Ireland and neighbouring isles were known as the British Isles? You deny that Great Britain and Ireland were once part of a "greater entity" (i.e. the UK of GB & Ireland)?

[janeymac]

It's not political views that makes them less Irish. It's relegating Ireland to a region of another country, and opting for citizenship of another country that does

Only part of Ireland is 'relegated' within another country with separate nationality. In no reasonable way does this make us less Irish. I don't really see where you can go with this one, Lopez?

you are 100% Irish but consider yourself British

I consider myself 100% both. What's da problem? It's entirely reasonable and logical.

Its hard to understand you being 100% of two nationalities. Here is a question that might help to figure out how 'Irish' you are? Would you consider that the Irish language is an important part of an Irish person's cultural heritage and should be on an equal footing with the English language by anyone who claims to be 100% Irish? Note: I don't mean that you need to be able to speak Irish to be 100% Irish - just respect those Irish people who feel it is important to Irish culture and not object to signposts in both languages etc. that type of thing.


What do you think the reaction at Windsor if a verse of GSTQ was sung in Irish? (only a verse and could be put up phenetically on a screen - it has been done elsewhere!)