Printable View
But the FAI are losing players to the IFA and that is the same thing and should be compared as such. 3 promising players from Derry recently make the switch after coming through FAI structures. I doubt if the IFA asked the FAI if these players were still in their "plans" or brought up the issue of compensation.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
If it is the case that these three switched to the IFA knowing they were still part of the FAI's plans, then it would be the same, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
I've not said that it doesn't happen, indeed DannyInvincible pointed out that Sean Scannell is/was a good example of the IFA looking at a player who was an active FAI underage player.
I've just argued that the line that 'the IFA complain about the FAI but they're happy to take England's rejects' oversimplifies the issue, in my opinion.
We, er, know...
What about Patrick McEleney's switch from the FAI to the IFA? The IFA had no problem whatsoever with the fact that Noel King still had plans for him: http://www.londonderrysentinel.co.uk...t-ni-1-4385364Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick McEleney
Is it that black-and-white though? What exactly constitutes "making up their mind"? How can a player "make up his mind" in a situation imbued with such uncertainty, where certain factors are beyond his control?Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
What about those players in the IFA's youth set-up who would support Ireland and who would jump at the chance to play for the FAI if it ever arose, but who aren't sure if their abilities would ever enable the realisation of such an aspiration, so, for now, and perhaps for the rest of their playing careers, so long as the FAI ignore them, they're more than happy to contribute to the IFA's cause? The IFA's under-age set-ups are full of such players and the IFA are well aware of this. Should they all drop out in order to maintain some element of integrity, even when the IFA have no issue with selecting them time and time again? It's obvious not even the IFA would want that.
I wouldn't put any credence in it. The timing of McClean's declaration for Ireland was incidental - the only reason he decided to switch at that exact time was because the IFA forced the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
Just on McAlinden, a Wolves-supporting friend described him as "one of [their] best academy prospects".
You're developing a bad habit of putting words in my mouth Danny. I never said anything about dropping out of squads to keep their integrity. My point has been about concealment. If a player who has decided that they would take the opportunity to represent the ROI if the opportunity arose, then that player should let the FAI know about their feelings, and should let the IFA know also. Once they've been open with both associations, bothe the FAI and the IFA are fully informed when making whatever decision that want to make regarding that player's involvement in their setups.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Apologies; just trying to tease out your perspective.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
That seems fair enough.Quote:
I never said anything about dropping out of squads to keep their integrity. My point has been about concealment. If a player who has decided that they would take the opportunity to represent the ROI if the opportunity arose, then that player should let the FAI know about their feelings, and should let the IFA know also. Once they've been open with both associations, bothe the FAI and the IFA are fully informed when making whatever decision that want to make regarding that player's involvement in their setups.
Well you sure as hell are going on like you are.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
Is there something else we don't know?
Quote:
I've made two points.
I am aware of the two points you made and in making those points I have responded with what I see as the next logical progression of what you said.
I think what you're saying is cr@p. Though you are perfectly valid in holding those opinions.
Why are the FAI "different"? Just because the IFA have a small pool to choose from, as we keep being reminded, doesn't mean the FAI should look on Our Wee Neighbours with a sense of sympathy.Quote:
The first it that the IFA getting players from other associations and the IFA losing players to the FAI isn't always the same thing, and shouldn't be compared as though they are.
The FAI are merely allowing Irish Citizens to play for the nation of their birth.
I don't understand how the input of the IFA's training strucures (whilst a contributor to some players development) is held up as the reason why these players should consider their futures as it was the IFA who had the most input into their development? Pure bull. The clubs are the ones who develop players. Associations merely take on the cream of the crop. Usually.
Ah the famous "decision cut-off point" argument.Quote:
The second is that if a player had made up their mind that they are going to represent ROI, but hides that from the IFA and continues to be involved in squads/development, I think that is unfair.
I mentioned apologies because in essence if you do something unfair the next stage is usually an apology I would think.Quote:
I made no reference to players being hindered, or apologies to the IFA, so I have no idea why you mention it.
But that's not really the nub of the argument.
All of the ideas I mentioned were retarded. That's the point. They were said with my tongue firmly wedded to the inside of my cheek.Quote:
And of the ideas you suggest, the first has already been mentioned on this thread before. The others are just retarded.
NISFA are the body responsible for schoolboy football in the Province. Playing for them in no way intimates that you are representing the IFA. It just means you are good at football and happen to attend school in FATDAD.
If anyone asked my child at such a young age who they wished to play for when they were older I would be liable to put them through a wall.
Same as that if the attendance at an IFA Summer Soccer School was predicated on your leanings t'wards Norn Iron or with us Mexicans.
If the IFA want to call eligible players to their teams then so be it. If the players don't want to play for them then so be it. Are we gonna get snooty when Michael Keane (eventually) gets his English senior debut or if Jack Grealish decides to throw his lot in with the Three Lions... no. We won't because we haven't got this bizarre insular paranoid mentality that is pervasive throughout Windsor Avenue.
This seems to have developed since I composed my last post.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
So essentially you feel it's the player who is being unfair to the IFA and not the FAI for picking them.
I understand, now, what you are getting at but like Danny I don't think it's as simple as "knowing". We have to bear in mind that a lot of the time these are young men who still aren't sure about anything in their lives (don't you remember being 19?) I think the IFA should be more understanding of that.
Spot on.
Don't think 'self-righteousness' figures very strongly in their decision-making.
With the possible exception of McClean.
;)
Nothing has developed since your last post. I've said the same thing over the last 24-36 hours. I'd say I made it perfectly clear in post 5378 that there was no blame attached to the benefiting association - the FAI.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
Quote:
Originally Posted by OsarusanQuote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Does it affect your moral judgment of the players concerned, or of the benefiting association?
Regarding the player, possibly, if they've been concealing their intentions from the IFA. Not the benefiting association.
I always regret posting twice in a row. It means you get to ignore the first one. Rookie mistake on my part.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
It has developed because namely I missed it when you first posted it and now thanks to Danny teasing it some more I understand more what you mean.
I still don't know why you hold this frankly bizarre stance, but each to their own.
Eh... Self righteousness and feeling aggrieved is the default position. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Isn't that, er, certain supporters from the island of Ireland?Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
:)
Derry whataboutery?? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
I wrote "usually" they have to make deals with the unwanted scraps of the international scene, very few would chose to go there if they were wanted elsewhere.
Surely you don't think I give a flying f'eck about the oft scorned IFA and their contradictions. They would poach and lure with the morals of a 1930's Berlin pimp and now some talk of paying a ransom before releasing their captive taigs.
I thought that seeing as how your first post was before you got what I was talking about, it was ok not to reply to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
And I am interested in what you see as so bizarre in the two points I have made.
I assumed that's who you were referring to. The sun is getting to me. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Well I was more interested in responses to some of the things I mentioned in my first post. This discussion can evolve. It doesn't just have to stagnate at the point of your problem with Irish born Nationals having their cake and eating it as it were.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
The part I find bizarre is your continued declaration of how it's unfair to the IFA and why it matters to you so much.
Which things?Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
Again, it doesn't matter to me so much, or at all. To quote yourself, Is there something else we don't know? Why do you insist it matters so much to me?Quote:
Originally Posted by BonnieShels
I think it's unfair if a player who is currently involved in training/squads with association A, but who has ambitions of playing for association B, conceals those ambitions from association A so that he doesn't run the risk of being left our of future training/squads. I can't see anything so bizarre about that.