QuoteDarragh Burns in the process of switching allegiance from the north
https://www.independent.ie/sport/soc...-40978407.html
Darragh Burns in the process of switching allegiance from the north
https://www.independent.ie/sport/soc...-40978407.html
Great news. He’s a serious talent, as he showed again on Friday night. Looking forward to seeing him in the Cup Final on the Aviva pitch. No reason why he can’t go on to become a senior international. Sadly that will probably only happen if he leaves Pats to go across the water. Just hoping we can hang onto him for a while longer.Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
Out for a spell, got neglected, lay on the bench unselected.
I wasn’t really doubting any of that, especially in the case of Kilbane. Always loved his attitude. For a lot of the others though, I imagine it was more of a good career move. And I’m not necessarily knocking that. Andy Townsend would be a prime example. No way was he champing at the bit to play for us, but when the chance came to play international football he said yes, and he always performed well in the green shirt. To be honest, if we are missing out on lads at the moment because we’re not doing so well, than I’m ok with that too. The likes of Rice and Grealish I have no problem waving on their way.
What’s the deal with Conor Gallagher? Is he eligible?
Rules are as clear as mud now but seemingly once you play a competitive game at any level after turning 21, then you're tied to that country. Gallagher has played for England 21s since turning 21 so would tie him down.
Not that it matters, he's a nailed on future England international and has no reason to change.
Covid reasons in TAS COULD help
Meanwhile, in other sports: https://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/2021/...-rugby-motion/
Imagine if this was the rule in football. Who would we be after?The new regulation, which will come into effect from 1 January 2022, had been lobbied for in particular by the Pacific Rugby Players Welfare group in recent years.
It means that players can represent a second team in Test rugby, provided they have a blood connection to the country, and have not been capped in the previous three years.
Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).
Maybe, Nathan Redmond. Genuinely can’t think of anyone else worth choosing. Cahill is no better than what we have at CB . I’d be surprised if either Maddison or Michael Keane get another cap, but we ‘d need to wait a year or two before they qualified.
Jonjo Shelvey would have been worth a squad place at times.
He'd walk into our team. For all his weaknesses, his range of passing is phenomenal. Keeping Jeff Hendrick out of the Newcastle team consistently
Remember we offered him the chance to come on board for the euros in 2012 to no avail.
Ryan Bertrand? Aaron Lennon?
The UTV are showing a documentary about the whole thing now, so expect a load of fuss over this in the next few days.
Mentioned it in the World Cup thread, but have been interested to follow along the case of Ecuador's Byron Castillo over the last few days. Chile claimed he was actually born in Colombia, so not eligible to represent Ecuador, Ecuador, up as far as their courts, disagreed: https://www.newyorker.com/sports/spo...soccer-in-2022
FIFA rejected Chile's claim today, but it got me wondering: has their ever been a case where FIFA ruled on the citizenship status of a player in opposition to a court of law from the country concerned?
Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).
I didn't read in the article where the courts in Ecuador made a decision on the citizen status of Castillo, did I miss it?
Sorry, I got that from some Spanish language news sites, here's one example: https://www.google.com/amp/s/247news...850.html%3famp
From reading the New Yorker article, basically Chile's case was that Castillo had faked his birth cert in order to be eligible to play for Ecuador and Chile's evidence for this had already been discredited. Deep echoes of desperate IFA shenanigans in that one. FIFA don't rule on citizenship, they rule on eligibility to play, citizenship papers are just a part of that.
There were various player nationality disputes in Africa around the the time of intl qualifiers some years ago when chief suspect Cape Verde were flying high (discussed in this thread) which might fit that scenario. At least one team were punished with a 3 nil defeat. But I'd say the FIFA rulings were more about eligibility factors rather than contradicting a State's judgement on citizenship status.
Last edited by geysir; 11/06/2022 at 12:19 AM.
This is a story that isn't going away just yet, with Chile appealing on the grounds of a 2018 audio interview, conducted by the Ecuadorian football association, where the player in question appears to admit that his passport is fraudulant: https://www.football365.com/news/ecu...ke-id-cover-up
Ruling due on Thursday. At this stage Chile might not even benefit: there would be an argument that Peru, knocked out in the Intercontinentals by Australia, should be allowed the place instead, as they would have qualified automatically if results where Castillo played were turned into 3-0 walkovers.
Author of Never Felt Better (History, Film Reviews).
FIFA don't reall rule on citizenship, more on elgibility (which is stricter than citizenship - you can be a citizen but still not be eligible), but you'd have to imagine that they'd not go against a court that had said X was not even a citizen of that country.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks