Player eligibility row

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by janeymac

I would regard the two Korean as the same people superficially divided into two states. I was hoping you would explore other similarly divided people like the division of India & Pakistan (into Hindu & Muslim states) or Cyprus (Turkish / Greek).



The choice is just an accommodation really. The India division was based on religion and generally has worked within each country (not between them) and of course there are still land disputes over Kashmir. While a lot of people say now what religion you are isn't important - there are huge cultural differences between catholics & protestants which rub off on us and make us different.


I wonder when India was being partitioned that seeing how it wasn't working in NI, they just created two muslim states and moved people there. Very painful at the time, but it has worked.

---

Despite having been to Cyprus found there was little evidence or mention of the division,which is also religiously (Orthodox cf. Islam) as well as nationality-based.
Though others probably know far better and to the legitimacy of any Turkish claim, other than just its proximity.

As for India and its 'sub-continent', that's an extremely complex case. Suffice to say that India itself is an amalgamation of 28 smaller countries, now based around an official federation.
The creation of Bangladesh and Pakistan, as you say aren't exactly foolproof as there's still at least a mere 100 million + Muslims in India.
Certainly with Pakistan, it was based on areas where Muslims had a majority but still divided whole states like Gujarat which doesn't sit comfortably personally.
Also would like to see an independent Kashmir, but even assuming India & Pakistan would let this happen, how would any small country feel being a buffer between two nuclear armed nations.

Much of the current situation though was due to past colonization (& then the usual ruthless 'divide-and-rule' policy based on things like religion, of the hapless locals) by the usual suspects.
So at least countries like India and Ireland have a shared experience in this respect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danny Invincible

A nation is not necessarily synonymous with a state or political unit

---

Yes. I didn't claim it was. For example in Ireland, a large minority on the Northern side of the political unit border identify quite reasonably with the mainly Southern-based nation. That doesn't contradict that the border is real, nor that many people see themselves as part of an Irish nation different from your Irish nation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janey Mac

I would regard the two Korean as the same people superficially divided into two states

---

In 1953, maybe. Not now. I expect the Kim Jong Il regime to collapse in the next few years, but integrating all Koreans into one country after that is likely to be unbeleivably difficult. Imagine the reunification of Germany magnified 10 or 100 times.

Quote:

---

I was hoping you would explore other similarly divided people like the division of India & Pakistan (into Hindu & Muslim states) or Cyprus (Turkish / Greek)

---

India/ Pakistan is too large scale to summarise quickly. I spent a lot of time in Cyprus in the early 80s (my parents were working there); there was a difficult choice, particularly for the Turks. Many wanted general economic prosperity that might have followed from reuniting the country- but more feared losing land, property etc. to previous Greek owners. So the majority of Turks settled for the theoretically independent Kibris (in practice an autonomous region of mainland Turkey). They just didn't want to be part of an etnhic-Greek dominated Cyprus nation.

Quote:

---

there are huge cultural differences between catholics & protestants which rub off on us and make us different

---

Indeed. There are broadly similar (although hugely larger in scale) differences between different branches/ sects/ tribal allegiances of Islam within Pakistan, for example. Many people in that country would disagree with you that the 1940s settlement has generally worked well.

Quote:

---

With regard to Austria & German speaking the same language and yet are separate countries

---

I was merely answering Fly's point that NI has no indigenous unique language (with the implication that it is somehow lesser in status than Wales, Scotland etc). A moment's thought would show other examples in nearby Europe which basically contradict this idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardee Bhoy

Except that the name of one of those countries makes no reference to the North (or Ireland!)

---

Er, it's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It couldn't refer more explicitly if it tried.

Quote:

---

Swiss-German is a pretty different language from mainstream Deutsch

---

It's a dialect (of group of related dialects), quite distinct when spoken but usually mutually and easily understandable when written (eg in newspapers).

Quote:

---

the Belgians speak Flemish as a distinct national language which again is different from Dutch

---

They don't, Flemish and Dutch are mutually understood by all speakers of either. They differ as the English spoken in Donegal or Derry may differ from that in Kent or Jersey, but neither is really a dialect.

Quote:

---

unless all the residents of the Western Isles die off

---

If the population of the Western Isles sees its migrating young people failing to pass on the language to their own children- to a greater extent than those youngsters are replaced by incoming migrants- then it's quite likely the language will fade away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

For example in Ireland, a large minority on the Northern side of the political unit border identify quite reasonably with the mainly Southern-based nation.

---

You're failing to grasp the concept of nation. A nation isn't define by political borders, geographical locations or places of birth. Hence there's no "mainly Southern-based (Irish) nation".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ifk101

You're failing to grasp the concept of nation. A nation isn't define by political borders, geographical locations or places of birth. Hence there's no "mainly Southern-based (Irish) nation"

---

I've grasped it perfectly well, thanks. I just disagree with your exclusive definition and offer a more inclusive one.

Pomposity Alert! Which must be part of the, er, 'peace dividend' ??
:eek:

Still spot on by DI & ifk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

For example in Ireland, a large minority on the Northern side of the political unit border identify quite reasonably with the mainly Southern-based nation. That doesn't contradict that the border is real, nor that many people see themselves as part of an Irish nation different from your Irish nation.

---

Except as has been referred to above (and has been a consistent viewpoint), a majority of people in the 'other' "Irish nation", don't see themselves as, er, Irish!

Quote:

---

Er, it's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It couldn't refer more explicitly if it tried.

---

Except all Brit.govts just use the name 'United Kingdom' in most official documentation and bodies, so they couldn't hide it more explicitly if they tried.
Lol.

Quote:

---

It's a dialect (of group of related dialects), quite distinct when spoken but usually mutually and easily understandable when written (eg in newspapers).
Flemish and Dutch are mutually understood by all speakers of either. They differ as the English spoken in Donegal or Derry may differ from that in Kent or Jersey, but neither is really a dialect.

---

So now you know better than native Swiss (& Germans) or Flemish?? Well fancy that!!

Quote:

---

If the population of the Western Isles sees its migrating young people failing to pass on the language to their own children- to a greater extent than those youngsters are replaced by incoming migrants- then it's quite likely the language will fade away.

---

In 200 years maybe?
Anyway, perhaps you should move there, to boost the population and, er, get in touch with your roots!
;)

Without ignoring the other posts, I would highlight a theme that has been repeated. Its impossible to be 100% irish and 100% British.
That simply makes no sense. In that case I'm 200% irish!

As regards this two Irish nations, to which I disagree, then I would argue that the lads who are "defecting" identify with the same Irish nation as their new team-mates.
As regards this secondary Irish nation, Northern Ireland, it does not portray any of the trappings of an irish nation if you were to bounce down to Windsor Park. It must be concluded that it is a British nation, located in Ireland. The reasons why it is here are well-noted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman

Without ignoring the other posts, I would highlight a theme that has been repeated. Its impossible to be 100% Irish and 100% British.
That simply makes no sense. In that case I'm 200% Irish!

---

Well repeated by only one person, probably.
But the principle stands;the education system in certain parts of the world needs to address the mathematical(?) issue that assuming an entity is 100% in total, it can therefore not be more!
Lol.

Still as ever, you will notice the lack of acknowledgement of the point when it was raised above.....
So no change there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman

Its impossible to be 100% irish and 100% British

---

It's perfectly possible. Neither contradicts nor compromises the other. As Charlie Darwin put it, nationality isn't a zero sum game.

Quote:

---

In that case I'm 200% irish!

---

Live and let live, baby. Be what you wanna do, etc. Of course in the real World, you can't be more Irish than I am, as we're both 100% Irish.

Quote:

---

As regards this secondary Irish nation, Northern Ireland, it does not portray any of the trappings of an irish nation if you were to bounce down to Windsor Park. It must be concluded that it is a British nation, located in Ireland. The reasons why it is here are well-noted

---

Given that it's

a) obviously in Ireland
b) the HQ of an Irish international football side

its Irishness is obvious, however much you dislike the trappings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

It's perfectly possible. Neither contradicts nor compromises the other. As Charlie Darwin put it, nationality isn't a zero sum game.
Of course in the real World, you can't be more Irish than I am, as we're both 100% Irish*.

---

Fantasy bubble alert!
Yes if you say so, of course you are '200%', though I suppose being 'two' entities couldn't really add up to zero.
;)

*But if the reality was to acknowledge you are no longer British, that would be a start. Would that be it was ever universal!

Quote:

---

Given that it's

a) obviously in Ireland
b) the HQ of an Irish international football side

its Irishness is obvious, however much you dislike the trappings.

---

Not withstanding certain flags of other countries (& don't mean the North
or anything Irish) in the proximity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

It's perfectly possible. Neither contradicts nor compromises the other. As Charlie Darwin put it, nationality isn't a zero sum game.

---

No its not a zero sum game, its a 100% sum game. 100%=whole, one complete unit. Really basic stuff. Did you pass the 11+?

Would you consider a transsexual to be 100% man and 100 woman?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

Live and let live, baby. Be what you wanna do, etc. Of course in the real World, you can't be more Irish than I am, as we're both 100% Irish.

---

We're both Irish, the rest of your sentence is of no importance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

Given that it's
a) obviously in Ireland
b) the HQ of an Irish international football side

its Irishness is obvious, however much you dislike the trappings.

---

a) There is nothing obviously in Ireland about the Village
b) Its the headquarters of a BRITISH international side (one of 4, the UK gets 3 more than most other European countries). They CHOOSE to play the anthem of the UK, they are a BRITISH side. The could play NI specific anthem, and then you may have some leeway, but they don't.

They CHOOSE to be BRITISH :confused:

Doh :frown:

To be fair Dtm, in this case yer banging yer head against the proverbial brick wall, or is it 'walls' ?
:)

Far be it from me to question someone's identity after spending the last fortnight rejoicing at Iniesta's goal, but I just don't get this 100% Irish from you GR. I mean your Irishness is clearly subservient to your Britishness, something, unless you've changed, is your nationality. It's Irish purely on a regional level - see Serbian in Bosnia and Croatia - whereas for the rest of us - even my 100% Irish and 100% Spanish (sic.) - this is not down to regionality but nationality.

I don't know what you're getting at here. Normally Unionists from the North are always banging on about how loyal, British, love the German Lady and her brood etc, that the rest of their nation is bored rigid from it. I suspect this is more a case of what you call up north 'f*ckaboutery', trying to legitimise the NI team amongst Nationalists with claims of [an albeit alternative] Irishness, when as dantheman points out, everything it points to it being British.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

Far be it from me to question someone's identity after spending the last fortnight rejoicing at Iniesta's goal, but I just don't get this 100% Irish from you GR. I mean your Irishness is clearly subservient to your Britishness, something, unless you've changed, is your nationality. It's Irish purely on a regional level - see Serbian in Bosnia and Croatia - whereas for the rest of us - even my 100% Irish and 100% Spanish (sic.) - this is not down to regionality but nationality.

I don't know what you're getting at here. Normally Unionists from the North are always banging on about how loyal, British, love the German Lady and her brood etc, that the rest of their nation is bored rigid from it. I suspect this is more a case of what you call up north 'f*ckaboutery', trying to legitimise the NI team amongst Nationalists with claims of [an albeit alternative] Irishness, when as dantheman points out, everything it points to it being British.

---

Guy beside at Germany v Serbia in full Serbia gear was telling me he was from Sarajevo. Another person nearby started with "Isn't that in ..." and I thought it best to stick to
discussing football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan the Man

No its not a zero sum game, its a 100% sum game. 100%=whole, one complete unit. Really basic stuff. Did you pass the 11+?

---

Er, no. I've explained repeatedly why it's perfectly possible to be 100% Irish and 100% British. If you don't like that, fine, if you refuse to acknowledge it, all that reveals is your narrow-mindedness. I failed the 11 plus, actually, mainly due to illness- I was only able to sit one of the two papers. But don't worry, I managed to pass O and A Level maths comfortably enough before leaving school. Incidentally, do you think everyone who failed the 11-plus is innumerate, ridicule them in public and so on? I'd be wary sitting next to you at the next primary school reunion.

Quote:

---

Would you consider a transsexual to be 100% man and 100 woman?

---

I've never actually thought about it. There isn't necessarily an exact parallel between shared nationality and shared sexuality, is there?

Quote:

---

We're both Irish, the rest of your sentence is of no importance

---

It's important- do you mean relevant?- only in that it answers previous points by you and others.

Quote:

---

a) There is nothing obviously in Ireland about the Village

---

Are you on drugs? It's been obviously in Ireland since it was first built in the 19th. Its site has been in Ireland since we broke away from the Eurasian landmass and Gondwanaland.

Unless, of course, you mean 'it isn't obviously in the Republic of Ireland or bedecked in tricolors'. Well, quite.

BTW, is there any need for that boldface block capitals thing? I mean, with your obvious interest in primary educational standards, you must realise it looks a bit remedial?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lopez

I just don't get this 100% Irish from you GR. I mean your Irishness is clearly subservient to your Britishness, something, unless you've changed, is your nationality

---

Hola, senor. I'm 100% Irish because it suits me, as it always has. Rest assured, it isn't subservient- as oft-repeated up-thread. I haven't changed any nationality, I'm quite content there.

Quote:

---

It's Irish purely on a regional level - see Serbian in Bosnia and Croatia

---

Hardly an exact parallel, is it? Bosnia and Croatia aren't in Serbia, Northern Ireland is obviously in Ireland. But to repeat, I'm not being exclusive here- I've no problem with anyone from outside Ireland being Irish too.

Obviously NI isn't a sovereign country, it's part of the bigger British state. So if you want to distinguish between national Irish and 'regional' Irish, no offence taken. Or even- as the other NI-supporting regulars on here have pointed out, if you distinguish between 'lifelong Irish with centuries of purely Irish ancestry' on the one hand, and people who aren't actually from Ireland/ have barely or never lived in it, on the other. It all starts to get unnecessary complex, and potentially upsetting. Much easier just to accept that everyone from Ireland (defined as broadly as you like) is equally Irish, surely? What's not to like?

Quote:

---

I don't know what you're getting at here

---

Er, that I'm 100% Irish, just as you are if you want to be. I mean, that's all I'm saying in most posts on this thread, given that, as I've made clear, I have no problems with Darron Gibson, Marc Wilson, Shane Duffy and co. playing for the Republic.

Quote:

---

Normally Unionists from the North are always banging on about how loyal, British, love the German Lady and her brood etc, that the rest of their nation is bored rigid from it

---

Come on, this is an exaggerated stereotype. Hardly anyone goes on like that except in vox-pops to camera on the 12th, and similar. But even if they did, I don't. Mrs Windsor has one German great-grandparent, by the way. You're likely to be as Portuguese as she is a Kraut.

Quote:

---

I suspect this is more a case of...trying to legitimise the NI team amongst Nationalists with claims of [an albeit alternative] Irishness

---

No, not at all. I don't feel I need to legitimise it, it's perfectly legitimate to me. If someone like Dan the Man was a player, I'd tell him to go and play for the South if he didn't accept that legitimacy. As I've said repeatedly up-thread, bye bye.

Ha ha, what a load of old BS.

Hypocrisy or Irony ( not to mention the usual Amnesia!) ??
You decide!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

Hola, senor. I'm 100% Irish because it suits me, as it always has. Rest assured, it isn't subservient- as oft-repeated up-thread. I haven't changed any nationality, I'm quite content there.

---

You can feel part of Gary Byrd's Chocolate Crew from Alkebu for all I care. But even you can distinguish the difference between nationality and any other form of identity you want. Of course you can feel both but I don't think you see both in the same light.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

Hardly an exact parallel, is it? Bosnia and Croatia aren't in Serbia, Northern Ireland is obviously in Ireland. But to repeat, I'm not being exclusive here- I've no problem with anyone from outside Ireland being Irish too.

---

OK. Maybe one of those local born fans waving Spanish flags in Barcelona and Bilbao singing 'Yo soy Espanol, Espanol, Espanol'. If my own Spanish family experience is anything to go by, you can hold your own regionality (nationality for some) within the state, even to a total hostility to other members of that state and still consider yourself a national of that state above all else. You can be 100% Basque or 100% Catalan and still be 100% Spanish, but your nationality being Spanish above the other two relegates your Catalanism or Basqueness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

Obviously NI isn't a sovereign country, it's part of the bigger British state. So if you want to distinguish between national Irish and 'regional' Irish, no offence taken. Or even- as the other NI-supporting regulars on here have pointed out, if you distinguish between 'lifelong Irish with centuries of purely Irish ancestry' on the one hand, and people who aren't actually from Ireland/ have barely or never lived in it, on the other.

---

You don't need to concern yourself with those idiots. Who do I listen to assess whether I'm Irish? Irish acts of parliament - 'Under the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Acts, 1956 to 2004, a person who was born outside Ireland is automatically an Irish citizen by descent if one of that person's parents was an Irish citizen who was born in Ireland.' :p (source Department of Foreign Affairs) - or some bar stool tool? The fact that I have only an Irish passport and no other suggests that I have no other allegiance to another country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

It all starts to get unnecessary complex, and potentially upsetting. Much easier just to accept that everyone from Ireland (defined as broadly as you like) is equally Irish, surely? What's not to like?

---

Well if we did then we get to imposing our Identity on you etc. It's surely up to the individual to make his decision about what he or she is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

Er, that I'm 100% Irish, just as you are if you want to be. I mean, that's all I'm saying in most posts on this thread, given that, as I've made clear, I have no problems with Darron Gibson, Marc Wilson, Shane Duffy and co. playing for the Republic.

---

We know YOU don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

Come on, this is an exaggerated stereotype. Hardly anyone goes on like that except in vox-pops to camera on the 12th, and similar. But even if they did, I don't. Mrs Windsor has one German great-grandparent, by the way. You're likely to be as Portuguese as she is a Kraut.

---

No Portuguese in me, mate. I think the last time I saw this was on a programme about the monarchy on ITV upto 10 years ago, but I still feel from the overt and popular declarations of loyalty to Britain and it's first family suggest it's far from rare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

No, not at all. I don't feel I need to legitimise it, it's perfectly legitimate to me. If someone like Dan the Man was a player, I'd tell him to go and play for the South if he didn't accept that legitimacy. As I've said repeatedly up-thread, bye bye.

---

Again that's what I want too. The individual player to choose who to play for their country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gspain

Guy beside at Germany v Serbia in full Serbia gear was telling me he was from Sarajevo. Another person nearby started with "Isn't that in ..." and I thought it best to stick to
discussing football.

---

Or from Melbourne? Good call on sticking to football. Got a similar sort of observation after the game in Aarhus a couple of years ago by some Danish woman asking why there were 'Belfast' flags when that is in Northern Ireland. And this is a country with the highest number of degrees per population in Europe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dantheman

Without ignoring the other posts, I would highlight a theme that has been repeated. Its impossible to be 100% irish and 100% British.
That simply makes no sense. In that case I'm 200% irish!

---

Well for once I am with GR on this one. I have a lot of friends in NI in both traditions and I think that a lot of Unionists do regard themselves as 100% Irish and 100% British and this is not necessarily a contradiction. In the same way many Welsh, Scottish and English "unionists" would be able to square the same circle. From a nationalist perspective there is a tendency to define Irishness as something incompatible with Britishness but for a Unionist this is simply not the case. They can reconcile Irishness and Britishness in exactly the same way that a Dubliner can be 100% a Dub and 100% Irish. One identity contains and transcends the other. If there were ever to be a United Ireland it would require Irish nationalists to radically extend their definition of Irish to contain / embrace the Britishness which is unquestionably a significant part of the heritage and culture of this island.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Despite having been to Cyprus found there was little evidence or mention of the division,which is also religiously (Orthodox cf. Islam) as well as nationality-based.
Though others probably know far better and to the legitimacy of any Turkish claim, other than just its proximity.

---

Still, they are differentiated as Greek/Turkish Cypriots and I would expect that being culturally Islamic/Christian has a lot to do with why they chose sides in the first place.

Quote:

---

As for India and its 'sub-continent', that's an extremely complex case. Suffice to say that India itself is an amalgamation of 28 smaller countries, now based around an official federation.
The creation of Bangladesh and Pakistan, as you say aren't exactly foolproof as there's still at least a mere 100 million + Muslims in India.
Certainly with Pakistan, it was based on areas where Muslims had a majority but still divided whole states like Gujarat which doesn't sit comfortably personally.
Also would like to see an independent Kashmir, but even assuming India & Pakistan would let this happen, how would any small country feel being a buffer between two nuclear armed nations.

---

100m is still only 10% of the population of India and the caste system is probably more of a problem than anything else (muslim being one grouping at the bottom of the pile). I expect India would have found it very difficult to function if it had the 330m (approx) muslims who now live in Pakistan & Bangledesh.

Mainland China has about 48 different nationalities - but 92% of the population are from the Han ethnic group. Thats probably why China is held together - one large majority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

In 1953, maybe. Not now. I expect the Kim Jong Il regime to collapse in the next few years, but integrating all Koreans into one country after that is likely to be unbeleivably difficult. Imagine the reunification of Germany magnified 10 or 100 times.

---

I think the unification of Germany went pretty well over all, considering. I would also think the Nth Koreans are very 'biddable' and if the Sth Koreans want them, I don't see that it will be a huge problem.

Quote:

---

India/ Pakistan is too large scale to summarise quickly. I spent a lot of time in Cyprus in the early 80s (my parents were working there); there was a difficult choice, particularly for the Turks. Many wanted general economic prosperity that might have followed from reuniting the country- but more feared losing land, property etc. to previous Greek owners. So the majority of Turks settled for the theoretically independent Kibris (in practice an autonomous region of mainland Turkey). They just didn't want to be part of an etnhic-Greek dominated Cyprus nation.

---

Surely there were assurances made that they wouldn't lose their property? Seems to be more like a cultural clash of muslim v christian, despite the obvious prosperity a united island within the EU would have given them (back then anyway!).

Quote:

---

Indeed. There are broadly similar (although hugely larger in scale) differences between different branches/ sects/ tribal allegiances of Islam within Pakistan, for example. Many people in that country would disagree with you that the 1940s settlement has generally worked well.

---

It has worked out better for India without having to deal with approx. 400m muslim in their state.

Quote:

---

I was merely answering Fly's point that NI has no indigenous unique language (with the implication that it is somehow lesser in status than Wales, Scotland etc). A moment's thought would show other examples in nearby Europe which basically contradict this idea.

---

Wales & Scotland were traditionally countries (Principality & Kingdom) NI was part of the Kingdom of Ireland. Their populations are largely protestant as well (i.e., something to be rated on the same level as having a common language).