Eligibility proposal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Absinthe

Not arguing with you, but by that logic why would we have 2 Irish teams picking from the same territory.

This suggestion by FIFA, means that in effect we could have 2 Idenitical teams, in terms of eligibility.

It would be possible for example, within FIFA's rules for the RoI to field a team of U21 Dubliners, in a friendly, and then for NI to call them all up and use them in a Senior International?

Bravo, chaps, Bravo.

---

As I said, we'll have to rely on patriotism. Just like the old days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

Just to remind you of some of the tosh you've posted on here (we'll leave Madeline McCann out of this BTW) is the smug assertion that the IFA had this in the bag. Then there was the claim that FIFA don't tolerate 'political influence', suggesting that the Irish government could not raise the case against FIFA without fear of the FAI being thrown out of all their competitions. Now, the bucky seems to have kicked in again, and you are suggesting that the all powerful Ma-FIFA were knobbled. Who by? The FAI? The Irish government? Uncle Gerry and Uncle Martin ringing up and saying 'we know where all you lot live'?

You are a class act EG, there's no doubting that. :D

---

I've already quoted my most recent post (31/10) where I openly acknowledged the possibility that FIFA might decide in favour of the FAI. Find me one post where I ever claimed that the IFA had this "in the bag".

As for "political interference", there has been no such interference that I'm aware of, or have alleged, in the FAI's presentation of their case (nor of the internal running of the FAI, for that matter).

I have consistently argued that should FIFA make a determination - and they haven't yet, btw - any attempt by politicians to subvert, thwart or otherwise interfere with it would not be tolerated by FIFA.

Nothing which has occurred in the last 48 hours has changed that.

As for my "got at" reference, maybe I should have used the less perjorative term "lobbied". Whichever, even John Delaney gave no indication that he knew or guessed FIFA might suggest the latest compromise, when he spoke to RTE on his return from Zurich on Monday 29/10. Since he was rushing back to sack poor Stan the following day, he was in sore need of some good news to announce, yet the best he could come up with was that at least FIFA weren't going to make their determination retrospective i.e. Gibson was OK.

Therefore, someone or something in the intervening week presumably persuaded/caused/lobbied etc someone in FIFA to suggest this third way (compromise), as a means of allowing FIFA to avoid having to come off the fence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

Absolute madness. If that lad came from Indo-China or Antartica he might have a Scotland cap by now.

---

Not really, LR. These things work both ways i.e. had Andrew Driver been born in Scotland but brought up in England, the SFA could have objected to his representing England.

Tbh, this is merely an agreement which serves to protect the three smaller nations, since many talented young footballers from NI/Scot/Wales go to English clubs when they are 16 (even earlier?). Assuming they don't get tied to their country of birth in the meantime, within two years they would be eligible under FIFA Rules to play for England. And considering the (usually) greater chance of qualifying which England offers, plus the enormous financial earning potential offered by England over the others, plus persuasion by Agents (even club managers), at least some might be tempted.

And in any case, it is not inevitable that the Association of the player's birthplace will object. The example of Driver is one where the lad appears "a cut above" i.e. both countries want him. However, should the lad not likely be good enough to represent England, the FA can always waive their right to tie him to them.

As for the comparison with youngster from e.g. India or China who moved to live in England, the FA doesn't give a stuff about his home Association; if he wants to play for England and he's good enough, they'll have him. John "My Jamaican Guy" Barnes, anyone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Therefore, someone or something in the intervening week presumably persuaded/caused/lobbied etc someone in FIFA to suggest this third way (compromise), as a means of allowing FIFA to avoid having to come off the fence.

---

or FIFA came up with it themselves ?? Dont forget that the Irish team could conceivably lose players to Northern Ireland under this ruling. I doubt the FAI lobbied for this particular result.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RogerMilla

or FIFA came up with it themselves ?? Dont forget that the Irish team could conceivably lose players to Northern Ireland under this ruling. I doubt the FAI lobbied for this particular result.

---

It's entirely possible, I suppose, that the legal/technical "experts" heard the case presented by each Association, came to the preliminary conclusion that the Rules favoured the IFA (which both Associations picked up on), so prepared a Paper for the relevant Committee to authorise.

At which point, in order to avoid having to find in favour of one Association over another if at all possible, the Committee sent it back with an instruction to try to find a suitable compromise. At which point, somebody or other with no understanding of the reality on the ground, hazarded that if the FAI were allowed to pick players from NI, might not the IFA be satisfied by being allowed to pick players from the ROI?

At face value, this might not have appeared unreasonable, since the IFA would have had no cause originally to have stated why picking ROI-born players was not something which they would want to do, nor something that would ever benefit them more than once in a blue moon.

And, as you say, the FAI presumably didn't mention it, either.

Strange, I must say.

Anyhow, that is why I used the term "got at" - it might just as easy have been someone within FIFA, even with the best of intentions (however misguided).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

Anyhow, that is why I used the term "got at" - it might just as easy have been someone within FIFA, even with the best of intentions (however misguided).

---

"got at" smacks of suspicions of underhandedness and also sour grapes to be honest. Anyway I expect the IFA to appeal this decision. This is far from settled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

It's entirely possible, I suppose, that the legal/technical "experts" heard the case presented by each Association, came to the preliminary conclusion that the Rules favoured the IFA (which both Associations picked up on), so prepared a Paper for the relevant Committee to authorise.

At which point, in order to avoid having to find in favour of one Association over another if at all possible, the Committee sent it back with an instruction to try to find a suitable compromise. At which point, somebody or other with no understanding of the reality on the ground, hazarded that if the FAI were allowed to pick players from NI, might not the IFA be satisfied by being allowed to pick players from the ROI?

At face value, this might not have appeared unreasonable, since the IFA would have had no cause originally to have stated why picking ROI-born players was not something which they would want to do, nor something that would ever benefit them more than once in a blue moon.

And, as you say, the FAI presumably didn't mention it, either.

Strange, I must say.

Anyhow, that is why I used the term "got at" - it might just as easy have been someone within FIFA, even with the best of intentions (however misguided).

---

More likely that Howard Wells is a díckhead and FIFA are being consistant in interpretation and application, that Howard still demonstrates his inability to grasp FIFA statutes, that Howard has delusions that he knows better than FIFA legal dept.
Just as it´s extremly unlikely that when using the term "got at" you had that "someone within FIFA, even with the best of intentions" in mind.

I've read the psts so far on the topic and my view is clear.

The status quo should remain untouched, in my opinion it does not need changing. We all know Northern Ireland has a vast community who feel they are Irish not British or even Northern Irish. This right is backed up by the Good Friday agreement. My Da's from Belfast. Asking him to turn out in front of the British national Anthem at Windsor (if he was gud enough!) is a no brainer, though i understand the anthem situation for Rugby isnt perfrect for Ulster Unionists!

I'm happy enough to go along with FIFA's ruling as at least it keeps the status quo the same.

In fairness Ealing Green, you are clearly a very intelligent debater! Your points are clear and backed up. I just disagree from my side. People in the North should be allowed play for ROI (for all the obvious reasons) and people in the Republic shouldnt be allowed play for you're team (though ill accept the comprimise as it will change nothing on the ground). Thats just how I feel despite your excellent arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EalingGreen

As for my "got at" reference, maybe I should have used the less perjorative term "lobbied".

---

It would seem clear this happened. Dermot Ahern made a statement to the press, so i would assume the Irish Foreign office was working behind the scenes. Given that the 2 governments are rarely parted on policy towards the north i would say there was a fairly high chance the British Foreign Office was doing similar.

As Gibson is from Derry, John Hume may well have made a phone call to Sepp Blater, and introduced himself as "Nobel peace prize winner John Hume".

The IFA were arguing an unclear FIFA regulation (which contradicts others) should take precedence over the GFA, which is generally now held as one one the worlds most successful peace deals ever.

They were offered no serious political backing by Unionist politicians on this one. It was naive in the extreme of the IFA to think there would ever be any other result. To think that FIFA would baulk at national governments lobbying them because of what happened in Greece was equally naive. In Greece the government effectively took over the FA. This was very different.

The IFA need to take a long look at the damage they have done themselves in the eyes of the nationalist community, which will be compounded if they succeed in getting DC out of the Irish Premier League. We are not stupid and simply insisting rules are applied to suit your political agenda is as obvious as some of the IFA's old techniques.

They have driven a(nother) wedge between themselves and nationalism. In future i would advise them to pick their battles a bit better

Quote:

---

The IFA need to take a long look at the damage they have done themselves in the eyes of the nationalist community, which will be compounded if they succeed in getting DC out of the Irish Premier League.

---

Since when did they do this? By the way the Irish Premier League sounds like an ALL-IRELAND league too ;) Or a concoction of two anyhow :)

Once DC were promoted they decided to cut the league to twelve (allegedly) in the hope DC wouldn't finish high enough to stay in. This will be based on on and off the field criteria, in the knowledge that DC will struggle as they have only recently been promoted to the Premier League

http://www.uefa.com/footballeurope/n...id=595823.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by backtowalsall

The reason they are a B team is because they have been consistently performing below ROI since 1987, recent times excluded, and that was with us at our lowest ebb, and NI flying

And who are these top class players?? Of the NI side the only player i would start in an all ireland 11 is George McCartney, and Healy would make the bench. (although the way Robbie is playing)

All this at out lowest ebb

They are a no mark team, who have achieved little or nothing of note since Pat Jennings picked the 3rd out on his 41st birthday. It was only a few years ago i heard Alan Greene, who is from Belfast (even if he is an arse), include them with Andorra, Malta and San Marino as countries he didn't think should even be allowed to play qualifiers for major tournaments.

If the FAI market this decision right NI can be marginalized and middle class unionists can be enticed to Croke Park to see Ireland play Brazil. They already flock down to the 6 nations

If the FAI want to play this right, The should always now refer to themselves as Ireland, adopt Irelands call as the anthem, announce plans to play in Belfast at some point, and appoint a northerner as new manager.

To quote a movie...



And for the record i'm not really worried about offending the IFA or their fans. They have attempted to deny me my birth right. I don't see what could be considered offensive though. It is only a mater of time before a talented Protestant Irishman from the north declares for the FAI because he gets a greater chance to play on the greatest stage of all. And once one does dozens more will follow.

the biggest obstacle to this is the hangers on who don't want the gravy being split more ways

---

No offence mate, but you would be better off concentrating on trying to poach our 'Nationalist' players, for the rest is just a pipe dream.. there will never be a United Ireland team under the Irish tricolour in Dublin.. the same way some Nationalist players feel they can't play for us, there is no way we would go down there and support that. You will never get a Northern Ireland supporter to feel like that about the Republic of Ireland. Never. Remember, we have been to hell and back already with our National team, and will gladly do so again, because at least they are ours, and represent us. Nothing to do with sectarianism, or any particular 'hate' for the Republic.. it is just that you are you and we are we :)


Of course.. if you wanted to 'unsplit' and rejoin us, we would welcome you back with open arms ;):D though to be fair, you would be just swapping one set of inadequate suits for another..

I increasingly am irritated by this decision, as someone said above (was it EG?) this sounds like a bright idea from some Swiss bureaucrat who knew nothing about Ireland. It reminds me of the story of Mickey Rourke going to NI and being stunned that there were people there that wanted to be part of Britain (he thought it was an all nationalist community with the British army in occupation).

In reality there is now no difference between the 2 Irish teams (with the possible exception of 2G players). What we'll end up with is a unionist team (NI) and a nationalist one (ROI). I'd like FIFA to explain whether this is a precedent. Would they have done this if 10% of the population of NI felt themselves Irish? Are they going to allow Germany and France to share a common player pool on the basis of 'Germans' in Alsace?

The logical thing to do was to say, there is something unusual about this situation so players born in NI can decide once and once only before the age of 18 that they wish to declare for the ROI. Once they have played for any underage NI team they are not eligible for the ROI.

OWC is absolutely insane at the moment. By far the worst I've ever seen it, including that NI speak English, sing GSTQ and have the queen's money 'Full Stop', as well as saying that previously the member supported anti-sectarianism but now he doesn't care if they fly a King Billy flag over Windsor, and none of the mods or patrons are saying one word to anyone except the ROI lads, and then for such sectarian obscenities as 'The English, Scottish and Welsh FA's won't get involved because it doesn't concern them' - which was threatened with a ban from the site!

Prior to this proposal they were in the main just staying on the right side of 'passionate' without going overboard but now they're riled all the true feelings on the issue really come out.

And they wonder why our boys don't want to play for them?? Well played FIFA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cavan_fan

I increasingly am irritated by this decision, as someone said above (was it EG?) this sounds like a bright idea from some Swiss bureaucrat who knew nothing about Ireland. It reminds me of the story of Mickey Rourke going to NI and being stunned that there were people there that wanted to be part of Britain (he thought it was an all nationalist community with the British army in occupation).

In reality there is now no difference between the 2 Irish teams (with the possible exception of 2G players). What we'll end up with is a unionist team (NI) and a nationalist one (ROI). I'd like FIFA to explain whether this is a precedent. Would they have done this if 10% of the population of NI felt themselves Irish? Are they going to allow Germany and France to share a common player pool on the basis of 'Germans' in Alsace?

The logical thing to do was to say, there is something unusual about this situation so players born in NI can decide once and once only before the age of 18 that they wish to declare for the ROI. Once they have played for any underage NI team they are not eligible for the ROI.

---

This is about protecting the rights of Irish people in the north so they can play for their country.

If that means one team of nationalist and one team of unionists then it is the IFAs fault for holding the rest (80%) back who want an all ireland team.

As long as Ireland can pick from the 32 counties im happy!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by backtowalsall

Once DC were promoted they decided to cut the league to twelve (allegedly) in the hope DC wouldn't finish high enough to stay in. This will be based on on and off the field criteria, in the knowledge that DC will struggle as they have only recently been promoted to the Premier League

http://www.uefa.com/footballeurope/n...id=595823.html

---

It isn't 'allegedly' at all, it is complete ******...you obviously don't know about the whole DC situation, but needless to say, they will be in the new league.. as long as they sort out their ground, or at least start to do what they said they were gonna do over two years ago.

There are reasons we are trying to sort out the league.. mostly it is to try and hit the smaller 'a pitch with a wee wall and no support' teams, and make them aim higher.

I saw that they are banning ireland fans left right and centre for offering a differnent opinion. Sad!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shanekerins

OWC is absolutely insane at the moment. By far the worst I've ever seen it, including that NI speak English, sing GSTQ and have the queen's money 'Full Stop', as well as saying that previously the member supported anti-sectarianism but now he doesn't care if they fly a King Billy flag over Windsor, and none of the mods or patrons are saying one word to anyone except the ROI lads, and then for such sectarian obscenities as 'The English, Scottish and Welsh FA's won't get involved because it doesn't concern them' - which was threatened with a ban from the site!

Prior to this proposal they were in the main just staying on the right side of 'passionate' without going overboard but now they're riled all the true feelings on the issue really come out.

And they wonder why our boys don't want to play for them?? Well played FIFA.

---

I haven't been on OWC, but are you sure you are right about them being banned? Northern Ireland supporters are rightly incensed that we can't rely on the ability to pick players from our own very small player pool.. I'm raging myself.. especially as I thought we had crossed that invisable barrier. Now, I'm not saying for one second I thought all young Nationalists all of a sudden thought that NI was all hunky dory.. but I though that political baggage had been left behind. Obviously not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingdomkerry

I saw that they are banning ireland fans left right and centre for offering a differnent opinion. Sad!

---

At least they can get registered!
I tried to register using the same username that I use here and the registration was never validated , I emailed the admin on the site and I got no reply , that was a few months ago now!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gustavo

At least they can get registered!
I tried to register using the same username that I use here and the registration was never validated , I emailed the admin on the site and I got no reply , that was a few months ago now!

---

Just register with a different name. You cant even view the boards unless you are registered. Ive got banned twice the second time i said nothing inflamatory and the first time i just told it as it is.

Anyway looks like you cant get in to it now there are so many people on it!