Mercenary, Do or Die?

I thought this would be a very interesting thread to open. Now i know we have had countless discussions on the merits and de-merits of having international players in the ireland squad who are simply playing to forward their careers or to get a chance to play in the world cup finals.

I want to look at this from a different angle. I'm going to use Kevin Nolan as an example, forget that he may be ineligible, just think of the situation:

Kevin Nolan has previously declared that he has no interest in playing for Ireland at all, does not feel Irish, and feels he has enough ability to break into England's midfield.

Now Nolan has finally decided that international football for him is not going to come in the shape of England, and he would therefore like to play for the Irish national side.

*Heres the catch. If Nolan is to play for the Irish national side he WILL be the difference between qualifying for the world cup and not qualifying for the world cup. Im not talking one game, he will play in all the qualifiers and will guarentee our qualifying for the competition.

Basically what i'm saying is ;
If Nolan plays we qualify
If Nolan doesn't play we don't qualify

Now what are your views on a mercenry, someone who isn't Irish, but will bring us qualification, playing for us...

Poll added. I voted for not qualifying.

If they wanna play then they'il play i reckon..I'd at least cut off a finger (one of the crap ones) to go to this world cup so id probably play anyone who'd get us there. (except for fester)

As the poll is based on a contentious supposition, my guess is the thread will hit the dirt bin.

well put it another way...do you think "the end justifies the means" should be our main motivation in our use of the "granny rule". (no from me)

I voted for not qualifying.

I don't understand the point of the poll, as Clinton Morrison already plays for us the answer is 99% wants Ireland to qualify....:)

:confused: Daft daft. So we have 10 players born and bred in Ireland and the 11th players is someone who also plays for us of Irish blood but who wants to enhance his career, so we should hope we don't qualify because of that.

It takes all sorts I suppose.

I can never understand this Aryan pure blood theory. We have enough "pure Irishmen" turning their back on their country and retiring early and now we want to sneer at the 2nd generation who want to play for whatever reason. The motivation of a player doesn't interest me so long as he does the business. At least he's prepared to put on the green shirt unlike some of his aryan brethern.

Since when has Irelands world Cup qualification depended on Kevin Nolan for **** sake.Stupid poll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jorge

Since when has Irelands world Cup qualification depended on Kevin Nolan for **** sake.Stupid poll.

---

:rolleyes: Its a hypothetical situation....

Interesting article in the Times today. Thornley suggesting extending the rule to children of irish people & leaving at that. If kid plays for england at under-age level then don't approach when they older. He suggesting dragging in mercenaries at senior level is unfair to players who have gone throuhg the whole underage setup.

No to mercenaries.

No to mercenaries for me too, and that would include current players like Morrison. It makes a mockery of the national team. A player should be asked once, if there's not a direct answer there and then they should never be considered again. It shouldn't be restricted to Irish born, but it shouldn't be anyone who qualifies either.

btw Staunton has lost all support for me with his granny rule comments. Wasn't his fault he's Delaney's stooge so got the job (well it is, but he could hardly turn it down), it is his fault if he's looking to cram the team full of numpties delighted to have midweek games and the associated bonus' of getting caps for the "Republic"

I suppose ye guys would also rather Ray Houghton/Andy Townsend/John Aldridge had never player for Ireland and we had never qualified for world cup 90/94.

what a stupid question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaf1983

I suppose ye guys would also rather Ray Houghton/Andy Townsend/John Aldridge had never player for Ireland and we had never qualified for world cup 90/94.

---

Well at least Townsend and Aldridge have stuck with their decision. I think they would've met the qualification of only being asked once. Houghton has said it's just because he was píssed off at not getting picked for scotland and he still says he's Scottish. He said this on an RTE programme, so no question of him playing up for particular audience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaf1983

I suppose ye guys would also rather Ray Houghton/Andy Townsend/John Aldridge had never player for Ireland and we had never qualified for world cup 90/94.

what a stupid question.

---

How do you know we wouldn't have qualified without them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

...I can never understand this Aryan pure blood theory...

---

It's not a pure blood theory. It's a pure Irish accent theory. No Irish accent then he must be a Brit! Simple as the people who think it. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

How do you know we wouldn't have qualified without them?

---

I dont , but in the context of the question on the poll, anyone who votes for "Not playing that mercenary and not qualifying for the World cup" should by the same reasoning in the past have rathered Ireland had not played Houghton/Aldridge/Townsend even if it had meant not qualifying for world cup 90/94.

people kick up about these people playing for Ireland but once they happen to play a few games/score a few goals everything is forgotten.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaf1983

I dont , but in the context of the question on the poll, anyone who votes for "Not playing that mercenary and not qualifying for the World cup" should by the same reasoning in the past have rathered Ireland had not played Houghton/Aldridge/Townsend even if it had meant not qualifying for world cup 90/94.

---

Plenty of people were against the appointment of Stan or the 2nd chance for Keane, it doesn't mean they're going to stop supporting Ireland.

I think it's a good question, Staunton brought it up after all, it's one thing to go out and exploit the granny rule (and I've no problem with that) but to keep mentioning it as a core tactic like Staunton has is going too far. And I've no issue with exploiting the international rule occasionally, every country does it, england not least (aren't nearly all of their cricket team foreign?) but I don't want to see too many recruited like that or we'll become the butt of all jokes again. I don't know what Staunton's up to, it wasn't lack of players that stopped us qualifying for the world cup it was tactics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

:confused: Daft daft. So we have 10 players born and bred in Ireland and the 11th players is someone who also plays for us of Irish blood but who wants to enhance his career, so we should hope we don't qualify because of that.

It takes all sorts I suppose.

I can never understand this Aryan pure blood theory. We have enough "pure Irishmen" turning their back on their country and retiring early and now we want to sneer at the 2nd generation who want to play for whatever reason. The motivation of a player doesn't interest me so long as he does the business. At least he's prepared to put on the green shirt unlike some of his aryan brethern.

---

you are deliberatly missing the point. this, as has been repeated ad nauseum, is not about genuine diaspora representing the country of their forefathers like kilbane or kelly.
this is about guys like morrison who chose ireland over other options to play international football soely to further their careers.
the fact that stan is going back down this route is a cop out, as TH says, it lets the FAI off the hook for not bothering with any youth systems and vision.
im irritated now by those 2/3g's who automatically assume mercinary refers to them, it doesnt. it refers to those who only want to play for ireland because the nightlife is better in dublin than cardiff or because there is a contract clause that gets them an extra couple of quid a week if they become international players or helps them come contract chat time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hither green

...And I've no issue with exploiting the international rule occasionally, every country does it, england not least (aren't nearly all of their cricket team foreign?)...

---

I saw on the news the other day that Freddy Flintstone (or whatever his name is) was given the freedom of his home town. I asked my missus was that Cape Town, Jo'burg or Harare? :D (Yeah, yeah, I know it was somewhere up north, but I had a point)

Voting going pretty much as expected . LOI fans against it, those who don't foolow a club in ireland for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

Voting going pretty much as expected . LOI fans against it, those who don't foolow a club in ireland for it.

---

Well, i'm an eL fan far more than the national team but accepting all arguments for more recognition of eL players i'd still vote the first option even if it was
"have your family raped and qualify for the World Cup".
I think the existing rules are fair in that we've never had a 2nd gen playing who didn't want to be playing. Do people forget how good world cups are?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risteard

i'd still vote the first option even if it was
"have your family raped and qualify for the World Cup".

---

Glad I'm not related to you! :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risteard

"have your family raped and qualify for the World Cup".
I think the existing rules are fair in that we've never had a 2nd gen playing who didn't want to be playing. Do people forget how good world cups are?

---

Did you mean Retard when you created your name and not Risteard?...but seriously, you gotta be having a laugh

is it possible to follow an EL club without being a fan of the league?

As I said in another thread, if it's good enough for Poland and Russia to play 'naturalised' Nigerians and for Portugal, Tunisia and Middle Eastern Countries to play 'naturalised' Brazilians -none of whom have blood ties to their 'FIFA' Country, then we should not get so hung up about someone who has an Irish Grandparent.

Probably not ideal, but that's the way it is in International soccer these days.
:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

Voting going pretty much as expected . LOI fans against it, those who don't foolow a club in ireland for it.

---

Can we make a leap and say, at the moment (56% v's 54%), the majority (no matter the magin) put their country before clubs in their country?:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shelsman

As I said in another thread, if it's good enough for Poland and Russia to play 'naturalised' Nigerians and for Portugal, Tunisia and Middle Eastern Countries to play 'naturalised' Brazilians -none of whom have blood ties to their 'FIFA' Country, then we should not get so hung up about someone who has an Irish Grandparent.

Probably not ideal, but that's the way it is in International soccer these days.
:(

---

poland and Russia havent got a policy of relying on it. and those nigerians actually live and play in poland and russia. so its not the same thing at all, is it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hither green

england not least (aren't nearly all of their cricket team foreign?)

---

Well if, by "nearly all", you mean one, then yes.:)

Pietersen has an English mother and Geraint Jones has two Welsh parents so I think most people are willing to allow for 2nd generation nationality at least. I'll give you Andrew Strauss (although he has been living in England since he was 7). Or does that make him "more English" than someone with one parent from there? Depends what way you want to look at it I suppose.

Not to say that there haven't been dubious cases in the past but I think rugby (particularly Scotland and Wales) is one of the worst offenders in this regard. In some cases grandparents were found out not to even be from the countries involved. And three years residency is all you need to qualify. I heard a story about an Englishman who tried to declare for Wales because he spent 3 years with a Welsh club. Only problem was he was still living in England the whole time! Also New Zealand have been shameless in giving out scholarships to any promising Pacific Islander in order to claim the best for the All-Blacks. The equivalent would be the England FA automatically claiming all Irish schoolboys who join English clubs. :mad:

F**k the granny rule, we don't need any of the players being suggested enough IMO to go back to the days whereby half the Irish team were British. It made a bit of a nonsense of all our great achievements under Jack when everyone was aware that the majority of the players involved weren't even Irish. In recent years at least we've had the situation were most of our players were Irish and we put in our best performances in any major championships in 2002 with those mainly Irish players (We were s**te in 1994, Holland just laughed at us and boring as f**k in 1990).

If ever the granny rule was going to be implemented it should have been done 2-3 years ago when we had a shortage of talent on the horizon. It may even have helped us qualify for the European Championships and the World Cup. Now, however, we've enough young talent coming through and that should be given the chance instead of sticking with older, less committed, England rejects.

If your father and/or mother are Irish and you're born and raised abroad then I'd say you are at least partially Irish and if you're committed to playing for Ireland from day 1 then by all means ply your trade for us. I'd be happy to have such players. If only your granny is Irish I don't think that makes anyone Irish (in the slighest) so I'd prefer those players to steer clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roverstillidie

poland and Russia havent got a policy of relying on it. and those nigerians actually live and play in poland and russia. so its not the same thing at all, is it.

---

You're right: It's not the same thing: The players the FAI seek have blood of the country they are representing. Example: the geezer who went to Portsmouth via Panathinaikos didn't hang around too much in Poland, but in your eyes he's far worthier of citizenship than the grandson of an Irish emigrant who married a foreigner. And did either of these countries have so much of their population pushed out through emigration (70 million of some sort of Irish descent in the world compared with 5 million on the island)? Even at the height of East Gemany haemorrhaging people in 1989, Ireland was still losing more people per head.

The only thing the same is that all these players are career enhancers. Personally I wouldn't turn down a Nigerian who was passing through Ireland either if he becomes entitled to citizenship. Don't care if he got one of those dodgy deals that Albert set up for the Arab with his cat food factory in the nineties. If it's lawful, then do it. It's just that with a 'Ius sanguinis' approach one can always argue that the connection above everything else is a genealogical one which I'm afraid carries far more respect in gaining citizenship throughout the world than residency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jerry The Saint

Well if, by "nearly all", you mean one, then yes.:)

---

Nice to see that happening now, because that wasn't the case in the 80s. I mean that's like having the Irish compromise rule side made up of Aussies. Personally they can have the side packed full of martians resident in Surrey, just don't start lecturing other countries about who they pick.

lopez, if you get off your high horse for a minuite and actually read what people are saying we might be able to have an informed debate.

no-one so far has suggested that genuine diaspora be blocked from representing ireland.

merely that staunton openly admitting he will try and find non-irish players who are technically eligible but dont know it is a regressive step and a very short-termist view.

olisadebe is a polish citizen by virtue of nationalisation. clinton morrison is a chancer. when you can spot the difference, you might be able to approach this rationally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tired&Emotional

Can we make a leap and say, at the moment (56% v's 54%), the majority (no matter the magin) put their country before clubs in their country?:D

---

I'd say that 54% put their country ahead of their clubs in other countres..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tired&Emotional

Can we make a leap and say, at the moment (56% v's 54%), the majority (no matter the magin) put their country before clubs in their country?:D

---

I don't see this as a club versus country issue as few eL players will get in the squad let alone the team in either scenario. Just look back all the crap non-irish players who got a cap or two & wouldn't it be better than an irish kid who played for all those under age teams got that senior cap?

How can you say 56% V54 % surely it should be 46 % V54% or 56% V44% . Otherwise it adds up to 110% and we have enough of that in football talk to be honest.

Typo, obviously: was at 56/44 at the time!!
But the 110% thing - you're not wrong there!! ;)

Supposing ...just supposing there was a Santa ...and you could get a present off him -but in order to for him to get to you his sleigh would have to run over the Easter Bunny ...

would it be worth it? well would it. I'll add a poll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

I don't see this as a club versus country issue as few eL players will get in the squad let alone the team in either scenario. Just look back all the crap non-irish players who got a cap or two & wouldn't it be better than an irish kid who played for all those under age teams got that senior cap?

---

Was a bit tongue-in-cheek tbh but yes you are right.

There have been some crap players who have not been born here that have worn the Green Jersey!
That argument has run its course, for now - we agree there are basically two opinions on this and we are roughly split down the middle.

Generally speaking though if one accepts that the game is at higher level across the water (thats why there is a long tradition of Irish players heading over there to ply their trade with, arguably, the best/better) then it is only natural that the selection process will start there. It becomes more difficult to PROPERLY dedicate time to two countries - we'll see if Stans promise on this will bear fruit...

Personally I hope he does cap some eL players but whether they will good enough themselves to claim and keep a place for Internationals is another thing (bearing in mind what I have said above already, 1st/2nd line)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roverstillidie

...no-one so far has suggested that genuine diaspora be blocked from representing ireland.

---

There are at least three threads on the subject and certain posters (not you) have been against anyone without an Irish accent from getting picked. It's their opinion of course. Who am I to argue if they think a dog born in a stable is a horse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roverstillidie

merely that staunton openly admitting he will try and find non-irish players who are technically eligible but dont know it is a regressive step and a very short-termist view.

---

I'd agree with that view to a certain extent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roverstillidie

olisadebe is a polish citizen by virtue of nationalisation. clinton morrison is a chancer. when you can spot the difference, you might be able to approach this rationally.

---

They're both chancers. Except Olisadebe probably needed a citizenship ceremony to go through complete with oath of allegience etc. while Morrisson needed a cheque for £35 for a Foreign Births Certificate. No country imposes such restrictions (generation difference notwithstanding) on whom it sees as descendents of its people. That might make Olisadebe more Polish than Morrison is Irish in your view but not mine, nor indeed it seems either government.