I think Nolan will be in the next england squad. Eriksson is so weak he lets the media pick his squads anyway. World Cup squads are about versatility more than quality.
Printable View
I think Nolan will be in the next england squad. Eriksson is so weak he lets the media pick his squads anyway. World Cup squads are about versatility more than quality.
I would love to see Nolan to be able to play for Ireland. Staunton brings him on as a sub for 5 minutes and then never to be picked again.
Hehe now that would be funny!
Talk about going about things arseways. I presume there's some cost involved in this silly "appeal" (especially if the FAI win it). And even after going out of their way to break the rules/cheat, Nolan still has the option of telling Staunton/FAI to get stuffed.:eek:Quote:
The Irish manager is appealing to FIFA about the eligibility of Bolton Wanderers captain Nolan to wear the green jersey.
If FIFA uphold the appeal, the final decision would rest with Nolan, who is eligible for Ireland through the grandparents' rule.
At the very least we shouldn't even waste the price of a phone call or a stamp on this nonsense until Nolan makes his mind up.:rolleyes:
I think Stan is going about this the right way. If getting Nolan to play for us proves to be the difference between qualifying for a major tournament or not then nobody will really care how he came about playing. One thing is for sure is that if results dont go Stans way, he will be cast aside just as cheaply as Kerr was and nobody would say well at least he didnt pursue that Englishman that time.
The main reason I wouldnt have a problem with Nolan is that some people dont feel as strongly about their nationality as others. I am 100% Irish and it means a lot to me to say that, but I understand that some people are not that concerned with the town, county or country they are from. Maybe his influential manager was the key to him rejecting Irelands approaches before or maybe it is because he considers himself and English and always will. Either way, we can never know his real motives for sure, the only thing we can do is judge his performances, if and when he ever actually plays for Ireland. If he ends up playing for England, then good luck to him I say.
Personally I don't think a players nationality should be fixed untill
he has played for a country at senior level. What they did at U21 and particularly U18 (when you are not technically an adult) shouldn't count.
Also what wrong with having duel nationality? You could even play
the first half for one country and the second half for the opposition :D,
or represent two different countries in the same competition, what wrong with
that? If you are eligible to play for two nations then why should you
be forced to choose just one?
Seems like FIFA are forcing you to be 100% one nationality when for many
people that is not the case.
You don't have to look very far, take Peter Charles the showjumper born in Liverpool of Irish Grandparents who represented English several times at international level, failed to be selected for the '92 Olympics and so switched his nationality to Ireland. He has always maintained he intended representing Ireland at some point but I don't know how true or honest this is. I think Charles was welcomed with open arms and made the Olympics at the expense of a native born Irishman...at least I don't recall any negative media coverage.
International football is already all about money, the ruling just reinforces the situation, players (and their parents) know which side their bread is butteredQuote:
Originally Posted by totalfootball
on well before the age of 21. The situation is made worse because made, other national sides are depleted of players who don't make the grade of the country with the deepest pockets.
It's a bit like Chelsea stripping other clubs of their best players only for them
to languish in the reserves, it helps Chelsea because whilst the player is not playing for Chelsea it ensures he is not playing against them.
It's a bad ruling in my opinion, it make the situation worse not better because
it weakens the strength of other countries and thus makes them even more less attractive to players with duel nationality.
So what? He was eligible to represent Ireland so what's the problem?Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
He made the Olympics because he was best of those eligible, what wrong with that?
Well it wasn't Charles that had the doped horse now was it?:mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
In fairness you can't compare the Tim Cahill situation to Nolan. Cahill was very young (14 or 15) at the time he played for Samoa, (where he just happened to be on holidays iirc). So it would have been a bit unjust to tie him to Samoa for the rest of his life.
As regards players being allowed to play for several countries, Di Stefano played for Argentina, Colombia and Spain. Puskas and couple of other Hungarians also played for Spain. And of course the great Jackie Carey once captain both Irelands (the IFA version and the FAI version) in the same week!!
I expected this reaction from Nolan, It happened before. There were strong calls from the media for Zac Knight to be included into the england squad and he missed out and knight said "i might have to consider my INTERNATIONAL future, apparently i can play for ireland so why not if i cant play for england"
Low and behold he was called up for about 3 international caps which i doubt he will ever add too. So Nolan will either end up winning 1 cap under Sven or end up playing for us. I just want him to say what he wants to do.....either play for us of them. I thought this was all sorted out when he said no thanks last year but guess not.
Not quite right. Cahill was living in London at the time and was approached by Samoa to play for them in an underage tournament. He only took it because his grandmother (who still lived in Samoa) was very ill at the time and by taking their offer he got a free trip to Samoa to see her. This all came out when he looked to change his international allegiance, and Samoa had no objectionsQuote:
Originally Posted by Volcán Masaya
I think the most important criteria is that he has an Irish sounding surname.
Good article by Vincent Hogan in the Independent on this today.
here here, if a dog is born in a stable it doesn't make it a horse!Quote:
I think the most important criteria is that he has an Irish sounding surname.
can you post the vincento hogan piece?
http://www.unison.ie/sportsdesk/stor...=12&si=1580178
Quote:
Ireland should tell Nolan where to go
Tuesday March 14th 2006
IT IS hard not to harbour a faint throb of misgiving as Kevin Nolan mulls over the sustained courtship of Steve Staunton.
Nolan, reputedly, has spoken to the Republic of Ireland manager more than once about the possibility of declaring for the land of his grandparents. It is a story that carries the whiff of unrequited passion.
Nolan, who played for England in an under-18 European Championship qualifier but could, according to some, follow Tim Cahill's successful challenge to FIFA eligibility rules, is prevaricating on the basis that a better offer might yet materialise from Sven Goran Eriksson.
To be fair, the boy from Toxteth doesn't feign any compelling emotional attachment to the Republic. Actually, playing for England would, unequivocally, be his preference.
Indifference
But, given Eriksson's apparent indifference to his bright form with Bolton, it seems highly unlikely any approach would be forthcoming to Nolan this side of the World Cup. So, does he wait to discover the identity of Eriksson's successor (Sam Allardyce would, clearly, suit him fine)?
Or does he declare himself 'Irish' in time for the May friendly against Chile in Dublin? All indications are that he'll bide his time and take a punt on Uncle Sam.
Now precedent, undeniably, supports Staunton in his efforts to recruit Nolan.
After all, neither John Aldridge nor Ray Houghton had ever even been to Dublin when Jack Charlton called them up for his first game in charge of the Republic, a friendly against Wales, in 1986. Indeed it is said that the greatest concern of both players back then was a fear of getting caught up in 'The Troubles'.
Aldridge was already 28 and admitted at the time that he had just become "tired of waiting to see if England will have a look at me."
It was the persuasion of an Oxford United team-mate, Dave Langan, that convinced the Liverpudlian to avail of the grand-parent rule (his grandmother was from Athlone) and declare for Ireland.
Now there are uncanny echoes of the past as Joey O'Brien, apparently, is working hard on Staunton's behalf in the Bolton dressing-room to persuade another Liverpudlian to turn his back on a gloriously indifferent, England.
Referring to O'Brien's efforts, Nolan has been quoted as saying "I told him it's something I have to think about. I'm fed up talking about England."
He is, indisputably, a decent Premiership player and at 23 could have ten solid years of international football ahead of him.
And perhaps it is nothing more than coincidence that this story (breaking simultaneously in a number of English newspapers on Sunday) coincides with Nolan being voted the Barclay's Premiership Player of the Month for February.
But there is a murmur of canvass about this business that can scarcely encourage Staunton. Short of standing outside Erikkson's home wearing a tee-shirt emblazoned with the words 'PLEASE PICK ME', it is difficult to see what more Nolan can do to catch the England manager's eye.
Staunton is perfectly right to avail of the grand-parent rule just as zealously as his immediate predecessor Brian Kerr - chose to keep it at a distance. And, at least, he has (we trust) stopped short of Charlton's circular to all English clubs in '86, requesting them to put a notice on their boards saying that "if anyone had an Irish mother, father or grandmother, then I would be interested and I would come and see them."
But Stan needs to be wary of becoming the fall-guy in an England World Cup story.
This is not to imply that Nolan is being deliberately mischievous. It is merely to point out that at no stage has he indicated a desire, let alone a compulsion, to play football for the Republic of Ireland. On the contrary, his stated wish as an Englishman is to play for England.
Perhaps we should respect that and concentrate on those who see more symbolism in an Irish shirt than a low-watt consolation prize.
Hoganvin2@yahoo.ie
Some papers have questioned why Nolan didn't just take up the option during the recent "window" to throw his lot in with us! A fair point, but I wonder how much Kerrs position as the senior manager may have been a factor in his decision to ignore the oppertunity... Given what happened when he was underage manager.
Personaly, I don't see anything coming of it.
And as much as I generally try to side step the "Plastic Paddy" arguments, this is going on far longer than say Morrisons deliberations, or even Dave Kitsons question, and is getting on my whick a bit.
I didn't think I was that confrontational... :o :DQuote:
Originally Posted by dr_peepee
:ball: PP
I still think it's all media hype. I'd be willing to bet a tenner that he's in the next England squad.
i don't think he will be in the next england squad. Eriksson leaves after the world cup, he doesn't think he is as good as the players in the side at the moment so what does he gain from picking him for one game, nothing. However, i think nolan will wait untill he talks to the next england manager before making his decision, i think thats certain.
Actually his horse was :)Quote:
Originally Posted by tricky_colour
You may be over-interpreting "I think Charles was welcomed with open arms and made the Olympics at the expense of a native born Irishman...at least I don't recall any negative media coverage.", this is simply a statement of fact and was made in response to others who gave examples from other countries and sports.
I have no objections to Breens and kilbanes. For the sake of necessity I can live with the Tony Cascarinos ( big fan ) and the Andy Townsends, who put in 100%.
The issue now with a Kevin Nolan call-up is NOT Kevin Nolan, it is Stan and the FAI and whether we should be courting players who obviously would prefer to gain international recognition elsewhere. I think it puts us in an embarrassing position, besides Nolan is an excellent player and will be capped by England, I can think of 20 players who played for England in the last 10 years who weren't half as good.
i can think of 4 in the england squad who aint as good. crouch, bent, young, hargreaves, nolan is superb and has been for 3yearsQuote:
Originally Posted by Qwerty
the next England squad is the world cup squad isn't it?? I don't think they've any more friendlies lind up.
Neil Kilkenny is probably the next fella to be harrassed by Stan.
If Jimmy Bullard isn't called up by Germany (chuckle) then I think Stan wouldn't have to press him very hard to play for us, not that he offers us much really and is about as Irish as Chinese take-away, but I would like to Stan get somebody ... he deserves a break.
Yep, I think they are planning to play Belarus to give "fringe" players a chanceQuote:
Originally Posted by shooter mc gav
to show their worth ... or in more apt terms get a few players who probably
arent in with a chance of the World Cup, but are touting themselves for dual
nationallity, to declare for England on the off chance someone else snaps them
up and they do well.
this gets ever more complicated...would a b international rule someone out from changing nationality????Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
Dont think so as its not a competitive gameQuote:
Originally Posted by livehead1
It doesn't have to be competitive, a friendly will commit you to a country won't it? I thought U21s were the same, so still haven't quite understood why Nolan is still free to choose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboy
I think you're right. On the eve of a World Cup why else talk about a B-match. They'll not get a chance to go to the World Cup, the current manager is on his way out and they'll have plenty of games and a different manager to impress in the autumn. I imagine a B-game would commit you and that's the only reason for england talking about having one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
Could just as easily push Nolan the other way though. If you've one country begging and pleading with you to join them and another country hasn't shown any interest then reluctantly offers you the chance to play in a B-(not quite good enough for a full)-international.... Remember Chris Sutton a few years ago, they called him up for a B and he told them where to shove it. Not that I want Nolan onboard but that would be very funny :D
he is not free to choose, he played a competative game for england at underage level but fifa said that if we asked there would be a good chance?! lol stupid clowns. But a friendly on the other hand, would not commit you, at underage level. It does at senior level though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hither green
Quote:
Originally Posted by livehead1
Are you sure about that, I see nothing in the rules that distingusihes between friendlies at different age levels, my understanding is that B internationals and friendlies do not tie you to a particular country at any age level. Paul Butler is a case in point AFAIK he is still eligible to play for wales etc.
No, Butler can't play for Wales unless he receives special dispensation from Fifa. Once you have a full international cap to your name i.e. you play for a nation at senior level in either a friendly or comp. game then thats it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboy
B games are a different kettle of fish. Like the Scotland future squad, no full caps are given out.
Paul Butler seems to think otherwise as often quoted. From Fifas regulations "any player who is qualified to play for more than one national association (i.e. who has dual nationality) will be deemed to have committed himself to one association only when he plays his first international match in an official competition (at any level) for that association."
The important phrase here for my arguement is "in an official competition (at any level) for that association." Why would they use the term competition instead of just first international match?
thought this might lighten the discussion :)
"The concept of national team eligibility continues to elude some fans. Take this exchange, for example, on TalkSPORT’s Scottish phone-in when goalkeeper Antii Niemi still played for Hearts (borrowed from Jason Burt’s “The Sweeper” column in The Independent, 1 January 2003):"
“Caller: I'm a Hearts fan and, fair enough, Stephen Pressley gets a game for Scotland but what I can't understand is why [national coach Berti] Vogts never picks Antii Niemi.
“Host (former footballer Arthur Albiston): Eh? Sorry?
“Caller: Why does he never pick Antii Niemi for Scotland?
“Host: It's because he's Finnish.
“Caller: What?
“Host: Antii Niemi is Finnish.
“By now enraged caller: He's not Finnish! He's only 28!”
if nolan played a b international for the saxons would people on here still call for him to play?
unfortunatley i think so.
Perhaps, my own view is that no one who does not consider themselves Irish should play for us, however I do recognise that not everyone shares this view and some would take the ultimately pragnmatic approach that we take whomever qualifies.
no dis-respect to mr nolan but if he wanted to declare for us he would of a long time ago,do we really need a player playing for us who clearly isn't too bothered...
i dont think he should be allowed 2 play for usQuote:
Originally Posted by Roverstillidie
Nolan said on Sky Sports yesterday that he is not really interested in playing international football and he likes the break in between matches as he relaxes abroad. He believe this break has helped his form this season. He also said numerous times in the interview that Sam Allardyce would be a great manager for "us" when talking about the future England manager.
nothing new there though really. theres been loadsa stuff coming out of him this season, and he regularly contradicts himself, one week his dream is to play for england, next week he aint too fussed about international football etcQuote:
Originally Posted by NeilMcD