Printable View
he is on twitter. I may have just overreacted in the direction of indo sport....
league has issues but anyone who tries telling me my scottish born daughter scoring for Ireland would mean less will get both barrels. He could easily have made his point that the FAI are being lazy about the league, talent being missed etc without suggesting any of that.
he was on twitter, but it looks like he's closed his account. You could just leave a comment on the article itself, of course there's no guarantee the Independent will actually approve it.
I've vented on their twitter feed a little but I've emailed them pointing out the errors of their decision to let that through the editorial process.
Sweeney needs to apply my gut test. My gut was very happy this last few weeks.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
And as for Townsend, he repeatedly referred to the team as "we" during his commentary and punditry. He referred to the players as "they", the team as "we".
Townsend seems pretty happy with Brady's goal here: https://streamable.com/y7n3?t=8.8
(cheers Danny for the link on twitter)
There's something about English commentary for Ireland goals that make the hairs spike even more than usual! Not dissing George or anything, he's had some great moments over the years.
At the very start of that clip Townsend says, "it had to go in, that", obviously referring to Hoolahan's missed chance just seconds earlier. I thought it was gone too I must admit.
That cross from Hoolahan gets better every time I see it, it really is pure perfection. I don't think any other shape on the flight of it would have allowed Brady to score.
Is that good or bad ?Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
Good, I think.
Sweeney sounds like a guy ranting in a pub that you'd nod along politely to and then get away from as soon as possible.
at that moment, so did everyone!
It's a pity Sweeney (again) feels the need to denigrate and question the place or commitment of diasporic players in order to make an otherwise valid point about the FAI's domestic neglect. That piece is, more or less, a re-write of a previous one he did: http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...-31580069.html
He seems to have a real gripe with "granny rulers". Playing for Ireland was never a "consolation prize" for proud "grandsons" of Donegal like James McCarthy or Aiden McGeady. It's incredibly insulting to refer to it as an "absurdity" that diasporic players might still cherish deeply and culturally their familial or grandparental bond to Ireland. Players need not be "native-born" to feel passion or national pride. Tell the likes of Kevin Kilbane that he should have been "native-born" if he wanted to play an authentic role or be fully accepted/celebrated; what nonsense. Kilbane was more committed and gave more than many players born even in Ireland. That's what resonated with me in the case of Kilbane; I wasn't fixated on his accent or place of birth. Being "native-born" didn't guarantee Stephen Ireland's commitment. Sweeney appears to lack understanding of national consciousness and identity, which transcend territorial or state boundaries. Ireland-born parents/grandparents of players are not "distant forefathers" either; they're immediate/close family.
For some second or third generation players, declaring for the FAI can be a means of realising or awakening the Irish aspect of their identity. I think Clinton Morrison and Andy Townsend are good examples of that; they embraced their Irishness upon declaring and were proud/committed to play for us. Fans gladly embraced them in return. Identity is fluid rather than static; it can be a journey at any point in someone's life, so if someone is willing, able and evidently not a spoofer/chancer, I don't see the issue.
Sweeney dismissively claims it's "pretty obvious that [Townsend] is an Englishman" from having listened to him commentate at the Euros, but this seems ignorant of the fact that Irishness and Englishness are not necessarily mutually incompatible. They can co-exist, overlap or be shared simultaneously by a dual national. Sweeney has a very narrow and myopic view of national identity. Besides, if Sweeney had heard Townsend commentate during our games on ITV, he'd have been in no doubt as to Townsend's sense of connection, passion and delight at seeing Ireland do well. He was elated when Brady scored against Italy and could be heard in the background roaring, "Get in there! Get in there!": https://streamable.com/y7n3?t=8.8
(Edit: Just seeing tets has posted that video above.)
Townsend was also referring to the team as "us" and "our boys" before the France game. Video of that here: https://twitter.com/DanielCollins85/...71909049270272
There was absolutely no sense that he was playing down his Irishness; he was keen to make it known and was "revved up", in the words of the ITV presenter. Sweeney clearly wasn't listening hard enough then!
You can tell Sweeney is primarily a contrarian/controversialist given his ludicrous description of England, the Czech Republic and Austria as "minor nations".
Besides the grating anti-diasporism, mind, Sweeney's right that the domestic game has been neglected. It would be wonderful if the FAI could try and somehow emulate the Icelandic model. The FAI's reliance on players from British academies is far from ideal, but that applies to eligible players born in both Ireland and Britain. We should always be welcoming of Irish diasporic players who display willingness and commitment to play for us. And, at the same time, we can strive to develop eligible talent through FAI structures, whether those players are born in Ireland or beyond. Commitment, pride and a steady stream of talented footballers is what we want; place of birth doesn't necessarily guarantee that.
Here's a piece by Eamon Dunphy I found that was written in the run-up to the 1994 World Cup:
http://web.archive.org/web/201006161...y-1437587.html
It's the perfect response to Sweeney's insulting anti-diasporic rubbish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eamon Dunphy
That older sweeney article - I remember that. It's the one where he suggests Gary Doherty was second gen. Not only is his basis flawed and his opinion insulting but his facts are just shoddy and wrong...
Danny what about asking to put that piece(slightly edited) into the comments section online and for next sundays indepedent, directly referring to Sweeneys piece - online via a URL?
I've just read his piece and can't understand why it's attracting so much derision, I was expecting something a lot more controversial. If one of his points is that the headhunting of English born players is counter-intuitive to the progression of Irish born players and players coming up through the League of Ireland - a League more than capable of producing Intl level players - then that's something I have been saying for donkey's years.
The underage teams are chock-a-block with eligible players who, by and large, fall by the wayside. Then the most talented eligible players almost invariably end up playing for England. So a cynical person would think that young Irish players are being given less of a chance due to the tendency to ingratiate and capture players who are eligible for us.
Another point he makes is that it would have meant less if it was Grealish setting up Noble to score in the Italy match. It would have meant less to me as these two players have made no secret that their first choice is to play for England and Ireland is a back-up plan. Although at least Noble is honest about his intentions, which I can respect him for.
Now if it was Keogh setting up Walters to score would it have meant any less? No it wouldn't because they have played through the age groups and haven't taken advantage of the eligibility to rules to benefit their Intl careers. It's simply a bonus that Brady and Hoolahan are a couple of my personal favorite players at club or country level.
Re: Townsend, Lawrenson etc. Ever since I started watching football coverage consistently at the turn of the century, I have listened to them refer to England as we and Ireland as they so it's not the best example IMO. And you can only laugh at some of Morrison's comments after his first call-up.
If they are committed and talented it's fine but it's a bigger issue than that. Maybe Owen Garvan's career would have turned out differently if he had Intl call-ups, maybe Seamus Coleman would've come through sooner if O'Shea was partnering Dunne and the RB slot was vacant. Maybe if an Irish born player was selected for the U-19's or U-21's ahead of an eligible player who will never play above League Two level that is a chance missed to launch his career.
It's too emotive an issue really. Perhaps that's where the problem lies.
The bottom line is that England have just stumbled their way through a pretty poor qualifying group and got knocked out to Iceland. We performed well for large periods against Sweden, Italy and France with a team predominantly made up of Irish born players and LOI graduates.
Perhaps we are better served by trusting Irish born players more, integrating LOI graduates sooner and moderating the use of eligible players who, by and large aren't good enough to play for England, at underage and senior level.
Surely we have proven that we have the talent at home who are dying for the chance that an Intl career will give them to launch their careers.
Enough waiting for the Patrick Bamford's who could take or leave playing for us and need their desire to play for their country to be awakened.
I don't believe anyone is waiting for Patrick Bamford.
Danny is typing...
...his letter to Nigel Farage.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
I think Sweeney's article ignores the important role of public funding in the Iceland programme. This is GAA country, the only country I can think of where there is a de facto sporting wing of the State.
I think Sweeney would be right if it was Noble and Grealish. I pretty much made the point myself in a recent post about the "domesticness" of this group of players resonating with the country. It's a question of degrees though, hence the importance of the gut test. I think the current squad very clearly passes the nation's own gut test.
As for the league and more home-grown players. I'd like to see the League better funded and I'd like to see more home-grown players in the squads. Not because there are degrees of Irishness, more that it endorses what we're doing of our own accord, where we have more control. Bring Back Control! Ooops.
[QUOTE=TheOneWhoKnocks;1879231]I've just read his piece and can't u...]
- I suspect you are giving the FAI more credit than it deserves - I would suggest they are far more reactive than proactive in finding English born players with eligibility. Clark for example was not properly on the radar until Richard Dunner went to Villa. However It's not that they shouldn't be looking at foreign born players - the league needs work. If the league was amazing perhaps they wouldn't speak to foreign born players so much but why would we exclude someone if they were interested and good enough - short answer - we wouldn't. To agree with the premise that we're excluding "Irish" kids suggests that we would exclude foreign born Irish kids if we had a choice. That's insulting to those of us with kids born abroad.
- Grealish/Noble - he picked them on purpose to be emotive. It's manipulative and comtemptible
- townesend/lawrenson - agree to disagree
- Garvan - terrible example - left at 16 - played extensively at under age level. Not sure of his backstory exactly but he had lots of under age chances. I agree an international cap can help raise profile etc but there are very few examples of caps being given out like confetti - john goodman. If you want an example of an Irish player who was perhaps ignored you only have to look at Wes but that was tactical. This is all very complex and there is no single example or story for all players. But it is true that there are in reality a very small number of non-irish born players on whom caps were "wasted". There's an equal number I would argue of Irish born players being rubbish for their few caps.
- No one who counts is waiting for Patrick Bamford - perhaps the media are...
- finally international football does not exist to "launch careers"
But if it was Noble and Grealish, then they would have been two players as committed to the cause as everybody else. He's basically saying if two players that ultimately didn't want to play for us were involved in the goal, it wouldn't have meant as much, but it's just a ridiculous example because if they were playing it would mean that they did want (or choose) to play for us. He went on to say...Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
"I think there's a pragmatic case in favour of sticking with native-born players."
So, where does that leave Ray Houghton's goals compared to Brady's?.... without "the same emotional resonance" apparently. That could hardly be further from the truth though, as your username will testify. Why not choose that, a real life example, instead of plunging to desperate hypothetical depths to manufacture a point that's not really there.
So did a squad brimming with foreign-born players in the 80's & 90's. Success overrides any gut test.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88