Printable View
Personally speaking the right of northern born players to play for ROI is not up for negoiation however I wouldnt have a problem of players making a declaraton at 18 of their international intentions*
*whether this is a purely NI/ROI agreement or is run simultaneously in conjunction with a similar UK internal agreement I am not bothered although I suspect that the IFA/SFA and Welsh FA may not be too keen to sign it
I support both. Do I count? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by greendeiseboy
No - sole traders only!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
Well what you asked for was a "link" or "quote". I provided you with a "quote", which, just to be clear, is one of the things you asked for. In fact, I simply reminded you of where you could find the quote that I previously provided, which you had apparently missed. As I said, if you want to argue that Cascarino just made that story up, then go ahead, but it's pretty hard to see why he would have. It's certainly more evidence than you have provided in support of your bizarre assertion that FIFA do not require any evidence of eligibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
To summarise my view, an account from a former international player counts for far more than the unsubstantiated opinion of an anonymous internet poster, but each to their own.
Eh, sorry, but anyone who wants independence is not a "Unionist". A Unionist supports the Union with Britain. The "Union" part of "Unionist" kind of gives it away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
PS: just to reiterate, there is no such country as the Republic of Ireland, the state is called Ireland. Even the UK has now accepted that, so you really should too. Even if it is hard for an "early 80 year old" to change his ways :rolleyes:
Maybe I took you up wrong. In our case there's a choice afforded. Are you questioning their eligability to represent both in the first place? Or the fact that they can change at as late a stage as 21? Or the fact that they can change at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
No, I haven't posted any comments. Some comments there now though about censorship. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
:D ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by greendeiseboy
You obviously haven't dealt with to many football players in your time if you credit them as reliable sources.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedser
As I stated before, you cannot demand proof of something that does not exist nor could anyone provide such. A reading of the FIFA Statutes, Competition Regulations (I gave you the current World Cup as an example) and Match Delegate duties and regulations would show you that there is no such requirement. Added to the fact of the 2006 case when it was proven that passport pertaing to the country being played for was not required, more than demonstrates that you are wrong in your claim.
Ha ha. Fair playing for highlighting the usual pompous paranoia!Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedser
Like it or not, there'll always be a moral claim on the six counties and their sports teams until the British state ends its colonial subsidy.
Be it a thousand, hours, days, weeks, months or years.
My €'s is on the penultimate.
;)
According to that, basically you are in agreement with the current eligibility rules but would prefer a player to be tied if he has been capped at adult level (18 and over?) and not just as it stands now - at senior competitive level.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Seeing as FIFA have just removed the age barrier of 21 years to any change, that would be very wishful thinking.
A gentleman's agreement perhaps? :)
If there was a time for that, it was way back in December 2007 when the IFA should have accepted FIFA´s offer to make a deal and come with their (bowler) hat in hand to meet with the FAI and knuckle out some agreement. They were too busy banging the drum to read the writing on the wall.
As it stands now, it is unfortunate for the OWC that there is such a collection of great minds as the IFA. They do not know if they are coming or going. Considering the IFA do not even understand the glaringly obvious concept of Article 16 which defines eligibility for their own team, it would be advisable to keep any expectations well under wraps.
Dare I say, a stop off at Lourdes might be in order for the IFA delegation on their way to CAS? or perhaps a few doses of EST?
So the North have decided that they are being treated unfairly because lads growing up in Ireland,who qualify for Ireland, who are born in Ireland, who hold Irish passports and who support Ireland, want to play for Ireland.
Hardly surprising!
The IFA go to FIFA and ask for a ruling over the eligibility of players like Darron Gibson etc.. and are told that the existing situation remains, players born in the North are eligible to play for Ireland. The IFA then go back to FIFA six months later to challenge FIFA’s previous ruling, because Alex Bruce decides to play for Ireland rather than the North. (Co. Down grandmother), and are told that the existing situation remains, players born in the North are eligible to play for Ireland. They then approach FIFA for a third time to ask for further clarification on their previous two rulings. The FAI, out of the goodness of their heart, offer the IFA a compromise, stating that they are prepared to consider the North being allowed to select players from all over the Island, to try and offset any leakage of players due to FIFA rules. The IFA reject this offer and insist that players born in The North should not be allowed to play for Ireland. Sepp Blatter then publicly tells the IFA that the existing situation remains, players born in the North are eligible to play for Ireland.
So….. the situation today remains, Just as it was during the mid 90’s when players like Gerard Crossley & Mark McKeever from Belfast and Derry were representing Ireland.
If Nigel Worthington and the IFA think it’s wrong that teenage kids can decide that they want to play for Ireland at a certain age, rather than the North, why do they not have the same concerns when they approach England underage internationals like Oliver Norwood and Joe Dudgeon. Both these Manchester United academy players played for England u16 & u17’s before being persuaded to come and play for the North.
Indeed, while Leeds born Dudgeon was unavailable for the North’s u21 team last night, Norwood scored twice for the team against San Marino. An u21 team that included in its strike force - Leicester born Billy Kee, Walsall born William Grigg & Northampton born Billy McKay. Burnley Born Norwood and Watford born Michael Bryan in midfield and Watford born Lee hodson in defence.
All those named in The North’s u21 squad qualified in accordance with FIFA regulations, just as Gibson, Wilson, McEleney, Kearns etc.. qualify to play for Ireland .
PS. Are the IFA carrying out a sectarian poaching policy by only approaching Catholic born England internationals like Dudgeon & Norwood to play for them. :)
Aye CDG,
Hypocrisy all round! Not to mention myopia (& amnesia!).
....suggest we offer these lads the opportunity to play for a decent team. No reason they should be confined to the gutter. Lets have Norwood anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by co. down green
Don't be surprised at the hypocrisy - I've been reading Ealing & his mate's posts for too long.
Actually it doesn't. Many unionists have always been more agreed on what they're against- anything to do with the South- than the detail of their relationship with the rest of Britain. The independent Ulster supporters saw themselves as unionists, so pretty much they are. Eccentric though it sounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nedser
Reiterate it all you like. I'm relaxed about what you call the country, I'll continue to call it the South or the Republic. Everyone knows where I mean, and why get hidebound by names? They differ from place to place.Quote:
PS: just to reiterate, there is no such country as the Republic of Ireland, the state is called Ireland
Why? I only call it Ireland when I mean all of it, not just part. You might as well get used to it.Quote:
Even the UK has now accepted that, so you really should too
I've made it clear- I think playing international football as an adult should tie a player to one country even if he has dual nationality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Peepee
Come again? I haven't said anything pompous or paranoid (or deluded, unlike you).Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
If you're that bothered about saving the British government money, why don't you go back to Ardee?Quote:
Like it or not, there'll always be a moral claim on the six counties and their sports teams until the British state ends its colonial subsidy. Be it a thousand, hours, days, weeks, months or years
Aye, that's right. I don't expect it to be easy...Quote:
Originally Posted by Geysir
A fair question. The logic doesn't seem to be much more than it's OK to recruit players from larger countries, but not smaller.Quote:
Originally Posted by CDG
Er, they've already had the chance to play for two teams at pretty much the same standard. Look at the results and seedings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy Garcia
They aren't. Save us the self-righteousness.Quote:
No reason they should be confined to the gutter
I don't think you can, he's already played for two countries..Quote:
Lets have Norwood anyway
If that's directed at me, back it with some evidence. I've said nothing hypcritical. Nor, unlike you, blamed NI football fans generally for a sectarian murder. Wind your neck in.Quote:
Don't be surprised at the hypocrisy - I've been reading Ealing & his mate's posts for too long
Good article in the Belfast Telegraph by Chris Donnelly: Empathy, not enforcement is what's needed in Irish soccer
You might like to re-read your own past tedious posts on the subject. And then read the dictionary definitions of those words! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
It's definitely proof you need to get out more....
Another debate here at 1:03:10, http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1067770 after the Brazil match.
Bill aska a question about northern players, but the panel rejects Kerr's article (although the answered more about British players, than those from the north).
Well what was Houghton going to say? :cool:
I don't know if it is really that good an article since he doesn't seem to understand the FIFA Statutes and there standing in this issue but rather talks about the GFA etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Predator
True enough, at least he was referring to discussions with others who didn't understand namely Howard Wells and the IFA.
In general he gives an account of perception, i'd leave to you lot to decide if he speaks for many nationalists.
And the North did vote to accept the terms of the GFA which included the Irish citizenship birth right thing. It was not entered into NI Statute law as there was no need, only a change to the irish law was needed. Yet the perception amongst Unionists is that this aspect of Republic citizenship laws are irredentist rather than a mutual democratically accepted principle.
Here he is almost accurate when dealing with the loophole accusation.
'It isn't a loophole that permits Irish-born citizens here to represent the Republic's team. It is an entitlement which FIFA has already affirmed a year ago.'
For 'Irish-born' read Northern Irish born Irish citizens (NIBIC) .