Except that's not what Stu' said...
Printable View
It's not what he is asking for though. It could really be any player that was in an underage NI squad.
It's actually quite outrageous.Quote:
If they want to take a player who has come through the IFA ranks, they should have to pay a compensation fee of somewhere between, say, half a million and a million pounds a player.
Daniel Kearns must be worth at least half a million. I mean, Peterborough only paid a fraction of that to Dundalk, but sure who needs logic?
I know it's not what he said, but he's talking sh!te. I'm talking about your point re FA development of players who end up with NI. If your point is purely to point out that he's talking sh!te, then we're in agreement.
I think you're missing my point,which is that, in my opinion, there is a difference between players leaving the English setup for NI after coming to the conclusion that they're never going to play for England, and players leaving the NI setup for ROI, despite still being part of the IFA plans at/for senior level.
So what?
You could say the same about loads of countries...
It ain't going to happen.
Or if it did, another nail in the coffin of smaller teams.
None.
So a total red, or is it 'green', herring then...
I'll be interested to see why Rory Donnelly has pulled the plug on his NI career. It now looks somewhat clear the he wasn't pulling out of squads or being picked behind inferior players due to injury, rather due to a lack of desire to play for NI, surely?
Am I correct in saying that the announcement in relation to McAlinden is the first of it's type in quite a while, perhaps since James McClean and Eunan O'Kane made their debuts for us?
And reading the stuff regarding McAlinden, it can hardly come as a surprise that he's switched his allegiances. If most of his family are from Ireland, then was never much of an affinity he could have had with the North. In fact, only one grandparent was Northern Irish and who knows to what extent they were indeed Irish or Northern Irish?
Does it affect your moral judgment of the players concerned, or of the benefiting association? Should the association that stands to benefit from a switching dual national player preserve some level of consideration for an association that might have future plans for that player, even when the decision of whether or not to continue playing for the original association is entirely at the discretion of that player? Should it reflect badly on a player when he shuns an association who want his services?
Afaiu the point Osarusan made, it began and ended with pointing out that there is a difference between a player leaving one association who still want him and an unwanted player declaring for another association.
Also worth noting that despite the IFA loss of McAlinden & Jones, the IFA u21 manager still managed to play seven English born u21 players in their defeat to Cyprus last week, with another couple on the bench. Four of those seven had never represented the IFA previously.
The IFA seem to be spending as much of their resources on scouring England for players as they do on under-age development, which is fine, I just wish they’d stop with the ‘using our resources’ nonsense.
Has Rory Donnelly ever played for an IFA team? Once? Twice? Certainly little if any IFA money invested in him over the years.
Regarding the player, possibly, if they've been concealing their intentions from the IFA. Not the benefiting association.
Not really.
No, as long as he hasn't been stringing them along.