We clearly have a differing opinion on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
You seem to believe that (P)SF and PIRA do not form the Provisional Movement.
I do believe they form the Provisional Movement.
We'll have to agree to differ.
Printable View
We clearly have a differing opinion on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
You seem to believe that (P)SF and PIRA do not form the Provisional Movement.
I do believe they form the Provisional Movement.
We'll have to agree to differ.
[QUOTE=ArdeeBhoy;1522316 it goes against the ethos of FIFA's rules and the CAS.
But some people are being more like an, er, ostrich about this...[/QUOTE]
I don't see anything in the FIFA Statutes or the CAS Ruling pertaining to which eligible players a member Association has to select to represent them.
I certainly haven't seen anything from FIFA or CAS stating that an Association must pick players who harbour ambitions of playing for another Association's senior representative side in the future.
As far as I'm aware, team selection is at the discretion of the member Association.
NB has clearly stated what he wants, that is, he wants to "weed out" those who are allegedly denying a place to someone whose dream it is to represent NI (a notion which can only truly be established if a player actually effects a switch). That should, for the sake of consistency, include those English opportunists who are playing for NI because they're not good enough for England and not just those NI born kids of an Irish nationalist persuasion who may have grown up supporting Ireland. It's hypocritical to want to "weed out" dream-snatchers (be they James McClean, Adam Barton or Lee Camp) at underage level and not those at senior level. You are claiming that that principle somehow changes at senior level, making it inconsistent and thus hypocritical.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
I'm not sure what part of my clarification you are failing to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Predator
Players in our under age set up who harbour realistic ambitions of switching to another Association at senior international level should be weeded out.
Our underage teams should be geared towards players who wish to progress and represent Northern Ireland at senior international level.
I don't see anything remotely "inconsistent and thus hypocritical" in that.
It's completely hypocritical for the reasons numerous posters have highlighted..
But even more so, it's wholly unrealistic.
I don't believe my viewpoint is in any way hypocritical.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
I also believe it to be wholly realistic.
Except in the main, we're not talking about you.
;)
It's the IFA.
You don't need to take it all on yourself!
:rolleyes:
They can like any FA, can make claims on eligible players, until they make their full competitive debut, regardless of age or disposition.
And they have now enlisted plenty of potential full internationals from outside the North. So what.
What's the problem?
Are you saying they shouldn't...
Any eligible player who wants to commit their future to our senior international side is more than welcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Any player currently in our underage ranks who, in future, has ambitions to play for the South's (or any other Association's) senior international side needs weeded out.
Are you a bit slow today - heavy weekend perhaps?
Alex Bruce.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
Except it's :rolleyes: your goofy statements about players who're eligible for other teams and the political stance of the Northern electorate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
Wondering if you are determined on looking silly. But do keep on digging...
The problem with mercenary Bruce is that he refused a callup previously, making patronising/disparaging comments in the process...and when he found out he wasn't good enough for the South, he thought we'd all forget.Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
Perhaps someone has had a word in Nigel's ear - no Bruce in our squad for the forthcoming games v Serbia and Estonia.
So, any eligible player who wants to commit their future to our senior international side is more than welcome (provided they didn't turn their nose up at us earlier).
I don't consider I have made any "goofy comments" about "players who're eligible for other teams and the political stance of the Northern electorate".Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
It is, of course, your perogative to consider my comments "goofy".
That will not concern me in the least.
What if such a player's dream is never realised because of some English-born Johnny-come-lately taking the place he would have occupied, thereby also hampering his development?Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
Alex Bruce. "I'm very flattered that Northern Ireland and the Republic are both showing an interest in me. But I think I'm going to pick the Republic purely because I think they are a better team.”Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
Patronising/ disparaging comments?
Think again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
...... and provided they don't keep you waiting for an answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
Our senior squad being bettered by players wishing to commit to playing senior international football for Northern Ireland - eg, Lee Camp - is fine by me - provided they haven't previously snubbed us previously.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
If an "English-born-Johnny-come-lately" was in our underage ranks, and had realistic ambitions of playing senior international football with another Association, I'd want him weeded out.
You never know - maybe some of your Northern Ireland born young starlets will have their dreams shattered, regarding playing senior international football for the South, by "English-born-Johnny-come-lately"s.
How do you feel about that?
That wasn't the issue, as you know. Yes, Sinn Féin are part of the provisional movement, but we were debating whether or not it was acceptable or appropriate to refer to McClean as a "provo" because of his stated support for Sinn Féin on his Facebook. You seem to think it's fine. I don't. I happen to feel that the intent to insult or offend behind what was a slur in the context was crucial. In the context, the derisive connotation was to insinuate that McClean was probably sectarian and of questionable moral fibre; it may as well have been an abbreviated form of "provo b*stard" such was the tone. It was intended as a smear or personal attack on the lad in an environment where such crap, if not lapped up by a sorry few, wouldn't cause much of a stir, pure and simple.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
"It was pleasing that I was wanted by national teams and Ive always had allegiances to the Republic because of the way I was brought up, so I supported them as well. When the chance came to play for the Republic, there was no decision really"Quote:
Originally Posted by ifk101
Funny how there's a decision now Alex, ain't it?
No thanks.
He wasn't in the squad named this morning.
But why do the other poor deprived souls who've had their dreams so cruelly crushed by mercenaries no longer matter to you at this point?Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
No problem with it whatsoever. Our diaspora is a fundamental and defining aspect of our national identity too. If another Irishman is a better footballer and more worthy of a place in our team than any other, fair enough. That's always been the way.Quote:
You never know - maybe some of your Northern Ireland born young starlets will have their dreams shattered, regarding playing senior international football for the South, by "English-born-Johnny-come-lately"s.
How do you feel about that?
It's of little concern to me whether you find it "acceptable" or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
I clarified my comments in detail.
I make no apology for them.
McClean is not "a Provo", on the basis that I don't believe him to be a member of the Provisional Movement.
He is, clearly, a Provo supporter, in that he expresses support for the Provisional Movement.
I'm happy to reword to "Provisional Movement supporter" - I told you that yesterday.
I suggest you google "Provisional Movement".
I don't know if McClean is sectarian or not- I do not claim that he is sectarian.
Nor do I consider all supporters of the Provisional Movement to be "*******s".
Keep on digging...
I thought we'd been through this.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Lee Camp never played for Northern Ireland, whilst harbouring ongoing ambitions to represent another Assocation at senior international level.
Keep on throwing out meaningless chirps, to hide your seeming inability to deal with the substance.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Hmm, if you say so....
More like you keep repeating the same contradictions & factual errors which is tedious enough in itself.
It seems you are unwilling to, or incapable of, highlightling these "contradictions" and "factual errors" you speak of.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
You're good at the "you're wrong" and "keep digging" stuff, but don't ever substatiate such comments - that's a shame really.
Lee Camp is playing for NI as a second choice, occupying a space that you feel should be reserved for those who see NI as first choice. Stop whinging about the denial and deprivation of dreams if you're willing to accept it at senior level.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
None of which counters/negates these sentiments, which you appear to be unable to grasp.Quote:
Originally Posted by Predator
"Players in our under age set up who harbour realistic ambitions of switching to another Association at senior international level should be weeded out.
Our underage teams should be geared towards players who wish to progress and represent Northern Ireland at senior international level".
I really can't be any clearer than that.
Except I (and more importantly numerous others) have done. You just choose to :rolleyes: ignore certain responses.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
And certain points are so obvious eg. SF voters, except to the average passing ostrich or completely paranoid, they don't need substantiating...
;)
Oh. my. god.Quote:
Originally Posted by Predator
PS: Disappointed this forum has no smiley smashing his head off a wall.
I do my best to answer challenges as honestly as I can.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
I believe there are, indeed, completely panarnoid passing ostriches commenting on the thread - but I'm not one of them.;)
What I have expressed is not an attempt to counter what you have said there. You are the one who is dodging the sentiment I raise. The problem I have is that you appear to be so worked up about those such as McClean/Duffy who are said to be denying dreams at underage level, but are willing to accept those English born lads who are also arguably (certainly, if the notion is to be taken seriously) denying dreams.Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
It completely undermines the alleged moral high-ground that many among the NI fanbase are trying to claim to support them.
Thanks for the insight awec, you rarely let us down. Well done.Quote:
Originally Posted by awec
The fundamental difference between the two cases (and it is a fundamental difference, however you look at it) is that in the case of the former, they are denying another player a place in a squad / team despite being unwilling to represent NI at senior level, while those in the latter category are denying others a place in the team /squad because of their willingness to represent NI at senior level.Quote:
Originally Posted by Predator
So denials all round then??
;)
Not to worry. Don't even mention it. I hadn't been the issue, thank God. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Brazil
You've caught me somewhat tired and cranky this morn, however, and I do resent your running deceit with regard to this matter, along with the insincere accusation of paranoia you've since thrown at me. Rather than thinking of it as paranoid, think of it as being not completely pig-****ing-thick when I perceive this to be a shot directed at myself along with your attempted smoke-machine defence of the reference to James McClean as a "provo" as an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has bothered following your brazen efforts to obfuscate the issue and worm your way around it.
I'll interpret that as an admission that the reference to McClean as a "provo" was inappropriate then...Quote:
McClean is not "a Provo", on the basis that I don't believe him to be a member of the Provisional Movement.
And in case there's still some unwillingness on your part to acknowledge this, or a residual confusion as to why it was inappropriate - although I suspect it's more likely you're just playing dumb here - it was absolutely not because the idiot who disparaged McClean would and should have been "more accurate" in referring to an open Sinn Féin supporter as a "Provo/Provisional Movement supporter", a twisted and irrelevant straw man you've since spent a number of pages attempting to erect. We all know that was not the connotation behind the label used as it was on OWC. It was inappropriate for the following number of reasons; don't necessarily think of them as exhaustive.
Sinn Féin refer to themselves officially as just that; Sinn Féin. Note the missing word/letter. You won't find one mention of the word "Provisional" on their home page. They also outline the following in an introductory document:
Couldn’t be more clear.Quote:
The Sinn Fein which emerged in 1970 - popularly known at the time as 'Provisional' Sinn Fein - was to evolve through the '70s and ' 80s to the party we know today.
The PIRA are effectively defunct as an organisation and have been for a number of years. Take your pick from since either 1997 or 2005; whichever you prefer. Republican Sinn Féin, in terming themselves as they do, officially do any necessary distinguishing from Sinn Féin for you in their own title, thereby making it wholly surplus to requirements for you or anyone else to continue referring to Sinn Féin as "PSF". There is no ambiguity in the simple use of Sinn Féin nowadays. It is especially unnecessary outside of an intra-republican context where the two organisations aren't even being discussed at once, if even extra clarification would be necessary within such a context, except to also make some political point. Everyone knows who Sinn Féin are and to which organisation one would be referring when using that title. And do you really believe that RSF are a genuine political force or anything other than a peripheral organisation within contemporary Irish republicanism, never mind Irish politics generally? Or was your reference to their apparent increasing strength merely another attempt to further lead us down the garden path; to pretend that they have a level of popularity and influence (indeed miniscule in reality) approaching something that might even nearly challenge Sinn Féin's claim over the Sinn Féin title, thereby invoking some need for disambiguation? The whole need for distinction by use of "Provisional" or "P" has become redundant with time, yet you still try to hoodwink myself and others here that you adhere to the strict use of a completely superfluous and outmoded distinction at all times. Are we supposed to believe that you genuinely fear people might think you're actually referring to a virtual non-entity when you mention Sinn Féin without a prefix? I certainly don’t.
It is fairly obvious that anyone who derisively dubs someone a "provo" in the current political climate is doing so to make a snide political point. In the context of OWC, it was so obviously anything but neutral and was loaded with contemptuous and slanderous innuendo that I can't believe you're still trying to defend it via unrelenting faux-denial. I mean, why else would anyone even mention the term if not to make some cheap point? Could you imagine Sinn Féin assembly members being referred to as "provos" by their unionist counterparts up in Stormont? Of course not. Well, OK, I admit I wouldn’t put it past the likes of Jim Allister, but other than that...
Have a read of this: http://www.tuv.org.uk/press-releases...-provo-victory
A story about the proposed conflict resolution centre on the old Maze site, and it's even tagged under "terrorism". It's abundantly clear the baggage the term "provo" carries in unionist circles, especially eccentric ones.
You’d think I was having a laugh if I started insulting you with various slurs that might be offensive to a unionist in certain contexts and then made it worse by blaming your sensitivity and paranoia for you taking offence because, after all, a unionist is exactly what you are. It'd be the height of ignorance and denial on my part. You surely must be aware that certain labels can have different meanings when used within different contexts and, depending on the intent behind them, might be considered pejorative in certain scenarios but not in others. I go back to the famous distinction between a white man referring to a black man as a "n*gger" and a black man referring a black man as a "n*gger". You think it would be acceptable for the white man to turn around and feign ignorance to the black man claiming, "But how can you get all worked up about this when a n*gger is exactly what you are?" You grew up in a region dogged by violent political conflict where verbal nuance was a public necessity in order to ensure various identities and sensitivities were respected, for God’s sake! It is important that unionists relinquish any last vestiges of that infamous culture of denial y'know. ;)
Now, it would help if you acknowledged what you've been doing.
Subtle. Only some of them then, aye? :rofl:Quote:
Nor do I consider all supporters of the Provisional Movement to be "*******s".
That's obvious. However, there is absolutely no difference between the two cases when it comes to the notion of "dream-snatching".Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
Think of cries of dream-snatching as emotive masks to conceal self-interest when it suits.Quote:
Originally Posted by Predator
I've been coming to that conclusion all right. Just like the fairness argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
If your entire argument is only that they are both 'dream-snatching', without any interest whatsoever in any context which might make one seem acceptable and the other acceptable, then you are right, but only in the sense and to the extent that every footballer in the world who has earned an international cap, is 'dream-stealing.'Quote:
Originally Posted by Predator
Indeed, which is why it is redundant to complain about dream denial, as Not Brazil has done.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
You choose not to differentiate between a player taking another player's place in a squad because he wants to play senior football for that country, and a player taking another player's place in a squad despite not wanting to play senior football for that country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Predator
I think your decision not to differentiate is nonsense in the extreme.
Who actually does that though?Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan