Player eligibility row

[Sullivinho]

As for that banner, whether it cost you or not, some moron went to the effort of producing it.

Sur wasn't it a superb victory for them in fairness? I expected a march but I s'pose a nice wee banner is as good a way as any to commemorate what they achieved that night in Paris. And if the vicariousness holds up, the Norn might well enjoy a great World Cup with the likes of Anelka and Ribery in the side! Who knows, winning the cup by proxy may even go some way to soothing the apoplexy brought about by upstarts like young Duffy who, "no disrespect to Northern Ireland", would rather be "playing for his country".

[Charlie Darwin]

The banner was funny. I'm sure it was just a giddy little thrill for NI fans the same way half of this country enjoys remembering the Hand of God.

[ifk101]

2. FIFA presently recognises the right of someone born within NI to represent the FAI outwith the normal parentage/residence requirements, on account of the fact that such people are automatically entitled to Republic of Ireland citiizenship as a birthright. This birthright has been available since 1921 i.e. 77 years before the GFA was even conceived.

The Republic of Ireland is the official name of an international football team and/ or a description of Ireland's form of government. Ireland was declared a republic in 1949. I'm sure you are well aware of this.

Is it not correct that if you are born in France, you may ordinarily* only represent the FFF? Or in Germany only the DFB? In Brazil only the CFB?

No that's incorrect. There are other special circumstances.

But regardless, are you against Irish nationals by birth representing their country? If so, you are against the true essence of what international football seeks to and should represent.

[co. down green]

(English-born) Gorman qualifies for NI on the basis that he has a grandparent from Coleraine. I do not know on what basis he formerly qualified for ROI.

Anyhow, all we ask is that the general principle whereby you may represent a Football Association outwith whose jurisdiction you were born only if you meet certain Eligibility Criteria (parent/grandparent/residence), be applied equally across all 208 Member Associations of FIFA.

I think you will find that Gorman qualifies for both Irish teams via his Co. Derry born mother.

I suggest you contact FIFA's legal department with any queries regarding eligibility, although i would have thought that the penny would have dropped by now, after FIFA have clearly stated on a number of occasions, that players born in the North continue to be eligible to represent Ireland.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Sure wasn't it a superb victory for them in fairness? I expected a march but I s'pose a nice wee banner is as good a way as any to commemorate what they achieved that night in Paris. And if the vicariousness holds up, the Norn might well enjoy a great World Cup with the likes of Anelka and Ribery in the side! Who knows, winning the cup by proxy may even go some way to soothing the apoplexy brought about by upstarts like young Duffy who, "no disrespect to Northern Ireland", would rather be "playing for his country".

Aye, yer right! We are bigger than that. It's just the hypocrisy of OWB that really stinks.

Anyway as numerous others have shown, our illustrious poster when not referring to us as poor dispossessed people, has a very limited grasp of FIFA regulations and Irish citizenship rules.
Incidentally, there is no country called 'Republic of Ireland'. Lol.

[DannyInvincible]

I think you will find that Gorman qualifies for both Irish teams via his Co. Derry born mother.

I suggest you contact FIFA's legal department with any queries regarding eligibility, although i would have thought that the penny would have dropped by now, after FIFA have clearly stated on a number of occasions, that players born in the North continue to be eligible to represent Ireland.

To be fair to EG on this, the strict rule under which Gorman presumably qualifies to play for us - article 17 - does actually raise the question of birthplace of his grandparent and specifies that it must have been within the territory of the association he now seeks to represent. This is at variance from article 15, which raises only the matter of a player's birth nationality. It confuses me as to how that would have made him eligible for us. In saying that, Alex Bruce's circumstances are more or less identical for the purpose of comparison and FIFA never appeared to have a problem with him lining out for us.

15 Principle
1. Any person holding a permanent nationality that is not dependent on residence in a certain country is eligible to play for the representative teams of the Association of that country.

...

17 Acquisition of a new nationality
Any Player who refers to art. 15 par. 1 to assume a new nationality and who has not played international football in accordance with art. 15 par. 2 shall be eligible to play for the new representative team only if he fulfi ls one of the following conditions:
(a) He was born on the territory of the relevant Association;
(b) His biological mother or biological father was born on the territory of the relevant Association;
(c) His grandmother or grandfather was born on the territory of the relevant Association;
(d) He has lived continuously for at least fi ve years after reaching the age of 18 on the territory of the relevant Association.

[EalingGreen]

Of course. The point is that it's a bit rich - childish and idiotic even - to hear accusations of southern irredentism being thrown about by Northern Ireland fans when the population of Northern Ireland, including a majority of the unionist community, democratically recognised the extra-territorial applicability of Irish citizenship over their jurisdiction. Likewise, it was recognised by the government of the UK. It's perfectly legitimate and recognised on a bi-lateral basis so to make out as if its indicative of some sort of aggressive or over-reaching "foreign policy" is simply nonsense.

You confuse "Irredentism" amd "Citizenship".
An example of the former was when the Irish Republic Government claimed territorial jurisdiction over Northern Ireland, even despite such a claim being nowhere recognised under international law. (In that respect, it was a little like eg Turkey claiming jurisdiction over Northern Cyprus.) Anyhow, this irredentist claim was removed as part of the GFA negotiations, which the population of Ireland North and South (including myself, btw) supported overwhelmingly.
As for Citizenship, it is open to any Nation State to grant citizenship to whomsoever it likes, for any reason or none. This basic principle was unchanged by the GFA, other than the Government of the UK specifically acknowledged that right, rather than tacitly accepting it, as previously.
Personally, I always thought the former Irredentism of the Irish Republic to be unwelcome, unhelpful and even marginally offensive. However, I couldn't care less about their Citizenship policy (aside from the way that the FAI uses that anomaly to exploit FIFA's eligibility criteria to select players who were not born within their own jurisdiction and who also do not meet the additional parent/grandparent/residence criteria which apply to players born outwith the jurisdiction of every other of FIFA's 207 Member Associations)

[EalingGreen]

That is correct alright, but it doesn't represent what you tried to pass off as a basic premise of international eligibility in the face of a written rule (article 15) which quite clearly mentions nothing about birthplace, but rather, invokes a player's nationality.

I was not attempting to pass off the basic premise of international eligibility (i.e. born within the jurisdiction of a Member Association of FIFA) as being specifically reflected in FIFA's Articles, merely pointing to its (premise) existence, in order to highlight the anomalous and inequitable situation re the IFA. This premise might prove inconvenient for you, but that does not alter it, never mind refute its existence.

Despite my fairly basic research, Ireland's system appears to be a unique one internationally, but a perfectly legitimate one all the same.

It does, indeed, appear to be unique; moreover it is recognised by FIFA. That does not mean it is fair* or equitable.

* - Just like Gallas's goal in Paris was recognised by FIFA as being "legitimate"...

[EalingGreen]

The GFA may not have changed the constitutional status of citizenship as a birthright

No "may" about it.

but it [GFA] did effectively legitimise Ireland's right to offer it [Citizenship]

Does that mean that pre-GFA, you considered the Irish Republic Government's policy of granting citizenship automatically to people born within NI to have been less than legitimate? If so, it is ironic, even bizarre that you might think so, whilst I do not!

and that has to have an effect on any lawmaker's thinking.

It may or may not have had an effect on FIFA's thinking, we do not know. Personally, I believe the attempts by Qatar and Togo to grant their respective citizenship to Brazilians etc who did not have dual nationality by birthright had much more of an impact. Or who knows, it might just have been another example of Sepp Blatter opening his mouth before engaging his brain one day, a phenomenon which is hardly unknown to supporters of the ROI team, I suspect...

Why are those forms of dual nationality superior to the automatic birthright of those born on the island of Ireland?

I did not state/imply, nor do I believe, that these were "superior"; rather they are additional or ancilliary.

[EalingGreen]

Well, nice hypocrisy by you. And your bretheren. Especially coming on here and all.
No wonder the likes of Duffy (& undoubtedly many more) have left behind the paranoia and control freakery displayed on OWB.

Really? According to Duffy, his opting to represent the FAI was at least partly on account of his being a Catholic, that apparently being the natural consequence of his holding whatever religious convictions he maintains.
Fortunately, the very many other Cathoics who represent NI at all the various levels do not take the same essentially sectarian view of things.

As for that banner, whether it cost you or not, some moron went to the effort of producing it.

No great "effort" at all (you know, computers and that); in fact, it might better have been described as a 'Labour of Love'.
Of course, such cost and effort as was expended might have been more onerous had it not had the full desired effect. But seeing as how you and others were apparently so outraged by it, I think we may safely call it "Mission Accomplished!"

Notice the North's 'fans' didn't go to the effort of producing one, say to mark the exploits of say, Best, Dougan or Healy.

We do indeed have banners honouring George Best. We have a Supporters' Club named in his honour. We also have wall murals honouring him. We have now renamed an airport after him. There has been a Charitable Foundation set up in his name and donations are being sought for a Statue to the great man.
As for Healy, there is more than one banner extolling the wee man on display at every home NI game; he features on several wall murals throughout NI and there is a park named after him in his home town.
Re. Dougan, his rather mediocre record of 8 goals in 43 internationals does not merit any greater recognition than that of, say, Colin Clarke (13/38) or Jimmy Quinn (12/48). Nonetheless, he does feature on a wall mural in his East Belfast homeland.

And if you really think it wasn't a handball, well you really do need to change your prescription!

If you have inferred that from anything I have ever posted, then it is you who is in need of medication, not me...

[EalingGreen]

are you against Irish nationals by birth representing their country?

I am against any National exploiting what is essentially a political stance, in order to subvert the basic footballing principles re eligibility etc., especially when that proves inequitable to fellow footballing countries.
That was the position I held when I heard that eg the Government of Qatar was giving out Passports to Brazilian-born footballers, so that they might subvert the normal eligibility criteria to represent their "new" country. If nothing else, this was liable to give Qatar an unfair advantage over their African neighbours.

If so, you are against the true essence of what international football seeks to and should represent.

Nice try to box me into a corner, but it doesn't work. For me, the opportunity to represent a country in international football is not a "right", it is a privilege. Moreover, since in essence it is determined by place of birth, it ought not to be a matter of "choice", as demanded eg by Darron Gibson, since one cannot choose to be born in any particular location (though one may choose to reside in such location...).
The fact that FIFA appears to allow NI-born people a choice does not make it any fairer (imo), especially when it does not offer the same choice to anyone born within the jurisdiction of any of its other 207 Member Associations.

[EalingGreen]

I think you will find that Gorman qualifies for both Irish teams via his Co. Derry born mother.

I was unaware that that is how he qualified to represent the FAI, just as i had thought it was his grandmother, rather than his mother, so thanks for that.
Beyond that, I was always under the impression that Coleraine was in Co. Londonderry, the former county of "Coleraine" having been abolished when the local authorities reorganised the county system which they had imported from England and no "Co. Derry" ever having existed.

I suggest you contact FIFA's legal department with any queries regarding eligibility, although i would have thought that the penny would have dropped by now, after FIFA have clearly stated on a number of occasions, that players born in the North continue to be eligible to represent Ireland.

I am quite aware that players born in what you term "the North" (Northern Ireland) are deemed eligible by FIFA to represent the FAI.
But young Gorman was not born in NI. Therefore, having been born outside Ireland, I am genuinely unsure how he avoids the need to satisfy the normal Dual Nationality requirements of having a parent/grandparent/residence in the Irish Republic.
(Oh, and there has been no international association football team called "Ireland" since the IFA voluntarily desisted from using that name for their team in friendly matches, sometime around 1980)

Edit: Re Gorman, I have just noticed DI's interesting post on the matter, above (#846). I should be interested to know what justification is used by ROI fans who feel he legitimately represented the FAI.

[ifk101]

Moreover, since in essence it is determined by place of birth, it ought not to be a matter of "choice", as demanded eg by Darron Gibson, since one cannot choose to be born in any particular location (though one may choose to reside in such location...).

Eligibility is not determined by place of birth.

The fact that FIFA appears to allow NI-born people a choice does not make it any fairer (imo), especially when it does not offer the same choice to anyone born within the jurisdiction of any of its other 207 Member Associations.

But FIFA isn't making an exception for NI-born people.

[Drumcondra 69er]

I was not attempting to pass off the basic premise of international eligibility (i.e. born within the jurisdiction of a Member Association of FIFA) as being specifically reflected in FIFA's Articles, merely pointing to its (premise) existence, in order to highlight the anomalous and inequitable situation re the IFA. This premise might prove inconvenient for you, but that does not alter it, never mind refute its existence.
It does, indeed, appear to be unique; moreover it is recognised by FIFA. That does not mean it is fair* or equitable.

* - Just like Gallas's goal in Paris was recognised by FIFA as being "legitimate"...

Bit like the United Kingdom being allowed to have 4 seperate representative teams rather then just one so.....

[co. down green]

IBut young Gorman was not born in NI. Therefore, having been born outside Ireland, I am genuinely unsure how he avoids the need to satisfy the normal Dual Nationality requirements of having a parent/grandparent/residence in the Irish Republic..

I'm fairly sure FIFA's legal department covered this in their response to the IFA in March 2006, when the IFA appealed against the eligibility of Alex Bruce to play for Ireland (although in truth, the appeal was as much about sour grapes on the IFA part, as Bruce had rejected four approaches from the IFA management team in the previous twelve months).

The response received from the IFA stated that In order for the player Bruce to be able to play for a representative team of the Republic of Ireland, he shall be required to hold a passport of the Republic of Ireland.

[EalingGreen]

Eligibility is not determined by place of birth.

Nor did I say it was, either. (You are ignoring my qualification of "in essence").

But FIFA isn't making an exception for NI-born people.

Not in so many words, no. But can you point me towards any other territory anywhere else in the world which as a place of birth automatically qualifies a player to represent two different National; Associations?
From what I can see, the only one out of the 208 MA's of FIFA is NI (IFA).
That seems pretty exceptional to me.

[EalingGreen]

Bit like the United Kingdom being allowed to have 4 seperate representative teams rather then just one so.....

Quite.
Mind you, if FIFA were to renege on the special status granted to the four UK Associations in return for bailing it out of bankruptcy, their only recourse would be to replace them with one, single UK team.
In which case, having removed that exception, if they were also to remove the exception whereby someone born in NI may choose to represent another Association than that within whose jurisdiction he was born, you would find that the likes of Darron Gibson would only be eligible to represent the UK.
You know, the country to whom he pays his taxes, which provided his free education and health services, allows him to vote for its Government, plus provides him and his family with pension rights and other social security benefits etc.

[EalingGreen]

I'm fairly sure FIFA's legal department covered this in their response to the IFA in March 2006, when the IFA appealed against the eligibility of Alex Bruce to play for Ireland

You may be correct. However, I should be very interested to know exactly on what grounds FIFA permitted Bruce to play for the ROI, since on the face of it, his case (and Gorman's) would appear to be excluded specifically by the provisions of Article 17.
Any ideas?

P.S. Bruce does not play for "Ireland", he only looks like a rugby player sometimes...

The response received from the IFA stated that In order for the player Bruce to be able to play for a representative team of the Republic of Ireland, he shall be required to hold a passport of the Republic of Ireland.

Is that all he was required to do?
For if that is the case, I fail to see how FIFA could prevent someone holding a valid Passport of Qatar from representing the Qatar FA, for instance.
Btw, you appear to be quoting from some sort of document or report etc. Can you cite the source, or is that some construction you came up with from memory?

[ifk101]

Nor did I say it was, either. (You are ignoring my qualification of "in essence").

I didn't ignore. Eligibility is not determined by place of birth.

Not in so many words, no. But can you point me towards any other territory anywhere else in the world which as a place of birth automatically qualifies a player to represent two different National; Associations?

Relevancy?

That seems pretty exceptional to me.

Not as exceptional as denying nationals by birth the right to play for their country.

[dantheman]

The GFA is utterly irrelevant to the question of international eligibility of Irish-born players, for two reasons (at least).
1. The GFA makes no reference to Football, neither do FIFA's Statutes etc make reference to the GFA;
2. FIFA presently recognises the right of someone born within NI to represent the FAI outwith the normal parentage/residence requirements, on account of the fact that such people are automatically entitled to Republic of Ireland citiizenship as a birthright. This birthright has been available since 1921 i.e. 77 years before the GFA was even conceived.

If you read my post correctly, you would have seen that I agree that the GFA did in fact change nothing in law.

What it did show was that EVERYONE had agreed to the fact that anyone born in NI had the right to Irish citizenship, and Irish citizenship alone. Which is not possible by playing for a British team, Northern Ireland. Therefore you have no grounds to complain, as your community and (admittedly) yourself voted for it.

I see you did not take me up on my point about petitioning the Irish goverment to change its constitution. This can be done in isolation from the GFA by them mechanism I have demonstrated. This is the course you should pursue. If you do not wish this, I suggest you humbly (lol) drop the issue. Neither the CAS nor FIFA can/will change the irish constitution.

By the way, you do have much more of a case regarding and English born player, with a grandparent from NI, playing for the ROI. However that is not the case you are taking. To be perfectly honest, after reading your supporters forum, you don't seem to have a coherent plan at all, and no idea what you want. You even know you're bringing the wrong case to the CAS.
The only thing that the NI fans have in common, is a deep seated (unreciprocated) hatred of the Irish nationality with which 43% of the people in your state/country/province (& **5% of the island) identify. This is manifested in part by attacking the, more successful, Republic of Ireland. Such an attitude will not serve you well in the long term.

Expect more weeping and gnashing of teeth in loyal Ulster. Agree the banner is a joke btw