Norn Iron rubbish part 23452346526

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Fly

But.....for the IFA to have accepted FIFA's compromise offer, would have been absurd.

---

Absolutely, 100%, correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeathDrog

Problem? :o

---

No..fine by me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Not Brazil

What's confusing you?:confused:

---

If you have mixed heritage, you can belong to more than one country.

However this doesn't apply to the vast majority of people in the North. Mainly for historical, religious and cultural reasons.
As stated earlier, 95% of the political representatives fall into either being British or Irish which is what is also indicative of their respective constituencies and how they see themselves.....

If you fall into the other 5%, you must be :rolleyes: quite a maverick?

And though am probably in a minority of one in this thread, would have been happy to see the IFA select a 32 county team. Though guess one or two of the usual suspects on here would have not been too happy!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

And though am probably in a minority of one in this thread, would have been happy to see the IFA select a 32 county team. Though guess one or two of the usual suspects on here would have not been too happy!!

---

I'm just glad that the IFA Turkeys didn't vote for Christmas...somewhat surprised too.:D

They could have taken over the FAI with our blessing though.
And until Paris blew up, they'd given us precious little to be proud of, off the field.

Not the IFA seem any better. From what my spies tell me, they're even worse??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

If you have mixed heritage, you can belong to more than one country.

However this doesn't apply to the vast majority of people in the North. Mainly for historical, religious and cultural reasons.
As stated earlier, 95% of the political representatives fall into either being British or Irish which is what is also indicative of their respective constituencies and how they see themselves.....

---

Aye...and those 95% of political representatives have sorted it, right enough.:rolleyes:

They say you get what you vote for...any wonder many don't vote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

They could have taken over the FAI with our blessing though.
And until Paris blew up, they'd given us precious little to be proud of, off the field.

Not the IFA seem any better. From what my spies tell me, they're even worse??

---

A bit of a shambols AB...but I've hope our new CEO has a bit of savvy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

If you have mixed heritage, you can belong to more than one country.

However this doesn't apply to the vast majority of people in the North. Mainly for historical, religious and cultural reasons.
As stated earlier, 95% of the political representatives fall into either being British or Irish which is what is also indicative of their respective constituencies and how they see themselves.....

If you fall into the other 5%, you must be :rolleyes: quite a maverick?

---

I'll quote you the relevant section of the Good Friday Agreement:

The participants endorse the commitment made by the British and Irish Governments that, in a new British-Irish Agreement replacing the Anglo-Irish Agreement, they will:

vi) 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."

Well this thread shows you can't change history quickly, but we're prepared to wait. ;)
All good things and that.

And if they can do it in Bosnia....though Srpska isn't playing ball.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Acornvilla

not catholic!? stab the b@sterd!!! :rolleyes:

---

ni ceapaim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Fly

I'll quote you the relevant section of the Good Friday Agreement:

The participants endorse the commitment made by the British and Irish Governments that, in a new British-Irish Agreement replacing the Anglo-Irish Agreement, they will:

vi) 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."

---

Aye, but everyone knows that was the ultimate fudge. An agreement to disagree!
;)

But accept the text as written. Though have never met anyone of either side in the North who'd say they were both, 'in the flesh'. Though if they really want to be so confused, more fool them, unless their heritage is of course mixed.


Actually reckon more Nats would call themselves 'Northern Irish', away from the old hotspots these days. Though they wouldn't exactly :rolleyes: appreciate the flag or anthem.
But there are worse alternatives. Though to be fair not all the Prods. would accept those now either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Well this thread shows you can't change history quickly, but we're prepared to wait. ;)
All good things and that.

---

Respect for difference might be a good start for change, don't you think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Aye, but everyone knows that was the ultimate fudge. An agreement to disagree!
;)
But accept the text as written.

---

As ratified by the electorate in both jurisdictions on the island,:)

It's a start.

But if you want to call yourselves 'Irish', you'll have to be more similar! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Not Brazil

As ratified by the electorate in both jurisdictions on the island,:)

---

And I've told you why. Not that it's the worst reason. Would have voted in favour at the time, though not on reflection now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

It's a start.
But if you want to call yourselves 'Irish', you'll have to be more similar! ;)

---

You'll not be (BNP esque) dictating to me how I express my Irishness...best you get over yourself on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Would have voted in favour at the time, though not on reflection now.

---

Shall we have another vote?:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

It's a start.

But if you want to call yourselves 'Irish', you'll have to be more similar! ;)

---

Similar to what, may I ask?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Would have voted in favour at the time, though not on reflection now.

---

Apologies for going off-topic admin but, to the above - why? .

Haha, I know a couple of old guys here in Canada (family friends). Both raised in Ireland, one a Protestant Unionist from the North, one a Catholic from the Republic.

Best friends. Those who leave Ireland realize the divisions are ridiculously superficial once they go to a place like Canada or the U.S. where the cultural makeup is amazingly diverse.

Working together we can achieve so much more than we can apart- okay we may lose a bit of our old identity, an identity based on differences rather than common ground- but we will create a new identity as one Irish team, stronger, more competitive, and most importantly, united.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by irishfan86

Working together we can achieve so much more than we can apart- okay we may lose a bit of our old identity, an identity based on differences rather than common ground- but we will create a new identity as one Irish team, stronger, more competitive, and most importantly, united.

---

Agreed, but only time will tell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Fly

However, the point you are making here, in relation to this discussion, would apply more to the UK and the Republic of Ireland, as political entities, deciding to combine to form one international football team.

---

You are confusing two different issues.
Permitting one Nation State (eg UK, Denmark or China) to have more than international football team is not the same as requiring/permitting two independent Nation states (eg UK and ROI) to combine two international football teams to create one.
As regards the former, there is no doubt that certain Associations within FIFA resent that the UK has four teams (though I would guess that this resentment may be less marked currently than during the 1980's and 90's i.e. when Scot and NI were qualifying for the WC Finals, as well as England).
That said, in addition to the written guarantees which the 4 Home Nations secured in return for rescuing FIFA from bankruptcy after WWII, the politics (small "p") of football also ensure that we have strong backing in other quarters.
For with FIFA operating on a "One Member, One Vote" basis, the other Confederations frequently gang up on UEFA in votes at Congress etc, despite UEFA providing the overwhelming bulk of FIFA's revenues and also being the powerhouse of world football, at both club and country level.
Therefore UEFA is only too pleased to have an extra three Member votes at FIFA. This explains why, for instance, on a busy international football evening in March last year, of all the matches Michel Platini might have attended, he picked a NI friendly with Georgia(!) at Windsor. Ostensibly, this was to present David Healy with a UEFA Goalscoring Award, but I have no doubt the real reason was to allow Platini to "press the flesh" with the recently elected IFA President, Raymond Kennedy.
By the same token, therefore, with just 53 UEFA Members out of 208 in FIFA, UEFA would likely be reluctant to lose even one extra Association's vote by merging the IFA and FAI.
And as I argued earlier, FIFA would also likely be hostile to such a move, albeit for reasons of principle, rather than "politics".
Therefore, I feel an all-UK Team poses a (marginally) greater threat to the IFA's independence than an all-Ireland team, but I'm not losing any sleep over either, tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seanfhear

Hopefully Darron Gibson and Marc Wilson do make a big impression for the Republic. This may encourage young Duffy at Everton to play for the republic.

---

As an NI fan, I would make a clear distinction between those players.
Duffy has a parent from the ROI and Wilson a Grandparent, so both should be perfectly entitled to play for the FAI team.
Whereas Gibson has neither, nor has he ever resided there; therefore, notwithstanding that FIFA permit it, imo he should not be allowed to represent the FAI team as a matter of principle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seanfhear

So long as it is within the rules I see nothing wrong with players taking their choice.

---

If you believe that the likes of Gibson should be allowed to choose to represent "his" country (ROI), can we take it that the likes of Steven Davis or Jonny Evans should equally be allowed to represent their country?

That is, you would oppose the enforced abolition of the NI team, whether by merger with the FAI team, or by some other mechanism?

Or, like most of the other posters on this Board who would do away with my team, do you blithely ignore this glaring inconsistency in the argument, even at the risk of being shown up to be a hypocrite?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ifk101

This is an interesting point EG and something those calling for an united team should consider. Indeed the current application of the eligibility rules with respect to the island of Ireland highlights the concept of footballing nationhood as it permits NI born players to play for the team representing their nation. Given your understanding of the footballing nationhood concept, it's somewhat amusing to think back to your stance on the eligibility rules thread.

---

In your haste to score petty points, you once again confuse two separate, if related, issues.
That is, the independence and integrity of any given National Football Association is not the same as the eligibility of a player to represent one Association as against another.

But for the record, when discussing this latter issue (i.e. in the context of Gibson), until the matter was finally adjudicated by FIFA, I never once claimed that the IFA would win their case.

Rather, in common with the likes of Gspain and one or two others, I consistently argued that there were two ways FIFA could go with their interpreatation of the Statutes etc, since the matter was never so clear-cut as some people made out. Moreover, my opinion as to which way it would go changed several times, as the debate raged. I remember, for instance, being encouraged by the remarks made to an RTE Reporter at Dublin Airport by John Delaney, as he (JD) flew back hurriedly* from meeting FIFA: i.e. "We [FAI] have won the battle [Gibson], but lost the war [eligibility]"

Alas, something occurred to change this prediction - perhaps a late delivery to Switzerland of a large gift of FAI-brand Fudge?

Anyhow, you clearly made a common mistake of the ineffably partisan of reading into my posts what you wanted/expected to see, rather than what was actually written. Oh well.

* - To sack Steve Staunton

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Whereas Gibson has neither, nor has he ever resided there; therefore, notwithstanding that FIFA permit it, imo he should not be allowed to represent the FAI team as a matter of principle.

---

Let's not go down this road again. We've been over all this before, and if it happens again on this thread, any kind of debate will be lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

If you believe that the likes of Gibson should be allowed to choose to represent "his" country (ROI), can we take it that the likes of Steven Davis or Jonny Evans should equally be allowed to represent their country?

That is, you would oppose the enforced abolition of the NI team, whether by merger with the FAI team, or by some other mechanism?

Or, like most of the other posters on this Board who would do away with my team, do you blithely ignore this glaring inconsistency in the argument, even at the risk of being shown up to be a hypocrite?

---

Absolutely spot on. Remember the fight (correct in my opinion, but obviously not Ealing Green's) to allow players who don't feel represented by the IFA and NI team the right to play for the ROI team. Remember the argument that these players were effectively being forced to either play for a national side they didn't want to play for, or to have no international career at all.

By merging the IFA and FAI, the exact same situation would be created - a number of players would be forced to either play for a team which they felt was not representative of them, or have no international career at all.

The difference being, that this time it's "them" who have the problem, not "us". And that makes it ok.

As of now, argueably how many players from the NI team would start for the ROI team?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

And whilst I don't agree with EG, his 'new improved more mellow' approach states a position far more eloquently in one post re.the IFA 'situation', than his 'countrymen' (Are they 'British' or 'Irish' today??) :rolleyes: have managed in 50 or more....
[/i]

---

In the post to which you refer, I outlined my opinion why I feel FIFA could not countenance the merger of the two Irish Associations (before any political unity, at any rate).
Whereas NB and GR between them outlined all the reasons why FIFA (or any other body) would not merge the two Associations.
As such, I am in complete agreement with both of them, since their case augments, rather than contradicts my case (and v.v.) - another example of the united and unanimous determination of NI fans to reject any proposal to do away with our team!

P.S. Re your question to NB and GR whether "they are 'British' or 'Irish' today", i imagine that both would answer that they are (proudly) both - today and every other day. In that respect, I am also entirely at one with them!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Does the fact that FIFA recognises the right of NI born players to represent the ROI (and vice versa?) not suggest that they may be sympathetic to two associations (consensually) merging, perhaps recognising unusual if not unique circumstances?

---

Actually if you think about it, it suggests the opposite (imo).
For it was (I suspect) a tacit acknowledgement by FIFA that their interpretation of their Statutes over Gibson had the effect of favouring one of their Members (FAI), to the direct disadvantage of another (IFA) and they hoped to "compensate" us, by means of this contrivance.
Otherwise, if they were unconcerned to keep the two Associations distinct and independent, why bother allowing each to pick players from the other's jurisdiction? Why not take this to its logical conclusion and simply merge the two?
Answer: They were neither prepared to, or wanted to, since that would open a much greater "can of worms".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Just because they've never done so in the past doesn't mean they never would. My granny's 95 and hasn't died yet, but it doesn't mean she never will.

---

Yet another example of someone trying to be clever, but only achieving the opposite*!


* - In case you don't get it, your granny's death is inevitable, whereas a merger of the two Associations, or even of a United Ireland, is not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osarusan

Are you sure about that? I had it in my mind that it was offered, but the IFA turned it down as wanted to continue to argue against the idea of the FAI getting players from IFA jurisdiction.

So actually, "offered and refused" would be right!

Or am I mistaken?

---

Offered yes but refused as if to indicate some high ground?

We all know that NI will play players born outside the IFA territory.
All we know is that the 2 associations (the FAI and the IFA) did not come to an agreement on that FIFA compromise. Both associations refused to believe they were anything but 100% correct. Both thought their position in interpretation of FIFA statutes were right and were sure of their position to even discuss a compromise.
Even when FIFA spelled out for the IFA in black and white in the rule book, they refused to believe they were wrong. They kept claiming victory on their website long after the pennies had dropped elsewhere.

In the FIFA view of the world, the GFA clause that related to automatic citizenship for all born on the Island and the acceptance of that GFA agreement by the people in NI, made all the difference.
Previous to the GFA, citizenship to NI born was a right but not an automatic right. An aspiring Irish citizen from NI had an extra requirement to satisfy the Dept. of Foreign Affairs, namely to declare an oath of allegiance to the Irish constitution. After the GFA this extra requirement no longer applied.

IMO, FIFA would have no problem in recognising an AI team if there was football association unity even before political unity was realised. Political unity would not be a requisite. As the IFA has a vastly higher % of naysayers than are present in the general population of NI, the prospects of football unity happening before political unity are not realistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

an AI team was less about agreement with the IFA (though that would be preferred) and more about such a 'notional' team having improved chances of qualifying....

---

In theory, such a team might be expected to have improved chances etc.
Yet in practice, experience suggests no such thing.
For example, Germany has, if anything, declined as a world footballing power since West and East reunited.
By contrast, how do the records of Russia and Ukraine compare with that of the former USSR? I don't notice any great decline, tbh, either at club or international level.
Ditto the fortunes of Croatia, Serbia and Slovenia etc, since the break-up of Yugoslavia.
And if you look at the Czechs and Slovaks, both are managing separately to qualify for tournament Finals, at least as comfortably as when they were one country*

Anyhow, when it comes to international footballing success, having larger numbers of potential players (China? India? Indonesia?) is much less important imo than having a genuinely united team, led by a decent manager. As such, I fear that any all-Ireland team would actually be diminished re. unity of purpose, whilst in no less danger of being managed by a McIlroy or even a Staunton :eek:


* - And before anyone mentions Euro 1976, I don't think you can compare an 8 team knockout finals with the present challenges, nor overlook the fact that 9 of the winning XI in 1976 were Slovaks i.e. Slovakia alone might just as easily have won the trophy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

And yes we know the majority of certain sports fans are against it. Fair enough. Though sounding less like a :rolleyes: broken record might help.

---

I think you'll find it is never NI fans who produce this record from their collection, but invariably ROI fans - usually after they have been frustrated/disappointed/embarrassed by the efforts of their team. Again.
So if you can't bear to witness our defending ourselves, stop attacking us in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

Previous to the GFA, citizenship to NI born was a right but not an automatic right. An aspiring Irish citizen from NI had an extra requirement to satisfy the Dept. of Foreign Affairs, namely to declare an oath of allegiance to the Irish constitution. After the GFA this extra requirement no longer applied.

---

Are you 100% sure about that?

Article 2 of The Constitution of the Irish Republic, pre GFA, would infer differently.

The Constitution (then) didn't recognise Northern Ireland - why then did it have "special" Citizenship requirements for Irish Citizens born in Northern Ireland?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

If you believe that the likes of Gibson should be allowed to choose to represent "his" country (ROI), can we take it that the likes of Steven Davis or Jonny Evans should equally be allowed to represent their country?

That is, you would oppose the enforced abolition of the NI team, whether by merger with the FAI team, or by some other mechanism?

Or, like most of the other posters on this Board who would do away with my team, do you blithely ignore this glaring inconsistency in the argument, even at the risk of being shown up to be a hypocrite?

---

I think that you guys (EG, GR and NB) fundamentally misunderstand the proposition. We are talking about MERGER. In this sense ROI fans who advocate this idea are equally suggesting that the ROI team be "abolished." Can you explain why it is that no ROI fan has reacted to the suggestion in these terms, as if this represented some profound threat to their very sense of personal and national identity. I think you are actually making my point. Your argument has nothing to do with football, but everything to do with a Unionist siege mentality, where the NI team is one of the few remaining embelms of seperateness. As someone who was brought up supporting NI first, this is eaxctly what makes me uncomfortable. If the NI team is nothing more than Orangism at play, then quite frankly it probably should be abolished.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Yet another example of someone trying to be clever, but only achieving the opposite*!

* - In case you don't get it, your granny's death is inevitable, whereas a merger of the two Associations, or even of a United Ireland, is not.

---

No, just an example of someone trying to approach this issue from a light-hearted, fair and non-antagonistic approach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Not Brazil

Are you 100% sure about that?

Article 2 of The Constitution of the Irish Republic, pre GFA, would infer differently.

The Constitution (then) didn't recognise Northern Ireland - why then did it have "special" Citizenship requirements for Irish Citizens born in Northern Ireland?

---

If I wasn't sure, I would have stated so ;)

The rights to citizenship for NI born pre GFA was spelled out by the
Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956
Irish Nationality and Citizens Act1956

Explnations of this act can be found on Wikipedia.
The key difference for NI born was that they were entitled to citizenship but it was not automatic.
I did read once upon a time on the Dept of Foreign affairs, the requirement for NI Born pre GFA and the only difference I could see for passport application was that a NI born had to declare an oath to uphold the Irish constitution.
Much anecdotal evidence from NI born that they had to go through this extra process pre gfa, supports this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by third policeman

We are talking about MERGER. If the NI team is nothing more than Orangism at play, then quite frankly it probably should be abolished.

---

No thanks with the "merger" thingy bud.

You comment about "orangism at play" is, frankly, ridiculous....and somewhat ironic on more than one level.

Why would you want our Association "abolished"?:confused:

Do you not see how such outright hostility lessens your, erm, arguement?

(Not much "merger" in abolishment:rolleyes:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

If I wasn't sure, I would have stated so ;)

The rights to citizenship for NI born pre GFA was spelled out by the
Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956
Irish Nationality and Citizens Act1956

---

Really?:eek:

Where, exactly, does that "spell out" the requirement for a Northern Irish born person to "declare an oath of allegiance" to the Constitution of the Irish Republic, in order to become an "Irish Citizen"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

Much anecdotal evidence from NI born that they had to go through this extra process pre gfa, supports this

---

That's strange - both my late parents (Northern Irish born) held Irish Passports. I can assure you neither of them "declared an oath of allegiance" to the Constitution of the Republic Of Ireland.;)

EalingGreen - you are not comparing like with like when comparing Ireland with the fortunes of teams that have been split / combined. Ukraine has a population of about 50 million. Czech Rep. has about 10 m and Slovenia approx. 6 m to select from. Choosing from approx. 6m seems to be about the number where you have a bit of a chance.

Elsewhere you have made comments about the IFA's voting power (influence?) with FIFA/EUFA and Michael Platini visiting the new IFA president (I seem to remember him coming down to Dublin to visit as well!). What use was that when you needed to be able to exert influence over the Gibson eligibility. IFA have about as much influence with EUFA/FIFA as the FAI. Contrast the blazer influence on sport that the IFA with the IRFU. Internat. Rugby Board / ERC headquarters in Dublin and an Ulsterman (Syd Miller) just stepped down from being IRB chairman (having previously been IRFU President). More than likely why Irish people do well in these organisations is that we are not England and are seen to be neutral, whereas the IFA are just about hanging in there because of the English influence. Without English support, I'd say no notice whatsoever would be taken of the Home Nations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

Offered yes but refused as if to indicate some high ground?

---

No - refused to protect our autonomy.

Good move, for once, by the IFA.;)