Printable View
AbsurdQuote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
FIFA have already decided in Darrons case, the FIFA committee have already accepted his transfer. FIFA have not directed otherwise since.
I wonder if a player can only change once before his 21st birthday then I suspect that Darron is already tied to Ireland.
There is no need to cap him on Wednesday in order to tie him up any more.
It has been pointed out to you on both forums numerous times the FIFA rule that enables anyone born in Northern Ireland to play for either the North or the Republic. You are either a complete idiot or the worst WUM ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
FIFA have made a decision and it's in their rules. They're not going to be bothered to point this out again because Wells is an idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
and/or slighty blind and deaf. ;) ULster says No to any letters.....until we feel the time is right :)Quote:
They're not going to be bothered to point this out again because Wells is an idiot.
News Just in:
Darren Gibson has moved to the Ireland team in a swap deal for Aer Lingus who have signed for Belfast.
They are finished for the Summer.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
I'm sure they could be included as a cross border body for next summer !!:D
The issue is the word 'citizenship'. The GFA is, as far as I can see, the last legal word on the question of national ambiguity between Ireland and Northern Ireland. It clearly states that anybody born in the North is entitled to Irish citizenship. That's what your people voted for, EG, though I imagine you probably voted 'No'.:rolleyes:
From the Belfast Telegraph...
"Londonderry-born Gibson was named in the Republic's under-21 squad for a friendly in Germany tonight, but upon arriving in Dublin yesterday he was swiftly promoted to the senior squad who face Denmark in Aarhus tomorrow evening.
Gibson was linked with a south-to-north switch at the weekend after Nigel Worthington revealed he had spoken to the player, who is subject to an Irish FA appeal to FIFA on his eligibility for the Republic
"Darron is going to be a very good player once he gets a bit of experience under his belt and he may be gone from us sooner rather than later anyway," said the Irish U-21 boss.
"The story about him switching to Northern Ireland is completely different to what he's told me. He said it is the Republic or nobody."
The Republic or nobody. There you go.
LOL. :DQuote:
That's what your people voted for, EG, though I imagine you probably voted 'No'
Did ye not know supreme, its a very popular word in Northern Ireland.
Been denied by a few Northern lasses Paul?? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by paul_oshea
Howcome everytime I mention on here the word "no" with something else the response is always about me being rejected by some lass or wanting to mount some lass :o did ye not know tets my face is my fortune ;) :DQuote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
Let's hope he does stay with Ireland. Looks a genuine prospect and was immense in the qualifiers last year.
Particulary in knocking the Italian's out in Turner's cross.
Darron's total commitment to Ireland was never in question. What is quite disgusting is the behaviour of that 'pompous ****' worthington and his association.Quote:
Originally Posted by Supreme feet
Worthington made 2 calls to Gibson a number of weeks ago inviting him to join the northern squad for a select game against Everton in Coleraine, Co. Derry. He was told 'thanks but no thanks' and Gibson reaffirmed his wish to represent his country on the international stage.
Worthington then went running to the press spouting all this rubbish about expecting Darron to play for the North etc..A similar situation arose in January this year when 'nice but dim' Howard Wells went public criticising Gibson's choice of international allegience. This forced Gibson's family to go public and they launched a scathing attack on the IFA for intimidating their son, via the media.
It clear that the IFA are using underhand & dirty tactics over this issue.
If i was staunton i would organise an 'A' international and play a team full of players from the North, perhaps that would stop the dirty trick brigade within the IFA.
I've been trying to avoid this one... Nearly broke my heart the last thread on Darren Gison did... The same points are getting regurgitated.
I have to ask EalingGreen to clarify... I take from from your points that you respect his civil right to Irish Citizenship but not to represent Ireland at Football. The core of you argument seems to be about a little ambiguity in FIFA's eligabillity criteria, rather than the players own Nationality, Citizenship, etc.
The core of my point last time and still is now that I think the IFA's efforts would be better served on addressing why some young men with the civil right of choice are opting to play for the Republic. I feel the present course of action and comments from Worthinton are counter productive.
You're right about the souce (but I still disagree with your view):Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showt...n#post11657126
In any case, Gibson has played an official game at underage level for Ireland. I could still switch to Northern Ireland before he becomes 21. But I think if he plays any part in a friendly for the Senior side, he will be capped tied to ROI. That and the fact that it says in FIFA rules only 1 switch is allowed. Unlike Lapira, who can still switch to the US because he has not played in an official competition. Gibson's case is similar to Freddy Adu of the US, there were some rumours a while back that he could switch to Ghana but playing a friendly against Canada ended that talk.
Metrostars, There does appear to be differing interpretations of what a friendly is about in the USA.
I see that an authority no less than Sports Illustrated claim that Freddy Adu is not yet tied to the USA
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...er.bag/2.html#
But the source for that is a USA press officer with FIFA.
I do believe he has it wrong, there has been no example of a senior capped player in a friendly transferring to another federation from the FIFA Players Committee since 2004.
Gibson has already transferred once, I don't think he can transfer again, is it not a one time only transfer?
Ealing Green will have to accept that, in certain cases, the North is reaping what its sown in relation to a vocal minority's previous intimidation of Nationalist players opting to play for NI. For example, Rogan, Lennon etc.
Ealing Green is not among that hateful minority, to be fair, and I also accept it's changed times in the North to a certain degree.
Sport and Politics are difficult to separate on this issue, as the individual players political outlook and sociological background will directly dictate whether you want to play for Ireland or not.
As the political / social etc labels and tribalism of Catholic, Protestant, Nationalist, Loyalist begin to thaw, I'd imagine the individual Nationalist player will be more inclined to at least consider opting for Northern Ireland whereas in the not too distant past a player had to consider continuing to play for NI as his family's safety was compromised by nasty threats (idle or not).
This may take another generation to take place and indeed some may quite legitimately consider themselves a citizen of Ireland and will opt to play for Ireland for generations to come.
Well in that case there should be no England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. Just a British team so. According to you all rulings should be made " with regard to their Rules and Regs".Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
You cant have it both ways. The rules are been interpreted on there individual merits. Northern Ireland/Ireland are a special case as are the british teams.
I've been trying to find the actual eligibility rules on FIFA's website, but they're nowhere to be found!
Probably rotting in a damp cellar in Alpine Switzerland, guarded by the reanimated, carnivorous zombies of Joao Havelange and Sir James Craig.
I hope Gibson plays and does well tonight, I can't see FIFA changing the situation, and I'd rather focus on Gibson's potential and what he could bring to the team. With Carsley coming to the end, Gibson could have a huge part to play in the future, if he keeps on developing and avoids the McPhail/Healy/Miller/Steven Reid fate of crippling injuries and/or years of reserve football, he could be a huge asset.
DG's views/rights on citizenship are absolutely none of my business, so whether he see himself as Irish or British or anything else is absolutely fine with me. Moreover, it is no business of anyone connected with the NI team what a given player thinks on such matters. Which is why down the years we have been graced with the contribution of players whose private political convictions reflect the whole diversity within NI, i.e. such things don't/shouldn't matter when they pull on the green shirt.Quote:
Originally Posted by dr_peepee
As for DG's right to represent ROI, I have no particular gripe with the player himself, or his personal affinity. But Gibson is not the issue, here. Rather, his case goes to the very core of what it means to "represent your country". For most people, it is relatively straightforward - you represent the country in which you were born. However, this simple principle is sometimes complicated by dual nationality, migration, changes in national boundaries etc, such that FIFA had to develop rules on eligibility to reflect and accommodate these factors.
But even beyond this, there are individuals who either have no great natural affinity to any country, or who are more motivated by success, prestige, money etc so that they will pick and choose "their country", given a chance. One of the most prominent recent examples was where the Qatar FA started arranging for talented young Brazilians to acquire citizenship, so that they could cap them, in return for lucrative earnings. FIFA soon introduced rules requiring such players to demonstrate an additional "connection" with their chosen country (birth/ancestry/residence etc), before they would obtain eligibility.
Which is where DG comes back in. On the one hand, I can see how the Irish situation is hugely different from the Qatari/Brazilian one, so that the FAI is saying that DG's particular citizenship is quite adequate "connection" for eligibility purposes. And FIFA may well accept that argument.
However, in the absence of a specific exemption for Irish football, there is also an equal chance (imo) that they will not. They may decide that a Government's motive for granting citizenship to someone born outside their territory, whether for political (Irish) or financial (Qatari) reasons, is not relevant; rather it must be purely footballing considerations which prevail. Otherwise, smaller or weaker Football Associations may suffer at the hands of their neighbouring Associations, who will use their power, influence and resources to "hoover up" young talent from around the world, in the same way the powerful do at club level.
And FIFA is very mindful to treat all of their Member Associations equally, whether they be large or small. In this case, they may sympathise with the IFA on the basis that we are spending scarce resources on developing young players, only to see them opt for another Association once they've reached another level.
And even if individuals like DG are switching for genuine reasons, there will undoubtedly be others who either don't care which "Ireland" they represent, so will pick whichever suits them best, or will gravitate towards whichever is doing best at the time, a phenomenon which the FAI has occasionally experienced from time to time in the past, where "plastics" who weren't good enough for England, Scotland etc, casually adopted the Irish Tricolour as a "flag of convenience"!
The idea of switching because a player has fallen out with an individual at one Association is hardly unknown, either. For example, Jamie Carragher has clearly had it with Steve McLaren. If he were still eligible for another country, I daresay he might be tempted to switch. But as I'm sure most people on this Board would testify, you can't "pick and choose" your country which, after all, Gibson could be argued to be doing!
Anyhow, these are all reasons why I feel FIFA may decide that for all the unique circumstances of the Irish situation, they may not make an exception for the likes of DG, who will still have to demonstrate the same "connection" with his chosen Association (birth, ancestry, residence) as everyone else in the world.
Otherwise, if they allowed the FAI an exception, then every politically or ethnically disaffected minority in the world (and there are hundreds, if not thousands) would demand a similar exception.
Which leads nicely to your last paragraph. As I've said, I don't disrespect DG for holding his personal political convictions, or their causing him to choose the ROI. But I feel strongly (as does FIFA, btw), that personal political convictions should not be a consideration when deciding someones "nationality" for the purposes of international football eligibility.
Besides, if you take the political conviction of many Northern Nationalists to the next level, many do not recognise the (partitionist) ROI team, never mind the NI team, indeed some don't even believe in playing non-native, "Garrison" games in the first place!
And moving such arguments to a wider scale, throughout its entire history, FIFA has had to deal with Associations or Governments attempting to influence international football for political motives over e.g. South Africa, Israel/Palestine, the Cold War, China/Taiwan, the Balkans etc and each time they have responded by stating clearly and effectively that it (FIFA) will determine where national boundaries lie, without regard for partisan politics, and individuals and Associations, even Governments will respect its authority, or be suspended or even expelled.
Of course, within that overriding principle, FIFA also demands (quite properly) that when an Association says to a player: "Irrespective of your personal political convictions, you are only eligible to represent us, so you must accept that or forego international football entirely", there must also be a quid pro quo on the Association's part, namely: "But if you are prepared to leave your personal convictions in the dressing room, we will not hold them against you in any way on the pitch and you will be treated 100% equally to every other player, i.e. on purely footballing terms".
Which brings us right back to NI. I for one would never deny that at times in the past, football in NI at both official (IFA) level and unofficial (club, supporter) level has discriminated against individuals for political, even sectarian, reasons.
However, I genuinely believe that this has now been widely accepted at all levels, and the game is making strenuous and effective efforts to eliminate this.
Therefore, those of our detractors who cannot or will not recognise the fundamental seachange which has occurred in recent years are as guilty of prejudiced thinking as the very bigots they condemn for their prejudices (imo).
In which case, if it should be decided that Gibson is only entitled to represent NI, I would sincerely hope that he could put his personal convictions behind him and become the latest in a long list of players from a similar background, stretching back over many decades, who have worn the Green and White of NI with pride, distinction and success. And if he should, it is incumbent upon the rest of us to support him in exactly the same way as we do every other player in the same shirt. I know I would.
I did not start this thread. Indeed, I didn't even respond until until a dozen or more posters had had their say, some of them even referring to me in a virtual invitation to respond!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuff Paddy
However, this issue is one which concerns me every bit as much as it does you and I am as entitled to express my opinion every bit as much as you. Indeed, I would contend that my opinion is actually more valid than yours, not because I am from the other side of the debate, but rather because I have tried hard to see the complexity of the issues involved, in a reasoned and measured way, whereas you have just been a bit of a tit. End of discussion.