I agree. Delap won't be playing for Ireland.
Printable View
I agree. Delap won't be playing for Ireland.
Call me old fashioned but I think I prefer the old days where any competitive cap tied you at any age group (I think it may have excluded school boys but could be wrong)Quote:
Originally Posted by samhaydenjr
The ever changing new rules are supposed to be fairer but to be honest I think small countries like Ireland lose more than we gain.
I also think it makes a mockery of international football. We have had an increase of brothers playing against each other and it just feels like the transfer system of club football.This was really brought home to me a couple of years ago when I went to an underage game were Phil Neville's son was in the Ireland squad. I don't know anything about him but he fails the gut test miserably. This is just denies another Irish lad a chance. Having said that in a world of no switching I could get on board with any player who staked their future to Ireland knowing their was no turning back, even the likes of Phil Neville's son.
https://www.thesun.ie/sport/14507631...rmany-ireland/
Well, if anyone was seeking a commitment either way from Nebel they thought wrong. A likely German cap until he's not.
https://www.thesun.ie/sport/14507806...-hallgrimsson/Quote:
Originally Posted by Olé Olé
They have quotes in a separate article. Nebel leaves it very open.
Yeah, he'll keep the Germany option open for a couple of years I'd say before he gives up on it. If it becomes clear we'll be playing at Euro 2028 and they haven't capped him by then, the cynic in me says he'll commit to us at that point as he'll be 25 by then.
He went off for Mainz after 37’ today. The mention of a potential Irish career has put the injury hex on him probably.
HH and O'Shea at the Burnley-Sunderland game. Cirkin, O'Riley and Bellingham all playing and all eligible.
https://www.balls.ie/football/presence-of-heimir-at-sunderland-game-has-ireland-fans-wondering-about-new-prospects-620610
Would have to imagine Cirkin is the player they're scouting in particular. Bellingham won't play for us anytime soon (probably ever) and Egan Riley would struggle to make our squad.
While I understand your primary opinion about integrity of international football, I actually don't think the current system has worked against us. If players were tied to an international team based on underage appearances, it wouldn't have meant that we would have kept Grealish and Rice - they probably would not have lined out underage for us. Meanwhile, the current system has allowed us to pick up Ciaran Clark, Callum Robinson, Kasey McAteer, Will Keane, Mikey Johnston, Shane Duffy, Mark Sykes and James McClean (admittedly the switch of the three NI lads possibly supports your view of a negative affect on smaller nations) .Quote:
Originally Posted by Thewhitepele
Not so in the case of NT's in Africa (esp), who have loads of players from France and Belgium (also from UK and Germany, to an extent).Quote:
Originally Posted by Thewhitepele
Indeed it was African Federations (esp Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia I believe), who lobbied FIFA to ease the rules governing switching.
Two random examples: Mbuemo and Wissa, currently tearing it up in the PL with Brentford, play for Cameroon and Congo, despite both having been born in France and coming up through French youth football. Indeed Mbuemo played up to U-21 level for France. While switching is more desirable than ever, what with non-European countries having increased places in the World Cup Finals, along with the development and increased profile of AFCON.
They've lost players due to the rule change too, Nacer Chadli had a Moroccan cap before switching to Belgium
We definitely don't lose more than we gain. In fact - other than the odd player born in the north playing for the north - I can't think of any Irish born player that would have been of value to us choosing another country. Whereas we've benefitted from loads of grandparent qualifying players coming in to play for us.
I know this will probably change in future, but (again leaving aside the position in terms of the north) any players of note we've "lost" weren't actually born or developed here to begin with. I think some people take the wrong view on someone like Declan Rice playing for England. He is, after all, English (though he shouldn't have taken senior Ireland caps if he wasn't fully committed). Similarly now with Vata, if we can confirm him with us that's fantastic, if he decides to go elsewhere then that's him making his own personal choice, he wasn't developed in Ireland after all.
This happens with every country that has a large diaspora - it also happens in the opposite direction with Imperial countries exploiting their colonial dependancies.Quote:
Originally Posted by samhaydenjr
France 1998 world cup squad
Bernard Lama - born in France to parents from French Guyana and move there shortly after his birth.
Patrick Vieira - Senegal
Marcel Desailly - Ghana
Lilian Thuram - Guadeloupe
Christian Karembeu - New Caledonia
David Trezeguet - born in France to Argentinian parents and grew up in Argentina (Spanish is his first language)
and
Thierry Henry - born in France - parents from Guadeloupe and Martinique
Bernard Diomède - born in France - parents from Guadeloupe
Zinedine Zidane - born in France - parents from Algeria
Bixente Lizarazu and Didier Deschamps are both Basque.
Similarly with the Dutch team from the same competition
Clarence Seedorf - Suriname
Edgar Davids - Suriname
Aron Winter - Suriname
Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink - Suriname
Michael Reiziger - born Holland - parents from Suriname
Patrick Kluivert - born Holland - father from Suriname, mother from Curacao
Winston - born Holland - parents from Suriname
Then you have others going the opposite way - Jamaica from 1998 WC
Andy Williams - Canada
Fitzroy Simpson, Marcus Gayle, Robbie Earle, Dean Burton, Frank Sinclair, Darryl Powell, Paul Hall - all born in England.
There are swings and roundabouts in all of this - for decades Ireland never had any players not born in Ireland. The great 1949 team that beat England at Goodison were all born in Ireland - indeed the first player to represent Ireland who was born outside the country was Shay Brennan in 1965 (born in Manchester). By the 1980s a significant portion of the squad was born outside the country (reflecting the significant emigration to England in the 1950s and early 1960s).
Now Ireland is benefiting from immigration. We could easily field a team of players born in Ireland for whom at least one parent was born in another country - Gavin Bazunu, Festy Ebosele, Andrew Omobamidele, Bosun Lawal, Adam Idah, Chiedozie Ogbene (born in Nigeria), Michael Obafemi, James Abankwah, David Okagbue, Gabriel Otegbayo (all eligible to play for Nigeria except Abankwah - Ghana).
As you point out - we have benefitted more than we have lost - although that might start to change in the near future.
I've no issue with the rules of International soccer eligibility. It has served us well. And us losing some players is fine also. That's just the rules.
If you have a grandparent or parent born on the island or you were raised in Ireland yourself, having not been born here, I think that's ok.
Ogbene being a case in point. Not born here but came here as a child and grew up in our system.
Obafemi also. He was born here to Nigerian parents before they moved to England. I think that's absolutely fine.
It's totally different from the rugby which is a system that is totally abused by the rich rugby nations like ourselves, NZ, England, France etc.
There were players playing for Ireland in the last World Cup that didn't even have Irish citizenship. Joke!
All international rugby players qualifying through residence have to have been resident in the country for at least five years now, so I don't think those rules are any different to football now in that respect. Similar to Eduardo playing for Croatia or Pepe for Portugal.
Where rugby differs is that it's more flexible with switching, I wouldn't be surprised if their more flexible switching rules are brought into football at some point at the request of African associations (e.g. player X won 15 caps for Belgium but hasn't been picked for five years, so could switch to Morocco etc.). Not sure how comfortable I'd be with that even though it would probably benefit us hugely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eirambler
The real problem with rugby is associations cynically giving players contracts with a view to them becoming naturalised. And of course, they don't even need to become naturalised to play for the country. Gibson Parks only became an Irish citizen 6 or so months ago I think.
For example, the IRFU like the look of CJ Stander so Leinster give him a contract and within a few years he's Irish. If Glasgow gave him a contract he'd be Scottish.
When in fact, he's neither.
This is not the faultiest of the players, it's the fault of the IRB.
It only favours the rich rugby nations. Developing rugby nations like Georgia, Romania, Portugal, Russia etc will never be able to afford giving a good contract to a player from abroad to make them 'one of their own'. For me, it stinks!
I would hate to see it coming in to soccer on a large scale. There have been cases of players playing for countries they've been resident in. Diego Costa springs to mind. But they weren't brought to that country for the bigger picture of them eventually playing for that country.
The petrostates would love that. Not that they're above giving Brazilians passports as it is.
Qatar had some players like that in their World Cup squad. It's ridiculous - signing players for club teams just to get them onto the national team. Granted in most cases they seem to be players who wouldn't get a game with their own country so it's not as if the other country is losing out. But still - feck that.
Actually the "game-changer" (sorry) which led to the many changes to eligibility rules dates from 2004, when Qatar cynically gave passports, and therefore eligibility, to three Brazilians, so as to be able to cap them. These guys, probably from poor backgrounds, were good enough to improve the Qatari team, even if they were never going to get capped for Brazil. (Togo and Cape Verde had also been at it, or were planning to.)Quote:
Originally Posted by John83
Following complaints from many countries, FIFA brought in an emergency ban on such practices:
"Fifa's emergency committee ruled on Wednesday that players must have a "clear connection to that country" if they wished to wear the colours of a nation other than the one of their birth.
The rules now state a player must either have lived in a country for at least two years, or have a parent or grandparent who was born there."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...ca/3523266.stm
This caused FIFA to look for a more permanent solution, which enshrined residential and ancestry requirements in order to secure eligibility, since tweaked many times. One key element was that Qatar had been granting Nationality to (otherwise unconnected) players, then withdrawing it again once they retired from playing, so FIFA specified that the Nationality in question must be "permanent".
Which was how ROI/FAI benefited pretty much uniquely in being able to cap players from another country (NI) without any of the usual residential/ancestral requirements, since permanent Irish Nationality is automatically accorded to all people from NI from birth. I say "uniquely", since other countries guard their citizenship closely, with all sorts of hoops to jump through, seeing as that citizenship also beings with it various benefits (voting, pensions, residence etc). Nationality laws are also a means of controlling immigration* etc. However with the Irish situation, Dublin granted few if any benefits, other than the right to give them €90 for a Passport in return for a warm, fuzzy feeling etc, effectively making it a "free hit", while making a purely political point against a neighbour. (Post-Brexit benefits are bestowed by the EU.). And in turn, the FAI has been able to benefit from something which had never anything to do with football.
Anyhow, when you look at how these eligibility rules have panned out, there can be little doubt that ROI/FAI have been a net beneficiary from the various amendments previously, then and since, including outwith the NI situation.
* - The only other exception I can think of which might (emphasise) compare with the ROI/NI situation is Israel(!), which will grant Nationality to pretty much anyone who is Jewish, even when they've not had any actual connection with that part of the world for hundreds of years. And as well as suiting that state's ethos, and "proving" a political point, it also serves to boost immigration, which is valuable to them. Ironically, Robbie Keane could never get an Israeli passport, unless he could find a Jewish grandma from somewhere!
Those rugby examples were all back when the rule was three years residency. It was increased to five years to stop that happening and the change seems to have worked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixer82