Eligibility Rules, Okay

[Predator]

Do you actually read what others write? I made clear my support for extending the base of NI fans, while accepting that some groups are obviously more likely to be convinced than others.

I do, yes. You said that you didn't particularly care whether a move away from GSTQ would make for a more broadly representative team. Glad that you would like to extend the support base. It makes sense.

The former, of course. It'd be a bit silly if it set out to represent Portuguese or Latvian football fans. They- like you- already support other teams. Which- to repeat- doesn't exclude them or anyone else from becoming NI fans.

Who said anything about representing the Portuguese or Latvians? I would argue that the IFA has a duty to try to represent as many people from the region as is possible, especially those who are eligible to play for them - i.e. people actually from NI rather than foreign nationals such as Portuguese or Latvians.

They have tried, and been quite successful. Not Brazil on this forum/ thread has been personally involved in many of their initiatives and will be glad to supply details, if you're interested in reading them.

If that is the case, I must presume that, if the IFA is serious, they will move away from GSTQ. However, it's telling that as we approach 2012, the IFA has not acted on previous recommendations to move away. Maybe it's a case of the rock and that hard place.

I've suggested repeatedly how I'd prefer they tackled this issue. By accepting that many players, like fans, from NI will identify with the South and want to play for its teams. And by trying to persuade those who have chosen to play for NI teams to remain available for them. Ideally as part of a bilateral deal with the FAI where they don't sleect each other's adult players.

You miss the point. Judging by the precedent of the CAS case and constant moaning through the channels in the media, the IFA cares about these type of people when they opt not to play for them and make attempts to encourage these people to play for them. Why shouldn't they carry this attitude over to supporters?

As an FA organising international football, their priority is obviously fans of that team first, potential fans second. Not all lof the first group (including me) are happy with the Status quo, as should be obvious.

That's fair enough. As I've said, I don't think that current IFA fans should be prohibited from having a say, merely that other groups should be consulted. This idea that only current fans should have a say makes no sense to me.

Which isn't to deny that, like any public organisation, the IFA should be listening to constructive criticism from any source.

Great, that's what I've been saying.

Standard public opinion surveys interview about 1,000 people. But not just the first 1,000 you meet down the street. You normally need 50% women, 15% over 65, 7% ethnic minority and so on.

A survey of IFA block bookers doesn't need to that. It just, er, asks all the block bookers. So it's both easier and more comprehensive.

Thanks for the rundown of poll mechanics. I thought that you meant "filtered" in the sense that potential-fans should be filtered out.

All opinions are valid, and- as I say earlier in this post- the IFA should listen to any constructive criticism. The opinions of anyone realistically unlikely to become a NI fan aren't invalid, just less likely to be relevant.

How do you discern whether someone is unlikely to become a NI fan?

Something of a roundabout argument, this. They'd be more likely to reach out as you say if the irredeemably biased took them even a wee bit seriously (ie, weren't so irredeemably biased...)

Roundabout indeed, but I believe the onus is on the IFA, considering that they are the self instated governors of the game for the public that rely heavily on public support through grassroots contributions, public handouts etc.

It's not unreasonable, just not a high priority in the way you're describing it. The IFA's role is to run football- and specifically in this argument, an international side. Not to commission sociological research.

If commissioning sociological research is something they must do in their own interests, I'm sure it could be done.

[Predator]

All sports are in receipt of public monies - the IFA can make their own decisions on something such as Anthem (rules governed by FIFA, not politicians) without approval from politicans.

If you think politicians, of whatever hue, are going to force the IFA on the Anthem issue, you are mistaken.

I never said anything about forcing the IFA.

[Predator]

Aye, that bluster will be a factor but not mainly because the IFA gets public grants. Rather because it gives the hacks a chance to grandstand without any political cost to themselves. As a relief from having to apply British government/ IMF spending cuts.

I doubt any politico is going to say, effectively 'Stop/ continue playing GSTQ, or we'll block your money'. Any nationalist trying the first will simply get a reference to the GAA thrown back at them; Jim Allister or whoever offering the latter would be gently ridiculed.

True enough, fair point.

[Not Brazil]

I never said anything about forcing the IFA.

I'd refer you to FIFA Statutes 13 (g).

As you are no doubt aware, FIFA don't take too kindly to political interference.

[geysir]

I'd refer you to FIFA Statutes 13 (g).

As you are no doubt aware, FIFA don't take too kindly to political interference.

The reference to political interference is a hysterical red herring and does not apply to what Predator has written.
NB, you are running into dodgy areas of discussion when you quote a FIFA rule to support your argument

FIFA definition "political interference is when a government tries to take direct control"
http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/news/n...544/index.html

The government sports body is quite entitled to hold back public money from the IFA or FAI, if it observes that the agreed criteria for receiving grants is not being followed. The sports body is not directly interfering in the internal mechanisms of the association and that does not fall under political interference.
If the government wants to fund a revamp of a stadium, the association has to follow accepted standards in application, planning, design and estimates, in order to benefit from the sports grant.
If the IFA has a constituted policy to exclude women in football from a fair and equitable recipient of grants, the sports body has the right to withdraw public funds until that gender discrimination policy has changed.
So on and so forth.

[Not Brazil]

The government sports body is quite entitled to hold back public money from the IFA or FAI, if it observes that the agreed criteria for receiving grants is not being followed.

That's quite different to "change your National Anthem, or else...." interference.

[geysir]

That's quite different to "change your National Anthem, or else...." interference.

You are now demonstrating confusion on the matter by inventing a scenario, when you transform 'political bluster' to a political direct threat/blackmail.
Political bluster, as most of us are aware, is noise without intent.
A threat is a statement of intent.


And even if that unlikely threat was made by your political master (to withhold public funds unless the pre-match anthem was changed) it still would not equate to the FIFA definition of political interference "political interference is when a government tries to take direct control".

[Not Brazil]

Political bluster, as most of us are aware, is noise without intent.
A threat is a statement of intent.

Indeed.

And, back to my original point - politicians of whatever hue can bluster all they like on the issue of the IFA's choice of Anthem, however, it will be the IFA alone who make the decision on the Anthem.

The IFA are obligated to "manage their affairs independently and ensure that their own affairs are not influenced by any third parties".

The Anthem of the IFA representative sides is the business of the IFA.

[geysir]

Indeed.

And, back to my original point - politicians of whatever hue can bluster all they like on the issue of the IFA's choice of Anthem, however, it will be the IFA alone who make the decision on the Anthem.

The IFA are obligated to "manage their affairs independently and ensure that their own affairs are not influenced by any third parties".

The Anthem of the IFA representative sides is the business of the IFA.

I think you understand now that is a separate point, to equating what Predator stated with the FIFA definition of political interference.

I agree with your main point, however politicians/pundits/journalists/ morons/imbeciles/drunkards/fans/half fans/non fans/ordinary people, all will express an opinion on the matter. That is the nature of life. It is up to the IFA to make the decision.
The IFA have demonstrated that they can manage with ease to avoid digesting sane advice from external sources. I will excitedly await the outcome of the coming together of the great minds of the IFA committee, after being locked in intense discussion for days over the football anthem issue.

[Predator]

Though keep in mind that this is the organisation that kept pressing FIFA to enforce their rules on player eligibility, and then, dissatisfied with the response and in a masochistic state of mind, took their case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport using the same strategy as before.

You are quite right. I afford the IFA too much credit.

[Gather round]

You said that you didn't particularly care whether a move away from GSTQ would make for a more broadly representative team

Where did I say or imply that (direct quote, please)? I've made repeatedly clear my preference to

a) change the anthem from GSTQ, replacing with something distinct to NI and likely to get broad acceptance there

b) as a result and combined with other initiatives (FFA etc.), to increase the supporter base (or make it more broadly representative, as you might put it)

c) accept the reality that RoI fans in NI aren't likely to change their allegiance even if they become more accepting of the NI side.

I would argue that the IFA has a duty to try to represent as many people from the region as is possible, especially those who are eligible to play for them

That duty needn't include an initiative to canvass the views of non fans on an issue which is relevant to fans.

I must presume that, if the IFA is serious, they will move away from GSTQ. However, it's telling that as we approach 2012, the IFA has not acted on previous recommendations to move away. Maybe it's a case of the rock and that hard place

Why do you presume that? They're more likely to act according to the wishes of their main constituency (which clearly for the purposes of this issue means fans of the NI side and probably not local clubs whose members don't support NI because they identify with the South). Which is why I agree NB's suggestion of a block-booker poll. If that shows 75% for GSTQ, there's no point changing; if 50%+1, it's game on.

You miss the point. Judging by the precedent of the CAS case and constant moaning through the channels in the media, the IFA cares about these type of people when they opt not to play for them and make attempts to encourage these people to play for them

No, I understood it quite well thanks. As I've said repeatedly here, going to the CAS was foolish not just because of the cost and inevitable defeat, but as it was vindictive. I wouldn't condemn players from NI who choose to play for the South; it would just be better if they hadn't amassed numerous adult NI caps first. In those circumstances, it's reasonable for the IFA to try to persuade them not to move. Anyone who emigrated before doing that, fine, bye-bye.

Why shouldn't they carry this attitude over to supporters?

The attitude- if I understand you point properly- that simply growing up in NI means you should support the local side- isn't realistic. 42% of the population, and by association of football fans, identify with another country. Of course the IFA should treat all its member clubs, players etc. inclusively, but canvassing them about the NI side in the same way as its committed fans is largely pointless.

As I've said, I don't think that current IFA fans should be prohibited from having a say

How very generous of you!

This idea that only current fans should have a say makes no sense to me

I explained it in some detail above, but if you don't accept that fine. I'll not press the point.

How do you discern whether someone is unlikely to become a NI fan?

Their already being a RoI fan is probably the most obvious test.

I believe the onus is on the IFA, considering that they are the self instated governors of the game for the public that rely heavily on public support through grassroots contributions, public handouts etc

Strictly speaking they're the democratically elected local authority for the game. The onus on them is to act in their members' wishes. Not all those members will regard issues around the NI side as relevant to them (largely becuae they identify with the RoI). And- as NB and I explained in our reply to you above- the receipt of public money doesn't make them accountable to the entire electorate in the way a government department is.

[ArdeeBhoy]

The usual guff & waffle from GR there. Am unsure why he bothers. Though based on past experience those views would never be tolerated on OWB.
Doubtless he's never tried to put up similar on there!

Politicians can bluster all they like, but the decision falls solely on the IFA - in arriving at that decision, the views of politicians should be ignored.

We're talking about introducing a "sporting" Anthem for Northern Ireland International football matches, not changing the National Anthem of Northern Ireland.

Hmm, would have thought you'd have had a better grasp of reality on this?

Can't see any decision being reached without political input, no matter how 'undesirable' this seems. In fact certain unionists are likely to implode at the thought!

The difference is that England and Scotland underage squads aren't harbouring kids whose "boyhood dream" is to play for Northern Ireland.

We pick up players born in mainland UK, with blood links to Northern Ireland (parent/grandparent), who realise the chances of representing their country of birth at senior international level are remote.

You also avail of players born in mainland UK for similar reasons.

Well yes. But how do we know if any of those players didn't have a previous "boyhood dream" of playing for Eng. or Scotland, before the North hoovered them up??
Or come to think of it, Germany, Zambia or Norway to name but three...

So, the short answer is - no, you don't.

Never mind me, though perhaps you should consider why there is such antipathy towards a small sub-team?
Especially when many Irish football fans of a certain age had a soft spot for the North which has long since ended.

Despite unlike me, having no connection to the place. Nor ever likely to.

[Not Brazil]

T
Can't see any decision being reached without political input, no matter how 'undesirable' this seems. In fact certain unionists are likely to implode at the thought!

Unionist politicians can "implode" all they like on the issue (most of whom don't attend Northern Ireland matches).

As I said, for fear of repeating myself, politicians of whatever hue can bluster all they like - the IFA will make the decision of Anthem, not politicians.

[gastric]

Getting a bit tired of the GSTQ debate, so I thought I would throw a hand grenade in. Any chance of pinching this 19 year old?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...-Donnelly.html

[Not Brazil]

Well yes. But how do we know if any of those players didn't have a previous "boyhood dream" of playing for Eng. or Scotland, before the North hoovered them up??

You really don't get it.

I'm quite sure those players we "hoovered up", did have "boyhood dreams of playing for England at Snr International level, when they played for England underage representative sides.

[Not Brazil]

Never mind me, though perhaps you should consider why there is such antipathy towards a small sub-team?

But yet, earlier in the thread, you queried why Northern Ireland fans won't be cheering on the South next summer?

[Not Brazil]

Getting a bit tired of the GSTQ debate, so I thought I would throw a hand grenade in. Any chance of pinching this 19 year old?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...-Donnelly.html

No doubt our Under 21 International will let the FAI know if he's interested.

[ifk101]

Don't think he has played competitively for the North at u21 level but was included in a recent squad. He may be ineligibile for our current u21 campaign so better if he continues to get experience with the North before he makes the step-up.

[Not Brazil]

Don't think he has played competitively for the North at u21 level but was included in a recent squad

He was an unused sub in the recent Under 21 Qualifier v Serbia.

[ifk101]

I think that stops him from playing competitively with our u21 until the current qualification/ competition ends.