Player eligibility row

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

As for that banner, whether it cost you or not, some moron went to the effort of producing it.

---

Sur wasn't it a superb victory for them in fairness? I expected a march but I s'pose a nice wee banner is as good a way as any to commemorate what they achieved that night in Paris. And if the vicariousness holds up, the Norn might well enjoy a great World Cup with the likes of Anelka and Ribery in the side! Who knows, winning the cup by proxy may even go some way to soothing the apoplexy brought about by upstarts like young Duffy who, "no disrespect to Northern Ireland", would rather be "playing for his country". ;)

The banner was funny. I'm sure it was just a giddy little thrill for NI fans the same way half of this country enjoys remembering the Hand of God.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

2. FIFA presently recognises the right of someone born within NI to represent the FAI outwith the normal parentage/residence requirements, on account of the fact that such people are automatically entitled to Republic of Ireland citiizenship as a birthright. This birthright has been available since 1921 i.e. 77 years before the GFA was even conceived.

---

The Republic of Ireland is the official name of an international football team and/ or a description of Ireland's form of government. Ireland was declared a republic in 1949. I'm sure you are well aware of this. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Is it not correct that if you are born in France, you may ordinarily* only represent the FFF? Or in Germany only the DFB? In Brazil only the CFB?

---

No that's incorrect. There are other special circumstances.

But regardless, are you against Irish nationals by birth representing their country? If so, you are against the true essence of what international football seeks to and should represent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

(English-born) Gorman qualifies for NI on the basis that he has a grandparent from Coleraine. I do not know on what basis he formerly qualified for ROI.

Anyhow, all we ask is that the general principle whereby you may represent a Football Association outwith whose jurisdiction you were born only if you meet certain Eligibility Criteria (parent/grandparent/residence), be applied equally across all 208 Member Associations of FIFA.

---

I think you will find that Gorman qualifies for both Irish teams via his Co. Derry born mother.

I suggest you contact FIFA's legal department with any queries regarding eligibility, although i would have thought that the penny would have dropped by now, after FIFA have clearly stated on a number of occasions, that players born in the North continue to be eligible to represent Ireland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sullivinho

Sure wasn't it a superb victory for them in fairness? I expected a march but I s'pose a nice wee banner is as good a way as any to commemorate what they achieved that night in Paris. And if the vicariousness holds up, the Norn might well enjoy a great World Cup with the likes of Anelka and Ribery in the side! Who knows, winning the cup by proxy may even go some way to soothing the apoplexy brought about by upstarts like young Duffy who, "no disrespect to Northern Ireland", would rather be "playing for his country". ;)

---

Aye, yer right! We are bigger than that. It's just the hypocrisy of OWB :rolleyes: that really stinks.

Anyway as numerous others have shown, our illustrious poster when not referring to us as poor dispossessed people, has a very limited grasp of FIFA regulations and Irish citizenship rules.
Incidentally, there is no country called 'Republic of Ireland'. Lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by co. down green

I think you will find that Gorman qualifies for both Irish teams via his Co. Derry born mother.

I suggest you contact FIFA's legal department with any queries regarding eligibility, although i would have thought that the penny would have dropped by now, after FIFA have clearly stated on a number of occasions, that players born in the North continue to be eligible to represent Ireland.

---

To be fair to EG on this, the strict rule under which Gorman presumably qualifies to play for us - article 17 - does actually raise the question of birthplace of his grandparent and specifies that it must have been within the territory of the association he now seeks to represent. This is at variance from article 15, which raises only the matter of a player's birth nationality. It confuses me as to how that would have made him eligible for us. In saying that, Alex Bruce's circumstances are more or less identical for the purpose of comparison and FIFA never appeared to have a problem with him lining out for us.

Quote:

---

15 Principle
1. Any person holding a permanent nationality that is not dependent on residence in a certain country is eligible to play for the representative teams of the Association of that country.

...

17 Acquisition of a new nationality
Any Player who refers to art. 15 par. 1 to assume a new nationality and who has not played international football in accordance with art. 15 par. 2 shall be eligible to play for the new representative team only if he fulfi ls one of the following conditions:
(a) He was born on the territory of the relevant Association;
(b) His biological mother or biological father was born on the territory of the relevant Association;
(c) His grandmother or grandfather was born on the territory of the relevant Association;
(d) He has lived continuously for at least fi ve years after reaching the age of 18 on the territory of the relevant Association.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Of course. The point is that it's a bit rich - childish and idiotic even - to hear accusations of southern irredentism being thrown about by Northern Ireland fans when the population of Northern Ireland, including a majority of the unionist community, democratically recognised the extra-territorial applicability of Irish citizenship over their jurisdiction. Likewise, it was recognised by the government of the UK. It's perfectly legitimate and recognised on a bi-lateral basis so to make out as if its indicative of some sort of aggressive or over-reaching "foreign policy" is simply nonsense.

---

You confuse "Irredentism" amd "Citizenship".
An example of the former was when the Irish Republic Government claimed territorial jurisdiction over Northern Ireland, even despite such a claim being nowhere recognised under international law. (In that respect, it was a little like eg Turkey claiming jurisdiction over Northern Cyprus.) Anyhow, this irredentist claim was removed as part of the GFA negotiations, which the population of Ireland North and South (including myself, btw) supported overwhelmingly.
As for Citizenship, it is open to any Nation State to grant citizenship to whomsoever it likes, for any reason or none. This basic principle was unchanged by the GFA, other than the Government of the UK specifically acknowledged that right, rather than tacitly accepting it, as previously.
Personally, I always thought the former Irredentism of the Irish Republic to be unwelcome, unhelpful and even marginally offensive. However, I couldn't care less about their Citizenship policy (aside from the way that the FAI uses that anomaly to exploit FIFA's eligibility criteria to select players who were not born within their own jurisdiction and who also do not meet the additional parent/grandparent/residence criteria which apply to players born outwith the jurisdiction of every other of FIFA's 207 Member Associations)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

That is correct alright, but it doesn't represent what you tried to pass off as a basic premise of international eligibility in the face of a written rule (article 15) which quite clearly mentions nothing about birthplace, but rather, invokes a player's nationality.

---

I was not attempting to pass off the basic premise of international eligibility (i.e. born within the jurisdiction of a Member Association of FIFA) as being specifically reflected in FIFA's Articles, merely pointing to its (premise) existence, in order to highlight the anomalous and inequitable situation re the IFA. This premise might prove inconvenient for you, but that does not alter it, never mind refute its existence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Despite my fairly basic research, Ireland's system appears to be a unique one internationally, but a perfectly legitimate one all the same.

---

It does, indeed, appear to be unique; moreover it is recognised by FIFA. That does not mean it is fair* or equitable.

* - Just like Gallas's goal in Paris was recognised by FIFA as being "legitimate"...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

The GFA may not have changed the constitutional status of citizenship as a birthright

---

No "may" about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

but it [GFA] did effectively legitimise Ireland's right to offer it [Citizenship]

---

Does that mean that pre-GFA, you considered the Irish Republic Government's policy of granting citizenship automatically to people born within NI to have been less than legitimate? If so, it is ironic, even bizarre that you might think so, whilst I do not!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

and that has to have an effect on any lawmaker's thinking.

---

It may or may not have had an effect on FIFA's thinking, we do not know. Personally, I believe the attempts by Qatar and Togo to grant their respective citizenship to Brazilians etc who did not have dual nationality by birthright had much more of an impact. Or who knows, it might just have been another example of Sepp Blatter opening his mouth before engaging his brain one day, a phenomenon which is hardly unknown to supporters of the ROI team, I suspect...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

Why are those forms of dual nationality superior to the automatic birthright of those born on the island of Ireland?

---

I did not state/imply, nor do I believe, that these were "superior"; rather they are additional or ancilliary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Well, nice hypocrisy by you. And your bretheren. Especially coming on here and all.
No wonder the likes of Duffy (& undoubtedly many more) have left behind the paranoia and control freakery displayed on OWB.

---

Really? According to Duffy, his opting to represent the FAI was at least partly on account of his being a Catholic, that apparently being the natural consequence of his holding whatever religious convictions he maintains.
Fortunately, the very many other Cathoics who represent NI at all the various levels do not take the same essentially sectarian view of things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

As for that banner, whether it cost you or not, some moron went to the effort of producing it.

---

No great "effort" at all (you know, computers and that); in fact, it might better have been described as a 'Labour of Love'.
Of course, such cost and effort as was expended might have been more onerous had it not had the full desired effect. But seeing as how you and others were apparently so outraged by it, I think we may safely call it "Mission Accomplished!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Notice the North's 'fans' didn't go to the effort of producing one, say to mark the exploits of say, Best, Dougan or Healy.

---

We do indeed have banners honouring George Best. We have a Supporters' Club named in his honour. We also have wall murals honouring him. We have now renamed an airport after him. There has been a Charitable Foundation set up in his name and donations are being sought for a Statue to the great man.
As for Healy, there is more than one banner extolling the wee man on display at every home NI game; he features on several wall murals throughout NI and there is a park named after him in his home town.
Re. Dougan, his rather mediocre record of 8 goals in 43 internationals does not merit any greater recognition than that of, say, Colin Clarke (13/38) or Jimmy Quinn (12/48). Nonetheless, he does feature on a wall mural in his East Belfast homeland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

And if you really think it wasn't a handball, well you really do need to change your prescription!

---

If you have inferred that from anything I have ever posted, then it is you who is in need of medication, not me...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ifk101

are you against Irish nationals by birth representing their country?

---

I am against any National exploiting what is essentially a political stance, in order to subvert the basic footballing principles re eligibility etc., especially when that proves inequitable to fellow footballing countries.
That was the position I held when I heard that eg the Government of Qatar was giving out Passports to Brazilian-born footballers, so that they might subvert the normal eligibility criteria to represent their "new" country. If nothing else, this was liable to give Qatar an unfair advantage over their African neighbours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ifk101

If so, you are against the true essence of what international football seeks to and should represent.

---

Nice try to box me into a corner, but it doesn't work. For me, the opportunity to represent a country in international football is not a "right", it is a privilege. Moreover, since in essence it is determined by place of birth, it ought not to be a matter of "choice", as demanded eg by Darron Gibson, since one cannot choose to be born in any particular location (though one may choose to reside in such location...).
The fact that FIFA appears to allow NI-born people a choice does not make it any fairer (imo), especially when it does not offer the same choice to anyone born within the jurisdiction of any of its other 207 Member Associations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by co. down green

I think you will find that Gorman qualifies for both Irish teams via his Co. Derry born mother.

---

I was unaware that that is how he qualified to represent the FAI, just as i had thought it was his grandmother, rather than his mother, so thanks for that.
Beyond that, I was always under the impression that Coleraine was in Co. Londonderry, the former county of "Coleraine" having been abolished when the local authorities reorganised the county system which they had imported from England and no "Co. Derry" ever having existed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by co. down green

I suggest you contact FIFA's legal department with any queries regarding eligibility, although i would have thought that the penny would have dropped by now, after FIFA have clearly stated on a number of occasions, that players born in the North continue to be eligible to represent Ireland.

---

I am quite aware that players born in what you term "the North" (Northern Ireland) are deemed eligible by FIFA to represent the FAI.
But young Gorman was not born in NI. Therefore, having been born outside Ireland, I am genuinely unsure how he avoids the need to satisfy the normal Dual Nationality requirements of having a parent/grandparent/residence in the Irish Republic.
(Oh, and there has been no international association football team called "Ireland" since the IFA voluntarily desisted from using that name for their team in friendly matches, sometime around 1980)

Edit: Re Gorman, I have just noticed DI's interesting post on the matter, above (#846). I should be interested to know what justification is used by ROI fans who feel he legitimately represented the FAI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Moreover, since in essence it is determined by place of birth, it ought not to be a matter of "choice", as demanded eg by Darron Gibson, since one cannot choose to be born in any particular location (though one may choose to reside in such location...).

---

Eligibility is not determined by place of birth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

The fact that FIFA appears to allow NI-born people a choice does not make it any fairer (imo), especially when it does not offer the same choice to anyone born within the jurisdiction of any of its other 207 Member Associations.

---

But FIFA isn't making an exception for NI-born people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

I was not attempting to pass off the basic premise of international eligibility (i.e. born within the jurisdiction of a Member Association of FIFA) as being specifically reflected in FIFA's Articles, merely pointing to its (premise) existence, in order to highlight the anomalous and inequitable situation re the IFA. This premise might prove inconvenient for you, but that does not alter it, never mind refute its existence.
It does, indeed, appear to be unique; moreover it is recognised by FIFA. That does not mean it is fair* or equitable.

* - Just like Gallas's goal in Paris was recognised by FIFA as being "legitimate"...

---

Bit like the United Kingdom being allowed to have 4 seperate representative teams rather then just one so.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

IBut young Gorman was not born in NI. Therefore, having been born outside Ireland, I am genuinely unsure how he avoids the need to satisfy the normal Dual Nationality requirements of having a parent/grandparent/residence in the Irish Republic..

---

I'm fairly sure FIFA's legal department covered this in their response to the IFA in March 2006, when the IFA appealed against the eligibility of Alex Bruce to play for Ireland (although in truth, the appeal was as much about sour grapes on the IFA part, as Bruce had rejected four approaches from the IFA management team in the previous twelve months).

The response received from the IFA stated that In order for the player Bruce to be able to play for a representative team of the Republic of Ireland, he shall be required to hold a passport of the Republic of Ireland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ifk101

Eligibility is not determined by place of birth.

---

Nor did I say it was, either. (You are ignoring my qualification of "in essence").

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ifk101

But FIFA isn't making an exception for NI-born people.

---

Not in so many words, no. But can you point me towards any other territory anywhere else in the world which as a place of birth automatically qualifies a player to represent two different National; Associations?
From what I can see, the only one out of the 208 MA's of FIFA is NI (IFA).
That seems pretty exceptional to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69er

Bit like the United Kingdom being allowed to have 4 seperate representative teams rather then just one so.....

---

Quite.
Mind you, if FIFA were to renege on the special status granted to the four UK Associations in return for bailing it out of bankruptcy, their only recourse would be to replace them with one, single UK team.
In which case, having removed that exception, if they were also to remove the exception whereby someone born in NI may choose to represent another Association than that within whose jurisdiction he was born, you would find that the likes of Darron Gibson would only be eligible to represent the UK.
You know, the country to whom he pays his taxes, which provided his free education and health services, allows him to vote for its Government, plus provides him and his family with pension rights and other social security benefits etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by co. down green

I'm fairly sure FIFA's legal department covered this in their response to the IFA in March 2006, when the IFA appealed against the eligibility of Alex Bruce to play for Ireland

---

You may be correct. However, I should be very interested to know exactly on what grounds FIFA permitted Bruce to play for the ROI, since on the face of it, his case (and Gorman's) would appear to be excluded specifically by the provisions of Article 17.
Any ideas?

P.S. Bruce does not play for "Ireland", he only looks like a rugby player sometimes...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by co. down green

The response received from the IFA stated that In order for the player Bruce to be able to play for a representative team of the Republic of Ireland, he shall be required to hold a passport of the Republic of Ireland.

---

Is that all he was required to do?
For if that is the case, I fail to see how FIFA could prevent someone holding a valid Passport of Qatar from representing the Qatar FA, for instance.
Btw, you appear to be quoting from some sort of document or report etc. Can you cite the source, or is that some construction you came up with from memory?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Nor did I say it was, either. (You are ignoring my qualification of "in essence").

---

I didn't ignore. Eligibility is not determined by place of birth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Not in so many words, no. But can you point me towards any other territory anywhere else in the world which as a place of birth automatically qualifies a player to represent two different National; Associations?

---

Relevancy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

That seems pretty exceptional to me.

---

Not as exceptional as denying nationals by birth the right to play for their country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

The GFA is utterly irrelevant to the question of international eligibility of Irish-born players, for two reasons (at least).
1. The GFA makes no reference to Football, neither do FIFA's Statutes etc make reference to the GFA;
2. FIFA presently recognises the right of someone born within NI to represent the FAI outwith the normal parentage/residence requirements, on account of the fact that such people are automatically entitled to Republic of Ireland citiizenship as a birthright. This birthright has been available since 1921 i.e. 77 years before the GFA was even conceived.

---

If you read my post correctly, you would have seen that I agree that the GFA did in fact change nothing in law.

What it did show was that EVERYONE had agreed to the fact that anyone born in NI had the right to Irish citizenship, and Irish citizenship alone. Which is not possible by playing for a British team, Northern Ireland. Therefore you have no grounds to complain, as your community and (admittedly) yourself voted for it.

I see you did not take me up on my point about petitioning the Irish goverment to change its constitution. This can be done in isolation from the GFA by them mechanism I have demonstrated. This is the course you should pursue. If you do not wish this, I suggest you humbly (lol) drop the issue. Neither the CAS nor FIFA can/will change the irish constitution.

By the way, you do have much more of a case regarding and English born player, with a grandparent from NI, playing for the ROI. However that is not the case you are taking. To be perfectly honest, after reading your supporters forum, you don't seem to have a coherent plan at all, and no idea what you want. You even know you're bringing the wrong case to the CAS.
The only thing that the NI fans have in common, is a deep seated (unreciprocated) hatred of the Irish nationality with which 43% of the people in your state/country/province (& **5% of the island) identify. This is manifested in part by attacking the, more successful, Republic of Ireland. Such an attitude will not serve you well in the long term.

Expect more weeping and gnashing of teeth in loyal Ulster. Agree the banner is a joke btw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

You confuse "Irredentism" amd "Citizenship".
An example of the former was when the Irish Republic Government claimed territorial jurisdiction over Northern Ireland, even despite such a claim being nowhere recognised under international law. (In that respect, it was a little like eg Turkey claiming jurisdiction over Northern Cyprus.) Anyhow, this irredentist claim was removed as part of the GFA negotiations, which the population of Ireland North and South (including myself, btw) supported overwhelmingly.
As for Citizenship, it is open to any Nation State to grant citizenship to whomsoever it likes, for any reason or none. This basic principle was unchanged by the GFA, other than the Government of the UK specifically acknowledged that right, rather than tacitly accepting it, as previously.
Personally, I always thought the former Irredentism of the Irish Republic to be unwelcome, unhelpful and even marginally offensive. However, I couldn't care less about their Citizenship policy (aside from the way that the FAI uses that anomaly to exploit FIFA's eligibility criteria to select players who were not born within their own jurisdiction and who also do not meet the additional parent/grandparent/residence criteria which apply to players born outwith the jurisdiction of every other of FIFA's 207 Member Associations)

---

The constitutional claim over the entire island was declaratory and aspirational in nature - not actually enforceable - and was restrained further from being achieved via anything other than peaceful, diplomatic means by other constitutional provisions upholding the binding nature of international law upon the actions of the Irish state. Besides, the Irish courts found, possibly on more than one occasion - I would need to confirm - that there was no legal obligation placed upon the state to actively seek the re-unification of the whole island.

I don't think anyone could ever have thought the claim over the whole island as the national territory might have manifested itself in aggressive military action or anything of the sort anyway. The notion of the Irish state militarily taking on the UK in a territorial conflict makes me chuckle more than anything; the idea of it ever being anywhere near a real prospect would have been preposterous, in spite of the rather romantic and optimistic street-rumours that circulated the Bogside of the Irish army marching in the Letterkenny Road the day Jack Lynch announced that he "could not stand by and watch innocent people injured and perhaps worse" during the events there in August of 1969 that came to be known as the Battle of the Bogside. This statement of "intent", which was interpreted by the outraged unionist community as an announcement of impending military invasion, amounted to little more than the Irish army setting up medical outposts for the injured residents of the Bogside along the Irish side of the border in Donegal.

Regardless, I do fully acknowledge how the former wording wouldn't have sat well with the unionist community in the north. I'd be going down a rather disingenuous route to attempt the argue that the claim wasn't an irredentist one under international law prior to 1999. That's something of which I can't deny the legal reality no matter what my own personal political stance might be regarding the aspirations of the my country with relation to Northern Ireland. The amendment of both worded intent and actions are, of course, a significant aspect of winning over hearts and minds in any conflict resolution.

Anyway, as you point out, the territorial claim has long been removed, but I still frequently encounter accusations that the extra-territorial applicability of Irish citizenship amounts to some sort of hostile irredentism. There are connotations in that that it might be illegitimate or legally questionable. Unfortunately, it's been expressly described as such by some of the more vocal and articulate posters on this issue on OWC, who one might have hoped would have been able to maintain a more level head, especially since its extraterritorial applicability was democratically vindicated (I think that's a fair enough description to use) in the north and further acknowledged by the UK government. In fact, you above, have just described it as an "anomaly" used to "exploit" FIFA's statutes, as if to de-legitimise it altogether. The laws regarding Irish citizenship, which have existed long before FIFA drew up its latest set of statutes, were not worded with the idea of exploiting or "subverting" the statutes of any external sports governing body in mind, as seems to be your implication, especially with your raising of the Qatari passport issue. The statutes that this body - FIFA - have composed themselves happen to permit the citizenship laws' application in the footballing sphere, which is perfectly natural, and maybe even something that FIFA took into account when wording their current statutes, seeing as they have always indicated through both words and action that they support the FAI's outlook on matters relating to this issue. A seemingly unique situation as regards the applicability of citizenship, yes, but to describe it as an anomaly would nearly suggest FIFA had made an error in overlooking something when formulating their rules. That patently isn't the case at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

If by "certain articles" you are referring to the application by FIFA of their Eligibility Articles etc to the Irish situation, then I would point out that not once have I ever stated in any of my numerous posts on this topic on this forum that FIFA would come down on the side of the IFA.
In fact, I was always careful to state that I thought that they might go either way - even after John Delaney was quoted by RTE at Dublin Airport as stating that the FAI had "won the battle" (Gibson), but "lost the war" (eligibility generally) as he flew home to sack Steve Staunton the following day.
Neither have I denied it when FIFA subsequently appeared to do a U-turn from Delaney's understanding and come down ultimately on the side of the FAI.

Of course, accepting that something may be so, and accepting that something should be so, are two different things entirely - even if you appear incapable of discerning it from what I and others post in this respect.

---

I never said you did,EG, I was referring to your interpretation and understanding of the rules. In the arguments you had a couple of years ago with Geysir, he had to point out on many occassions that your understanding was incorrect. Then when the ruling came out, you didnt appear on here for months. That in itself shows 1 and/of 2 things, a) you couldnt handle that Fifa had come down on the side of the FAI b) that you beleived that FIFA would come down on the side of the IFA and a)

But let me guess that was because you were on a sabbatical or expedition deep in the amazon rainforest with no access to the outside world - or a computer.

BTW, does anyone think that NI is a great feeder club for the proper Ireland team?
What with the new motorway network in the south (M3 in Enniskillen direction opened last Friday), and Sinn Fein MP Conor Murphy working on the roads around Newry, the masterplan is kicking in. Just need to work on the A5 road now to get Duffy/Gibson safely home after match.

I;d also like to thank the good work Nigel and co did on keeping our young lads ticking over, until they made step up in to proper international football, with a proper team in a (choice of) proper stadiums...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Does that mean that pre-GFA, you considered the Irish Republic Government's policy of granting citizenship automatically to people born within NI to have been less than legitimate? If so, it is ironic, even bizarre that you might think so, whilst I do not!

---

No, but in international relations legitimacy is derived from the recognition of other nations and the GFA was the first instance in which the British and NI governments formally recognised the Republic's right to offer automatic entitlement to those born in NI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

I did not state/imply, nor do I believe, that these were "superior"; rather they are additional or ancilliary.

---

Superior in the sense that residency and parentage would qualify a player to line-out for the ROI in a football match but the birthright entitlement would not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

I was not attempting to pass off the basic premise of international eligibility (i.e. born within the jurisdiction of a Member Association of FIFA) as being specifically reflected in FIFA's Articles, merely pointing to its (premise) existence, in order to highlight the anomalous and inequitable situation re the IFA. This premise might prove inconvenient for you, but that does not alter it, never mind refute its existence.
It does, indeed, appear to be unique; moreover it is recognised by FIFA. That does not mean it is fair* or equitable.

* - Just like Gallas's goal in Paris was recognised by FIFA as being "legitimate"...

---

As ifk101 correctly and continually highlights, there is no "basic premise". It doesn't have any "existence". It's a figment of your imagination, so there is no inconvenience here for me other than trying to convince you to acknowledge this fact. Why you have given it oxygen in your imagination is because the huge inconvenience to be found in this issue lies on your side; that being that the rules support the FAI's stance. There is no need to imagine some "basic premise" invoking a player's birthplace when you have the express rule telling you otherwise right in front of you.

As for fairness and equity, we all know that they are entirely subjective matters. I could just as easily argue that it would be highly unfair to prevent an Irish national from representing his country, yes?

The law is on the FAI's side, it's as clear as day.
Just because you don't like it EG, doesn't mean it isn't true.

The IFA will lose the case
More players will "defect"

Stop digging...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman

The law is on the FAI's side, it's as clear as day.
Just because you don't like it EG, doesn't mean it isn't true.

The IFA will lose the case
More players will "defect"

Stop digging...

---

it realy is that simple. Everything else is just noise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Really? According to Duffy, his opting to represent the FAI was at least partly on account of his being a Catholic, that apparently being the natural consequence of his holding whatever religious convictions he maintains.
Fortunately, the very many other Cathoics who represent NI at all the various levels do not take the same essentially sectarian view of things.

---

That's just muddying the waters and sullying Duffy's name. What Duffy said was something rather casual and benign along the lines of, "Everyone knew I was a Catholic and naturally wanted to play for Ireland". I'm sure you can correct me on the exact quote, but that was certainly the nature of it and nothing more. What his comment was was an explanation of identity or background and indicative of the socio-cultural reality in Northern Ireland where the tendency of those within the nationalist community - generally used interchangeably with "Catholic community" in common local parlance, as well as by academics, historians and sociologists, for the sake of convenience - is to profess an Irish identity as opposed to a British one, so, being from the Catholic/nationalist community, choosing to play with the team that best represented his nationality, no doubt, seemed to him like a natural thing to do.

Of course, that's not to say that all Catholics are nationalists and so forth, but the general trend is that a Catholic in the north will tend to consider himself Irish rather than British. And that's in no way due to some mass communal expression of sectarianism, but rather due to cultural history. Wishing to play for the Republic's team seems like one of the more obvious manifestations of this for a footballer who need not be concerned by the potential limits of his abilities; maybe why the likes of Paddy McCourt declared for Northern Ireland. Maybe I'm entirely wrong, but despite all the assurances from those on OWC about how Paddy loves lining out on the hallowed turf of Windsor to belt out "God Save the Queen" - ;) - I'd hazard a guess that he considers himself anything but British.

Admittedly, maybe not the greatest choice of words used by Duffy and obviously somewhat naïve considering the over-willing zeal of his detractors to jump on anything he might say in order to take away from the lad's credibility - see the reaction of supposed outrage on OWC - but certainly not indicative of some bigoted or sectarian intent. He wasn't saying anything remotely along the lines of, "I'm a Catholic, so therefore hate Protestants and the very existence of Northern Ireland itself, and couldn't even imagine the prospect of lining out with them ever again, so, obviously, declaring for the all-Catholic FAI team once the opportunity arose was something my deeply-rooted hatred forced me to do". Although, you'd nearly think that reading OWC. It's just very petty, bitter stuff. Likewise, is attacking the lad's perceived level of intelligence from interviews conducted shortly after life-saving surgery, along with his moral character and that of his father's, without any knowledge or understanding of mental turmoil making the change-over might have caused him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Nice try to box me into a corner, but it doesn't work. For me, the opportunity to represent a country in international football is not a "right", it is a privilege. Moreover, since in essence it is determined by place of birth, it ought not to be a matter of "choice", as demanded eg by Darron Gibson, since one cannot choose to be born in any particular location (though one may choose to reside in such location...).

---

Once again, you're trying to pass off how you think it should be with how it actually is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

I was unaware that that is how he qualified to represent the FAI, just as i had thought it was his grandmother, rather than his mother, so thanks for that.

...

I am quite aware that players born in what you term "the North" (Northern Ireland) are deemed eligible by FIFA to represent the FAI.
But young Gorman was not born in NI. Therefore, having been born outside Ireland, I am genuinely unsure how he avoids the need to satisfy the normal Dual Nationality requirements of having a parent/grandparent/residence in the Irish Republic.

...

Edit: Re Gorman, I have just noticed DI's interesting post on the matter, above (#846). I should be interested to know what justification is used by ROI fans who feel he legitimately represented the FAI.

---

I had been unaware that it was his mother through whom he qualifies also. I misread and assumed otherwise; my mistake. If so, the case might be slightly different as Irish citizenship is transferred automatically upon birth from parent to child if that parent is an Irish citizen born in Ireland. My understanding is that this may satisfy the requirements set down by FIFA in article 15 due to its automatic and permanent nature. For the transference of citizenship from a grandparent, an applicant must undergo a slightly different process and will take on the new nationality from the point of it being granted, rather than it being considered legally permanent from birth.

Still, if I'm going to appeal to the express rules as worded in FIFA's statutes to argue my case regarding the right of northern-borns to represent Ireland, I must acknowledge that the text of the related subsequent rules doesn't completely satisfy questions surrounding the likes of Alex Bruce's eligibility, as despite FIFA's alleged affirmation of his eligibility in April 2006, it still seems at odds with what they actually have written in their rule-book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Quite.
Mind you, if FIFA were to renege on the special status granted to the four UK Associations in return for bailing it out of bankruptcy, their only recourse would be to replace them with one, single UK team.
In which case, having removed that exception, if they were also to remove the exception whereby someone born in NI may choose to represent another Association than that within whose jurisdiction he was born, you would find that the likes of Darron Gibson would only be eligible to represent the UK.

---

You've confused me. I don't see why that would be the case at all. Those born in Northern Ireland would still be perfectly entitled under Irish citizenship law to exercise their birthright to Irish nationality. Therefore, it would change nothing as far as the FAI were concerned, surely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

You know, the country to whom he pays his taxes, which provided his free education and health services, allows him to vote for its Government, plus provides him and his family with pension rights and other social security benefits etc.

---

Relevance?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

You've confused me. I don't see why that would be the case at all. Those born in Northern Ireland would still be perfectly entitled under Irish citizenship law to exercise their birthright to Irish nationality. Therefore, it would change nothing as far as the FAI were concerned, surely.


Relevance?

---

Only back from a trip to the flicks and was about to respond but you've pretty much saved me the bother. Although it seems EG is dealing in ifs and buts by stating that IF FIFA were to take away the special status of the 4 UK nations that may lead to them also removing the 'exception' that enables 6 county born players to represent Ireland. My original post was just to raise the fact that the NI football team only exists due to an exception granted by FIFA so it's therefore a bit rich for their fans to moan about an 'exception' in another area. Incidently, my contention would be that it's not an exception that enables Gibson et al to play for us but is down to the uniqueness of the citizenship laws that profess Irish nationality automatically on anyone born on the island. Cheers anyway! <thumbs up>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman

BTW, does anyone think that NI is a great feeder club for the proper Ireland team?
What with the new motorway network in the south (M3 in Enniskillen direction opened last Friday), and Sinn Fein MP Conor Murphy working on the roads around Newry, the masterplan is kicking in. Just need to work on the A5 road now to get Duffy/Gibson safely home after match.

I;d also like to thank the good work Nigel and co did on keeping our young lads ticking over, until they made step up in to proper international football, with a proper team in a (choice of) proper stadiums...

---

Video here of Shane Duffy arriving home in Derry.

http://www.u.tv/UTVMediaPlayer/Defau...0-7b905f9af8bc

Fair play to the lady who suggests he'll captain Ireland one day. I'd be inclined to agree with her.

My favourite part was when the kid in the Ireland shirt gave him a hug and you could see Duffy almost double over in pain. Kids, eh!

Danny no offense but you have been writing some serious novels on here lately. You should summarize your thoughts in a blog post. :angry2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Really? According to Duffy, his opting to represent the FAI was at least partly on account of his being a Catholic, that apparently being the natural consequence of his holding whatever religious convictions he maintains.
Fortunately, the very many other Cathoics who represent NI at all the various levels do not take the same essentially sectarian view of things.

No great "effort" at all (you know, computers and that); in fact, it might better have been described as a 'Labour of Love'.
Of course, such cost and effort as was expended might have been more onerous had it not had the full desired effect. But seeing as how you and others were apparently so outraged by it, I think we may safely call it "Mission Accomplished!"

If you have inferred that from anything I have ever posted, then it is you who is in need of medication, not me...

---

To answer your 'points', just because someone is an Irish Catholic makes them sectarian, hmm.... I'd make silly men in bowler hats, say, more so. Your arrogant attitude that nationalists have to benignly accept British rule, exemplifies all that is wrong with the unionist community in the North. People now have the right to choose and these people are no longer 'owned' by the British state or their unsavoury institutions.

In the case of the such amusing banner, even if it was donated, somebody still contributed to the time and expense of emphasing the chip on the shoulder you have about the real Ireland team. Why not make them for Scotland, then you'd have dozens of the things....
;)

And you did imply an element of legitimacy re. a certain Frenchman which is bully for you, but I would seek attention for amnesia as well as myopia! Which seems a common trait in that community. Maybe it's the embitteredness??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman

The only thing that the NI fans have in common, is a deep seated (unreciprocated) hatred of the Irish nationality with which 43% of the people in your state/country/province (& **5% of the island) identify. This is manifested in part by attacking the, more successful, Republic of Ireland. Such an attitude will not serve you well in the long term

---

The only thing all NI fans have in common is, er, supporting NI. I don't have a deep seated hatred of anyone's Irish Republic nationality, I haven't repeatedly suggested the Irish Republic's national side be abolished or forcibly merged with anyone else, and without wishing to upset anyone else on here I'd suggest that a team which has qualified for one of the last eight international tournaments and hasn't beaten a higher-ranked team in a qualifier since 2001 wouldn't immediately be identified as "more successful". It's about a third as successful as Slovenia.

PS Glad to see Duffy is making a quick recovery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drumcondra 69

My original post was just to raise the fact that the NI football team only exists due to an exception granted by FIFA

---

It's a bit convoluted this, isn't it? The Irish FA and its international side predate FIFA and have always followed its rules. You might as well say that RoI football team only picks players from all across Britain due to an excpetion granted by FIFA.

Quote:

---

the uniqueness of the citizenship laws that profess Irish nationality automatically on anyone born on the island

---

Apart from the Irish-born who don't get it automatically as supported by nearly 80% in a referendum, you mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

I don't have a deep seated hatred of anyone's Irish Republic nationality,

---

Irish nationality isn't defined by Ireland's form of governance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

.... and without wishing to upset anyone else on here I'd suggest that a team which has qualified for one of the last eight international tournaments and hasn't beaten a higher-ranked team in a qualifier since 2001 wouldn't immediately be identified as "more successful". It's about a third as successful as Slovenia.

---

Must. Try. Harder. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

It's a bit convoluted this, isn't it? The Irish FA and its international side predate FIFA and have always followed its rules. You might as well say that RoI football team only picks players from all across Britain due to an excpetion granted by FIFA.

---

???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather Round

I'd suggest that a team which has qualified for one of the last eight international tournaments and hasn't beaten a higher-ranked team in a qualifier since 2001 wouldn't immediately be identified as "more successful".

---

As opposed to a team that has not qualified for anything in 25 years & counting....
They may as well disband, FFS.
Given their 'own' players are deserting them!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

I was not referring to what is stated in FIFA's Articles etc, ot how they have been interpreted/applied.
I was merely stating that the basic premise for international eligibility is that a player is eligible due to birthplace (only) to represent solely the National Association within whose jurisdiction he was born. For 207 Member Associations of FIFA, this means just one Member Association, but the 208th (NI), it means two (IFA and FAI).
Are you saying that this is incorrect?

---

Yes, of course that is incorrect, what planet are you on?:D
The basic premise for automatic eligibility is an automatic nationality - not dependant on residence.

to cut to the thrust of a later post

Quote:

---

2. FIFA presently recognises the right of someone born within NI to represent the FAI outwith the normal parentage/residence requirements, on account of the fact that such people are automatically entitled to Republic of Ireland citiizenship as a birthright. This birthright has been available since 1921 i.e. 77 years before the GFA was even conceived.

---

It has been previously explained in detail by me (somewhere) that the GFA did cause a change the law and an important enough distinction in regards to the citizenship rights.
NI born were not automatic citizens of Ireland before the GFA.
Pre GFA , according to the citizenship act of 1955?, NI born were automatically entitled to apply for citizenship. They were not automatically entitled to citizenship just by being born in NI

Post GFA, NI born were automatically entitled to citizenship. That is why the citizenship laws had to be changed in the Republic, when the GFA was signed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crosby87

Danny no offense but you have been writing some serious novels on here lately. You should summarize your thoughts in a blog post. :angry2:

---

Sorry to have angered you. I suppose you could block me if it's that bad. :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

Apart from the Irish-born who don't get it automatically as supported by nearly 80% in a referendum, you mean?

---

My good man, ever the pedant. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

My good man, ever the pedant. :D

---

Saved me the bother again Danny, good man! :)