Adam Barton

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

16/03/2011, 1:17 PM
Gather round

Quote:

Originally Posted by liamoo11

Gorman is hardly a "boy Wonder". He is a sub on Wolves reserves a team that three current under 19 Irish internationals Doherty, Mccarey and Forde play for regularly. He left united because Brady amongst many others was miles ahead of him

True, I was being facetious. I live near Wolverhampton and many of their fans locally have never actually heard of him. He should be in our U-19 squad, like his mates in yours.

That said, he's played in an Irish international side that's won an away qualifier against higher-ranked opposition.
16/03/2011, 2:32 PM
TrapAPony

Looks like we have found ourselves a drummer to back up Andy Reid on the guitar.

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk...k_n_goal_star/
16/03/2011, 2:40 PM
Stuttgart88

Talk about living the dream: pro footy player by day, rock star by night.
16/03/2011, 3:54 PM
tetsujin1979

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gather round

That said, he's played in an Irish international side that's won an away qualifier against higher-ranked opposition.

that's a little easier when there's more teams ranked ahead of you
16/03/2011, 4:02 PM
Gather round

Quote:

Originally Posted by tetsujin1979

that's a little easier when there's more teams ranked ahead of you

True, but only a little, given that we are only three places behind you in the UEFA rankings (#25 to #22).

In five minutes of competitive international football Gorman has managed something no RoI player has managed since 1994. Wolves third-teamer or not ;)
16/03/2011, 4:25 PM
EalingGreen

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

ALl he [Barton] needs to do to qualify is inform FIFA of a change of nationality and also apply for an Irish passport and apply to the FAI.

If Barton is "changing his nationality" (and has to apply for an Irish pp), that suggests he was not already an Irish National.
And assuming he was not automatically an Irish National from birth (i.e. he is 2nd generation), then he must be "acquiring a new nationality". In which case, in order to be eligible to represent the FAI, he must satisfy the provisions of FIFA's Article 17.
Which means he/a parent/a grandparent must have been born in the "territory of the relevant Association".
Therefore unless someone can produce another (ROI-born) grandparent, or can plausibly argue that NI consitutes the "territory of the FAI", then I fail to see how he qualifies.

Or let me put it another way. I am saying why I think he is not eligible. Would anyone like to put forward a case - with links, sources, Articles etc - arguing how he is eligible?
16/03/2011, 4:27 PM
EalingGreen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Predator

Quite surprised by this, but I guess that it is evidence that certain posters were wrong about the eligibility issue once more.

Care to elaborate on who you mean by "certain posters"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Predator

Unless, of course, the FAI are in no position to call him up and this is a big mistake or joke.

Quite.
16/03/2011, 4:35 PM
EalingGreen

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Perhaps he was worried about being kept out of their team by all the North's British (mainland)-born players?

Considering the %age of non-locally born players in our latest senior squad is just over 20%, whereas the equivalent figure for both the ROI Senior and U-21 squads is almost 50%, I doubt it, somehow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Anyway, If he ever plays for us in a competitive game that permanently ties him down worry about it then.

If he ever plays for your senior team in a competitive game, then his own particular feelings may be the least of your worries:
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/f...rs-742993.html
16/03/2011, 4:38 PM
geysir

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gather round

Miaow! If that includes me personally, some evidence please. Blowing off steam don't count.

You are habituated in the practice of slicing up replies into small quotes, removing the context and making comments on that.
The context for my comment was in reference to players who have once played for the IFA and who then choose to declare for the FAI. In all these cases, we can takes the opinions of the OWC with a large dose of salt,
as they are generally exercises in prejudice, cynicism and denigration.
The IFA claim that Barton decided to wait on his English chances, is simply laughable.
16/03/2011, 4:40 PM
EalingGreen

Quote:

Originally Posted by CraftyToePoke

As far as I understand it, and I am open to correction here but he is now tied to us having changed associaton once.

That would appear correct, since under the most recent amendment to the regulations etc, a player may only switch Associations once.
Which in Barton's case would prevent him from ever representing England.
Considering he has previously publicly stated that he would not commit himself to NI if it meant ruling out any possibility of representing England, I wonder has anyone made this clear to the player?
16/03/2011, 4:42 PM
EalingGreen

Quote:

Originally Posted by liamoo11

Maybe Paul Doolin could give Gorman at wolves who previously walked in the light at under 16s for us when he payed at Man Utd a chance to come back to the under 19s brotherhood now that he has a few full international caps for the north!!

He can't (a ) because he is already tied to NI, and (b ) because a player may only switch once.
Apart from that, nice try...
16/03/2011, 4:48 PM
EalingGreen

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Well know it's a concept the North doesn't like to contemplate, but my context related to the future, as in plenty of their reserves and U-21's of their own being born on the Brit mainland. And why shouldn't they be....
Just mind the hypocrisy!

Your under-age teams contain more non-native born players than ours, so your future would appear to be more "plastic" than ours...

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

As for the U-21 rankings, given our joint woeful standings, maybe we should have a combined team in future??;)

Considering our refusal of the invitation to pool our resources in an all-UK U-21 team (for the London Olympics), why on earth should we do so with your lot?
16/03/2011, 4:57 PM
paul_oshea

is the olympics not u23? given that mark bright had andy carroll in there who is 22 i assume it is u23 - always thought you were allowed 2 over 23 players as well.
16/03/2011, 4:58 PM
geysir

Quote:

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Or let me put it another way. I am saying why I think he is not eligible. Would anyone like to put forward a case - with links, sources, Articles etc - arguing how he is eligible?

The fact that FIFA say he is eligible probably goes over your head. Like the IFA, you think you are right and FIFA don't even know their own rules. Quite a bizarre argument which makes sense to only the most irrational of people.
I have explained in detail why a player like Barton is eligible for the FAI, in the eligibility thread.
As you have consistently got every aspect of the rules of FIFA eligibility wrong, I wont hold my breath on your desire or capability to understand the rules.
16/03/2011, 5:00 PM
EalingGreen

Quote:

Originally Posted by geysir

Unlike ye lot, I keep an open mind and being a wise man I do not take the IFA's word as gospel.
There is nothing in that article directly quoting Barton.
The article is maybe a fair representation of how the IFA see it but it is not a representation of Barton's own opinions.
Who knows why he turned up to join the IFA squad, maybe Worthington invited him to the IFA set up and Barton being a polite lad accepted, but always knowing that he did not have to do that for rest of time, i.e. what exists in his international career.
I wouldn't condemn a teenager for life, for making a mistake. I'd be of a similar opinion to Yard of Pace on this matter.

Not Brazil has provided a link to an article containing direct quotations from the player himself. The article clearly states that he was considering NI, but was unsure, since he was still hoping for a future England career.
NI/IFA have been in close contact with the player for nearly two years, primarily through Steve Beaglehole. They were prepared to "keep the door open" whilst he decided between NI and England; I cannot believe they would have done so had he asked for such consideration whilst he decided between NI, England and ROI.

All the evidence suggests that this is just another example of a player being a d i c k - something with which eg followers of the career of a certain Stephen Ireland should be familiar.

The fact that you choose to ignore the evidence and prefer instead to accuse NW of lying etc, says more about you than it does of him.

And then you have the brass neck to bleat about being "open-minded"...:rolleyes:
16/03/2011, 5:04 PM
Gather round

Quote:

Originally Posted by geysir

You are habituated in the practice of slicing up replies into small quotes removing the context and making comments on that

Aye, I reply point by point, and as far as possible briefly to what others say. Why throw in unncessary flowery language? It doesn't impress people, just makes you look arrogant and pompous.

Quote:

The context for my comment was in reference to players who have once played for the IFA and who then choose to declare for the FAI. In all these cases, we can takes the opinions of the OWC with a large dose of salt, as they are generally exercises in prejudice, cynicism and denigration

No reply to my direct question then? Fine, I'll assume from the above that you think any comment from any NI-supporting poster on this broad issue is inherently worthless. Even where I or others might agree with you. This isn't merely narrow-minded (contrary to your claim above), it's infantile.

Quote:

The IFA claim that Barton decided to wait on his English chances, is simply laughable

I outlined various possibilities above, all are plausible. Nigel Worthington, however mad he is, has actually spoken to Adam Barton. I'd trust his account of their conversation slightly more than your habituated flights of fancy.
16/03/2011, 5:09 PM
Gather round

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

is the olympics not u23? given that mark bright had andy carroll in there who is 22 i assume it is u23 - always thought you were allowed 2 over 23 players as well.

Yes, it's U-23. Although the rules on U-21 age eligibility means you can play until you're well over 23, as james Milner did for England. Basically you have to be u-21 in the calendar year when the tournament starts, not finishes.
16/03/2011, 5:44 PM
EalingGreen

Quote:

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Whilst the territory does not equate to the administrative jurisdiction of the FAI under the most literal of interpretations, it is clear that the latter is indeed the case; shock, horror!

When a poster has to resort to convoluted constructions like that to back up his case, it is a sure sign that he is on dodgy ground.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Evidently so, FIFA deem the jurisdiction of the IFA to be the territory of the FAI for the purposes of their rules on player nationality; it is a territory from which automatic and permanent Irish nationality is granted, after all.

International eligibility and territorial jurisdiction are two separate issues.

Otherwise, since the FAI is entitled to select as-of-right under Article 15 any player born anywhere in the world to an Irish-born parent, your "logic" would mean that anywhere in the world also constitute the "territory" of the FAI...

Or, to put it another way, if NI is FAI "territory" why does a player (professional or amateur) transferring from an ROI club to an NI club (or vv) have to secure international clearance? Why are Derry City required to be Members of the IFA? Why do clubs/players/Leagues etc who are eg aggrieved at a decision by an IFA Disciplinary panel not merely appeal to the FAI etc? Indeed, why does anyone submit to the authority of the IFA in NI, if it does not have full jurisdiction over its own territory?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Didn't geysir explain all this to you here, even mentioning how Howard Wells was on record saying he'd requested clarification from FIFA's legal department on how Alex Bruce is eligible to play for us through merely having a northern-born grandparent?

Geysir did NOT "explain it" to me.

Rather, he concocted a flimsy case which depended on two points, Alex Bruce and an alleged Howard Wells statement.
However, he has never specified under what Article etc Bruce was deemed eligible, or even that he was actually even deemed to be so (i.e. an Association may select anyone it likes, without having to justify it, if no-one else formally challenges the selection). Further, the international eligibility criteria, and their operation, have changed several times since Bruce first played for ROI.

As for Wells, Geysir likes to refer to an (alleged) statement by Wells, yet he has not, to my knowledge at least, ever provided a link. And considering he has consistently denigrated the reliability, credibility and veracity of Wells on just about every other issue, it's a bit rich for him to be making him his "Star witness for the prosecution" now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Maybe of more use to you would be the question of whether or not Barton held Irish nationality at the time of representing Northern Ireland, seeing as Irish nationality acquired through an Irish grandparent is not automatic from birth, nor does it take retroactive effect once granted.

Why on earth should the IFA be interested in ascertaining whether Barton held/was entitled to Irish Nationality at the time he played for us against Morocco?
Having been born and bred in England, Barton is automatically a UK national.
And UK Nationality falls under FIFA Article 16 - "Nationality entitling players to represent more than one Association".
In the UK's case, these Associations are the FA, SFA, FAW and IFA and by mutual agreement, these four Associations specifically requested that additional qualifications (birth/ancestral/residential) be required to prevent a "free-for-all".
Barton satisfied these by virtue of his NI-born Grandfather, so neither the FA nor FIFA can have had any objection to his representing us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Truth be told, I'd actually be interested in knowing that myself. If the IFA were on the ball here, and I know chances of that may be rather slim, there could be a lovely Summer holiday to Lausanne in the pipeline for another lucky underling out of this. Just so long as this one remembers to bring the wording of the correct statute with him! (That would be article 18.1 (a), of course.)

I do not understand what point it is you're trying to make here.
16/03/2011, 5:53 PM
EalingGreen

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

So was the England thing a Facade.

Who knows?
If his past, public pronouncements/actions are anything to go by, his capacity for logical thinking lies somewhere between that of Stephen Ireland and the average two year old.
And when I say "average two year old", I mean average two year old goldfish...

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul_oshea

Or is Ireland the next logical stepping stone to ENgland....;D

If that is his thinking, then he's got a nasty shock coming to him, since if he were somehow to switch his Nationality to the ROI, the fact of his having already registered as Northern Irish would preclude him from making a second switch to England.
16/03/2011, 5:53 PM
Predator

Quote:

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Care to elaborate on who you mean by "certain posters"?

You know, certain posters. Plenty of people have been confused by the eligibility statutes and misled by equally confusing reportage of the 'Eligibility Row'.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page