Potentially eligible players thread

Here is the full content from the Irish Daily Mail:

https://image.ibb.co/jzOQXn/capture.png

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXnND4ZX4AEArmp.jpg

The mini-piece that runs from the back page to page 48 is a watered-down version of the more explicit and accusatory content that was published on Sunday and pulled the following day.

In the longer piece, O'Neill rationalises his chase of Sean Scannell and attempts to distinguish this from the FAI recruiting northern players on the basis that Scannell's bloodline is from the north. In O'Neill's opinion, this means that "[the IFA are] not taking [Scannell] off the Republic" - O'Neill places his pursuit of Paddy McEleney in the same bracket - whilst a player switching from the IFA to the FAI is, in O'Neill's implied opinion, being taken from the IFA by the FAI. You can he sure that O'Neill is employing here the meaning of the word "take" that refers to the act of snatching something that isn't rightfully yours.

Thus, when the IFA facilitate a former FAI player moving in their (the IFA's) direction, O'Neill appears to be suggesting that the process is somehow purer, more correct or kosher - that it is simply the case of a player returning to his rightful home - but when a northern player moves in the opposite direction, this process is somehow tainted or sullied by the fact that that player may not have a bloodline to the 26 counties.

O'Neill is very much losing his bearings here by trying to apply to reality his own biased and prejudicial preconception (as to what he feels should really render a player eligible to play for an association) rather than trying to look at the rules and the practical nature of Irish nationality law in a rational and objective fashion.

Scannell's father is indeed from Armagh, but what has a bloodline to a territory got to do with anything? It doesn't make a player any more or less eligible for one particular association as long as that player satisfies the relevant eligibility criteria for another association, nor does it give the IFA some sort of exclusive right or preferential access to a player. Insofar as Scannell was eligible to play for the FAI, it doesn't matter how he was eligible, and insofar as he played for the FAI, his potential switch to the IFA is no different to a player who played for the IFA switching in the other direction.

As it happens, Scannell, as the son of an Irish national born on the island of Ireland is an Irish national as of birthright. Paddy McEleney is also an Irish national as of birthright, having been born in Derry. Nationality as of birthright is as close a connection you can get to a particular country in citizenship law internationally. There is no closer connection. In attempting to imply that the IFA should have more of a claim than the FAI over the likes of Scannell or that the likes of McEleney is rightfully theirs comes dangerously close to denying or diminishing the validity of the Irish nationality of Irish nationals born in the north. It's exceptionally poor form from O'Neill.

(I was sent the first photo by Del, by the way, just to give him credit for it.)

To be a fly on the wall when Michael meets Martin. 'Ever hear of the Good Friday Agreement Michael you dick?' End of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gastric

To be a fly on the wall when Michael meets Martin. 'Ever hear of the Good Friday Agreement Michael you dick?' End of.

---

O'Neill has never expressed an opinion on the switching point though. Is Eunan O'Kane the last player to have switched and obtained a senior cap? I think so. He switched around 2012. There hasn't been much precedence or reason to ask Martin about the topic during his tenure. There have been lads switching at underage level but I'm not sure if he's been asked about those or addressed them. There has been no direct impact on his squad anyway. It's actually hard to know how he feels about it. I think this is the most revealing he has ever been on his identity and even here he avoids the fact that he had a choice on who to represent and his views on same: Martin O'Neill on what it means to be Irish http://the42.ie/1089500

For some reason, I get the impression it's an issue that Martin would rather avoid if at all possible on account of his history with the IFA. He was once NI's captain, of course, and I'm sure he doesn't want to upset old friends. They're a sensitive bunch when they're reminded they can't always get their way any more.

Agreed. That's exactly how it appears to me. In fact, no journalist has posed any question to him on the point. Could there be a gentleman's agreement with the media not to broach that one?

The bloodline argument seems fairly empty alright. He may feel like it is valid to apply it as some kind of principle in Scannell's particular case, but NI have had no problem in the past casting their net at players with no such link to NI, so there's no consistency.

I'd say my views on the 'taking their players' issue are fairly well known on this site, so I won't go into them again, but as somebody who has expressed sympathy for their situation in the past, comments like this from O'Neill, and other things the IFA do, seriously erode that sympathy.

Lots of ill informed stuff on radio Ulster this morning. People who should now better saying that the poor wains get their heads turned early on and once declared for Ireland may never be called up to play and that once this happens it's totally irreversible which I thought happens only after they got a senior competitive cap under their belts. Presenters are not challenging any of this, I'll see if I can post a link.
Commentators also seem to think that O'Neill's use of religion is part of some fiendishly clever strategy, I think it's more likely that he had a few before the interview.

The bit we're interested in starts a bit after 9.30
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09tgm9k

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by punkrocket

Lots of ill informed stuff on radio Ulster this morning. People who should now better saying that the poor wains get their heads turned early on and once declared for Ireland may never be called up to play and that once this happens it's totally irreversible which I thought happens only after they got a senior competitive cap under their belts. Presenters are not challenging any of this, I'll see if I can post a link.
Commentators also seem to think that O'Neill's use of religion is part of some fiendishly clever strategy, I think it's more likely that he had a few before the interview.

---

No, a player can only transfer allegiance once. eg. Jack Grealish is no long eligible for the rep of Ireland

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by punkrocket

The bit we're interested in starts a bit after 9.30
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09tgm9k

---

Those two lads were fair enough I thought. Starts at 35:40 by the way and runs for around fifteen minutes.

IFA distancing themselves from the comments somewhat - https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/...ty-467959.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by punkrocket

The bit we're interested in starts a bit after 9.30
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09tgm9k

---

The specific segment featuring discussion on O'Neill's comments can also be found here isolated from the rest of the show: https://audioboom.com/posts/6710539-...eacom5-discuss

Highlights:

i) Their weird pronunciation of Sean Scannell's surname. "Scan-ELLE"? That's surely not how it's pronounced, is it? He's not French, like. It reminds me of Richard "Sadlee-ay".

ii) Presenter: "So, Sean Scannell... He's English?"
Steve Beacom: "Yes, he's injured at the minute."

The talk of this 'gentleman's agreement' is utter nonsense. I hope the FAI aren't going to be agreeing to something like that.

Also, is there a similar situation like this anywhere else in the world?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IsMiseSean

Also, is there a similar situation like this anywhere else in the world?

---

Muzzy Izzet and Colin Kazim-Richards were eligible to play for Turkey on the basis of their Cypriot heritage because Turkish citizenship law extends extra-territorially over what only Turkey, out of the entire international community, recognises as Northern Cyprus, even though FIFA simultaneously recognises the entire island of Cyprus as the 'de jure' territory of the Cypriot football association. The eligibility of Northern or Turkish Cypriots to play for Turkey is probably the closest thing to an analogy that I've been able to find.

A key difference in our case though is that the island-wide effect of Irish nationality law is multilaterally-agreed (since the GFA) and is, as a result, no longer a matter of diplomatic contention or dispute. It is all agreed, entirely above board and should not be a contentious matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diggs246

No, a player can only transfer allegiance once. eg. Jack Grealish is no long eligible for the rep of Ireland

---

Okay, I thought that the Alex Bruce saga was available to be copied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeLorean

IFA distancing themselves from the comments somewhat - https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/...ty-467959.html

---

Where is Mackey getting this?:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Liam Mackey

Current regulations, backed by Fifa and copper-fastened by a Court of Arbitration of Sport decision in 2010, allow players on both sides of the border to switch allegiance if they have not been capped at senior level.

---

:excruciating:

Just on Paddy McEleney as well, as Michael O'Neill mentioned him in the article, and this whole notion of players being "taken" when they go from IFA to FAI but this not being the case when they move from FAI to IFA... O'Neill had no qualms about meeting up with McEleney at a time when Noel King still had immediate plans for the player. In fact, McEleney provisionally agreed with O'Neill to switch from the FAI to the IFA and even had King ringing him up pleading with him not to go.

It eventually transpired that McEleney wasn't prepared to go through with the switch because he was told by an IFA official that he would have to apply for a British passport (or so he claimed anyway), which he didn't want to do, but O'Neill was nevertheless more than ready to open his arms to a player who was in immediate demand by another association.

Of course, O'Neill suggests this is different to the FAI facilitating players who might be in demand by the IFA because McEleney has a "bloodline"... :confused: The purported distinction is simply self-serving fantasy.

The thing is though, that nobody is prepared to actually take note of the facts or the counter-examples. Michael O’Neill has put this out there, the headlines and the claims have been made and 99% of people with any awareness of the situation will simply think the FAI is poaching players under some kind of loophole and poor old IFA is being hard done by.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

The thing is though, that nobody is prepared to actually take note of the facts or the counter-examples. Michael O’Neill has put this out there, the headlines and the claims have been made and 99% of people with any awareness of the situation will simply think the FAI is poaching players under some kind of loophole and poor old IFA is being hard done by.

---

Someone needs to explain to the IFA that , that "loophole" is called the Good Friday agreement

RTE twitter account reporting from the press conference

MON: I have no problem to have a conversation with Michael O'Neill. Met him at a game recently. Very convivial conversation. Didn't mention this. Wish he had...

MON: I have not taken one senior player from him (Michael O'Neill). Bringing religion into it...you'll have to ask Michael. Very disappointing. It's the player's choice.