I think the fly is suggesting (unlike his superior intelligence) that you wouldn't have the time, inclination or intelligence
I think that's what he was really trying to get at AB.
Printable View
I think the fly is suggesting (unlike his superior intelligence) that you wouldn't have the time, inclination or intelligence
I think that's what he was really trying to get at AB.
I don't know if FIFA got involved with that farce in France. There was enough of a rumpus inside France which speedily dealt with the situation, perhaps a few heads rolled and the racial quota system was thrown into the bin.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
This pledging your allegiance to NI plan at the age of 18 could well be regarded as ethnic cleansing, cleaning out the players who are not yet decided as to where their first choice lies. A meritocracy being trumped by an exhibition of servility.
I doubt the IFA could have the moral backbone to stand up the slightest scrutiny of such a plan, after news is leaked of Johnny being turned away at the academy door because he hesitated to answer after being told that if by any chance he was to represent NI he would be confirming his British citizenry, whilst some servile plodder gets through no bother.
Jesus wept.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Assisting young adults to represent the Association they feel most represents their national identity - helping them fulfil their dreams - could be regarded as "ethnic cleansing" in geysir's warped world.
His sense of victomhood knows no shame.
Sad.
You are being a bit silly geysir, but the effect of the plan would indeed be to freeze out and further alienate a large section of the nationalist community. So double silliness all round. Quit being silly, you bunch of sillies.
What's to stop a lad pledging allegiance to the Northern Irish FA at 18 years of age only to switch at a later date?
How so?Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Giving a helping hand to young adults with aspirations of playing senior international football for the Republic Of Ireland, by directing them towards the FAI is not "silly".
It is far from "silly".
It is a socially mature and responsible thing to do - at the same time, it means the IFA can focus on developing players who want to play senior international football for them.
Remember the cries from ROI supporters of "The IFA should concentrate on players who want to play for them"?
Now, when an idea is put forward to ensure that, as far as possible, that happens, we get outrageous comments like "ethnic cleansing".
Needy much?
Nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
Also, I believe that having a specific age to to make such a declaration is unnecessary. Whilst it may be desirable from the IFA's point of view, I think it would just muddy the waters somewhat.
Nothing - except his honour.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
A more workable solution is the two association combining forces in the underage development of footballers in the north. It would quickly become apparent where a player's loyalty lies if this is done.
I think thats the crux of the counter argument here to NBs proposal, all it does in the long run is further alienates players if they change allegiance, because as far as FIFA are concerned it holds no water.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
Well you'd be encouraging the players who have genuinely split loyalties to opt out of international football.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
Reading your point I find something cynical around the reasons for the proposal put forward by NB, perhaps not consciously.
That's one of the beauties of it - which some are unable to grasp.Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
Nothing I have proposed violates FIFA Statutes, or impinges on a player's right to switch within the Statutes.
A player choosing to go down the FAI road at Under 19, can switch to the IFA if things change for him or don't work out with the FAI at a later date.
Being honest to oneself is a great virtue.
If they have "genuinely split loyalties", they could start off with the FAI at Under 19.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
If that doesn't work out for them, they can switch to the IFA.
Hardly "opting out" of international football.
Simple.
Do you think there are many young adults in Northern Ireland who don't have a preference on their national identity?
Possibly, although they wouldn't be opting out as they would be welcome to pursue the possibility of an international career with NI at a later date if their efforts with the ROI didn't bear any fruit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Also, in my experience, the number of players from a nationalist/catholic/republican background with such split loyalties would be few and far between.
http://z5.ifrm.com/5902/57/0/e14492//e14492.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
I think a line has to be drawn under when a player is asked to be mature and honest enough to express his preference.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Fly
The objective of the IFA, in my opinion, should be to develop (as far as possible) players from Under 19 and above who have a sole aspiration, in an international context, of representing the IFA at senior level.
I could have said "system", "policy", "informal interview" or "casual discussion". Any could be used to help the IFA gauge where a player's allegiance lies. Don't get too hung up on the language.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
The statutes may not require it, but I don't see how they forbid it either. Associations are permitted to do whatever they like as long as they don't fall foul of the statutes, aren't they?Quote:
If a player who is sure, is selected over a player who isn't sure right now, then it is a system which is forcing a player to decide something the statute rules don't require him to decide right now, in order to play representative football.
Therefore, as it says in the advertisements, bla,,bla, bla .. 'this does not conflict with your statutory rights' - shouldn't it be contained in any system which is asking a dual national player to decide (right here right now) where his loyalty lies, contrary to his statute rights?
It may seem a bit of a contradiction, but I know people from a nationalist background who would identity solely as Irish, support the Ireland football team or possess just an Irish passport but who wouldn't necessarily vote for a united Ireland if there was a referendum on the issue tomorrow. I used to go out with one such example. She saw herself as culturally Irish but would have been swayed by economic factors with regard to the issue of unity. It suffices to say, that was the end of that relationship! :pQuote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
I wouldn't be so sure about the immigration/dilution thing either. I also know of Derry-born sons of Indian, Chinese and Ghanaian immigrants who support Ireland. Granted, the latter two examples also have parents from Derry who would identify solely as Irish, but both of the former lad's parents are from India. I posted this amusing anecdote about the Irish-Ghanaian lad in the Shane Ferguson thread last year:
Thought it provided a bit of an insight into the cultural and political outlook of the son of an immigrant from Derry.Quote:
In fact, when Northern Ireland were playing Slovenia in Belfast the other week, a lad I know from Derry whose father comes from [Ghana (I'd initially thought Nigeria or Senegal for some reason)] and who is now living on Tate's Avenue near Windsor Park, evidently getting somewhat annoyed by chanting Northern Ireland fans walking past his door on their way to the ground, wrote the following as his Facebook status:
"Were not Brazill, we're Northern Ireland!"
Jesus f**k up you bunch of ignorant tw*ts...enjoy watching your wee made up country get beat
Likewise, Marc Mukendi is an Irish-Congolese footballer from Derry who played for Ireland at under-age level in spite of his eligibility to also play for NI and DR Congo. With regard to the question of unity, I'd imagine the same would apply to immigrants who may not view themselves as traditionally/historically Irish as would apply to those from a nationalist background I mentioned above; if they could see economic merits in it, I'm sure they'd support it.
I had a search earlier for a comment from FIFA/UEFA on the matter, but it appears it was dealt with internally in France. Whilst morally objectionable, I don't see how it would have fallen foul of the eligibility statutes, however, unless it was to prevent a player switching to the FFF from another association, but my understanding is that that was not the purpose of the supposed proposal.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
There are undoubtedly practical problems, but, as I've said, that's the business of the IFA. If they want to go ahead with it, be it fruitful for them or reckless, it doesn't bother me. I'm not sure why Ireland fans care so much.Quote:
This pledging your allegiance to NI plan at the age of 18 could well be regarded as ethnic cleansing, cleaning out the players who are not yet decided as to where their first choice lies. A meritocracy being trumped by an exhibition of servility.
I doubt the IFA could have the moral backbone to stand up the slightest scrutiny of such a plan, after news is leaked of Johnny being turned away at the academy door because he hesitated to answer after being told that if by any chance he was to represent NI he would be confirming his British citizenry, whilst some servile plodder gets through no bother.
Except if they express their preference publicly like Alex Bruce? Why is Bruce any different to one of these hypothetical examples exactly?Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
I predict that Bruce will never be selected to play for Northern Ireland, so it's a bit of a moot point.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Because "there wasn't really a decision to make", according to Bruce when asked to play for the IFA previously.
Never good enough for England and failed with the South - we're not that desperate.
I have to say I'd be quietly impressed if Alex Bruce managed to fail with three separate countries. Is he eligible for Scotland?