Some lad just posted something over on P.ie and my brain has nearly melted trying to reply. I have given up.
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
Sports News Ireland wrote a piece about what I'd written: http://www.sportsnewsireland.com/soccer_irish/35535/
Summarises the issues quite well - much better than my natural weakness for verbosity would ever have let me - and it almost makes me sound like someone who should be taken half seriously sometimes.
Next stop the bt...
It's something I think most of us have been wondering, but it appears that Ireland's particular brand of extra-territorial nationality law isn't unique. I've come across another state that offers citizenship extra-territorially by virtue of birth alone in what is internationally-recognised as a separate and sovereign jurisdiction. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is recognised only by Turkey and it confers a right to Turkish citizenship to those born there. As far as the international community is concerned, however, this territory is a 'de jure' part of the Republic of Cyprus. Interestingly though, Turkish Cypriots are entitled to play for Turkey under FIFA's rules. Kâzım Kâzım and Muzzy Izzet, for example, were able to play for Turkey in light of their Turkish Cypriot parentage.
If FIFA aren't prepared to step into a situation and introduce an exceptional set of territorial criteria where they'd be going with the tide of international opinion, one must ask why they would step into the Irish situation and force through some unique set of rules where they'd be going against international opinion just because some disgruntled, stuck-in-the-mud NI fans are throwing their toys out of the pram?
My discovery came in light of having read through half a thread on the issue on IrishLeagueSupporters.com last night that I'd seen recorded as a source of origin for quite a few who'd visited my piece. To my surprise, the discussion on the matter was at a similarly advanced stage to what it's at here and a few posters even suspected me, as the author of the piece, of having read through that topic before writing it, ha, but I wasn't even aware of the forum's existence until yesterday evening. I did see a few posters on there who I'd be pretty certain are also on here, so that probably led to a semi-crossover of ideas.
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
On the basis of your input here, rather hiding your light under the proverbial bushel there, DI.
I see one poster, in what appears to be a fit of dogged contrarianism, has criticised the article after it was described as being well-informed and researched:
It's neither "informed" or "well researched" and no amount of self promotion to the contrary is fooling anyone.
End Apartheid Now! One Team in Ireland!
He's wrong on a few accounts. Forgive my personal bias, but that's simply an outrageous comment. Over the past few years, I've gone to quite an effort to ensure I am as knowledgeable as I can be on this issue and I don't think anyone could seriously dismiss the piece as providing an ill-informed analysis of the situation. My current understanding has encompassed an ungodly amount of research, within which I would also include the various and significant contributions from myself and others over time on this forum. Neither am I engaging in self-promotion on OWC.
I assume he's accusing me of being this 'EdwardT' to whom he immediately responds after 'EdwardT' states:
I'm guessing 'EdwardT' is an undercover agent from here, because it certainly isn't me.I don't think anyone has addressed any of the substantive points in it. In fairness, its certainly the most informed and well researched piece on the subject. It looks like some media outlets have even got hold of it.
http://www.sportsnewsireland.com/soccer_irish/35535/
From my experience on OWC, that chap comes across as very irreconcilable. I think he was partly behind that ludicrous 'Open Letter' and petition campaign. His comments on your article are petty and childish - his first criticism was against the format of the greenscene article, because, well, he obviously had nothing important to say about the content. How could he?
End Apartheid Now! One Team in Ireland!
I was just looking at this bit again on the FAI's website and the wording still puzzles me somewhat:
"The decade of the 1950s marked the resolution of the thorny issue of dual qualification of players born on the island of Ireland and also the intervention of FIFA to apply an official designation to the two associations governing football on the island.Maybe someone could clarify what is meant by the last paragraph. I know it was discussed a bit before and the conclusion was drawn that it was referring to the IFA, but I can't put my finger on where exactly right now. I have to assume it is referring to the IFA, as otherwise it would contradict the evidence all of FIFA, the IFA and the FAI submitted to CAS, but is there an error in there? Should it not say the following?:
The Irish Football Association in Belfast continued to select players from the south for their international teams in the years after the War, a policy that was not shared by the football authorities in Dublin with just one exception.
The Football Association in Dublin selected four Northern Ireland players in a squad that travelled to play Portugal and Spain in the Summer of 1946 in Ireland's first two international matches after the War.
The reasons why they departed from their stated policy of confining selection to those players born in the Republic have never been satisfactorily explained but the licence to look beyond the political boundary separating the North from the Republic for team selections was revoked in 1950."
"The reasons why they [the IFA] departed from their stated policy of confining selection to those players born in the [north] have never been satisfactorily explained..."
Or can confining your selection to a certain set of players mean that you're limiting your selection to players outside of that set? I generally thought it meant you'd be limiting your selection to players within, rather than outside, some limit or boundary, no? Does that make sense? For example, if you're asked to select a few cards from a pack but to confine your selection to red cards, wouldn't that be an instruction to limit your selection and choose from just hearts and diamonds rather than an instruction to limit your selection to cards of a black suit?
Not at all Danny, consider the earlier line,
'a policy that was not shared by the football authorities in Dublin with just one exception'.
To my understanding, the whole piece you quote from the FAI website makes consistent sense.
Go back to the FAI's submissions to CASOr can confining your selection to a certain set of players mean that you're limiting your selection to players outside of that set? I generally thought it meant you'd be limiting your selection to players within, rather than outside, some limit or boundary, no? Does that make sense? For example, if you're asked to select a few cards from a pack but to confine your selection to red cards, wouldn't that be an instruction to limit your selection and choose from just hearts and diamonds rather than an instruction to limit your selection to cards of a black suit?
CAS 2010/A/2071 IFA v/ FAI, Kearns & FIFA - Page 6
The so-called “1950 FIFA Ruling” and the alleged subsequent accord between the associations do not exist, at least not in the terms asserted by the IFA. Up until 1950, both associations claimed to govern all football in Ireland and to be entitled to choose players from throughout the island, without any reference to their geographical location. In the beginning of the 1950’s, the two associations accepted that they could no longer regard all players on the island as being under their jurisdiction and agreed that the IFA was the governing body of football in Northern Ireland and the FAI in the Republic of Ireland. In any event, there was no discussion about the status of Irish citizens living in Northern Ireland and FAI has never accepted that Irish citizens could not be selected for its representative teams, whether they were living in Northern Ireland or elsewhere.
- “Any rule or ruling from 1950, or thereafter, was in any case replaced by the adoption of Articles 15 to 18 of the FIFA Regulations, which were created to govern the issue of eligibility and nationality in a comprehensive manner” (answer, page 17, par. 51).
CAS upheld this submission.
I've just read this for the first time. To me it is referring to the FAI and it follows from the previous paragraph which refers to the one departure in the FAI selection policy in 1946 in selecting 4 Northerners to play Portugal and Spain. Tis strange as it appears to be written by a neutral/outsider.
If it's referring to the FAI, then when did they state a policy of confining selection to just players born in the Republic? And wouldn't that have implicitly ruled out northern-born Irish nationals from lining out for the FAI?
It appears to be a badly written piece. I've just had a look on wiki. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_Ir...al_footballers
Going from the wiki on dual Irish internationals I can only see 11 Northern born players who represented the FAI. 6 of these were dual internationals and 5 represented only the FAI.
The first was Harry Chatton who was born in Belfast. He made his last IFA appearance in 1925 and made his debut for the FAI aged 32 in 1931.
In 1936 and 1937 6 Northern born players were selected for the FAI. They were Hugh Connolly, Davy Jordan, John Feenan, Mick Hoy, Tommy Donnelly and Jackie Brown. Of these only Jackie Brown had played for the IFA.
From Jackie Brown's entry:
"Brown was one of several players born in Northern Ireland who benefited from the FAI’s attempts to establish their all-Ireland influence. He was first called up by the FAI for a game against Germany on 17 October 1936 but he was injured at the time. In May 1937 the FAI organised a European tour with a squad that included Brown and two other Northerners, Davy Jordan and John Feenan. Brown made his debut for the FAI XI on 17 May in a 1–0 win against Switzerland. A week later, on 23 May, he scored the second goal as the FAI XI defeated France 2–0. This would prove to be his last appearance for the FAI XI. However in May 1938, for another European tour, the FAI once again called up Brown, together with two other Northerners, Harry Baird and Walter McMillen. However this time the IFA objected and all three players received telegrams from the English FA ordering them not to accept the offer on the grounds they were not born in the Irish Free State."
From Harry Baird's entry:
"In May 1938, Baird, together with Jackie Brown and Walter McMillen, was one of three Northern Ireland-born players called up by the FAI XI to play in two friendlies against Czechoslovakia and Poland. However the IFA objected and Baird subsequently received a telegram from the English FA ordering him not to accept the offer on the grounds he was not born in the Irish Free State. Baird was bitterly disappointed at missing the chance of an international debut and was keen to play for financial reasons as much as anything. He was neutral about the dispute and was willing to play for either team. However facing suspension from the English FA, he eventually declined the FAI offer."
This push of 1936-1937 was an attempt to establish the FAI as an all-Ireland association. The timing might have something to do with the December 1937 constitution of Ireland?
There were then the 4 Northern born dual-internationals who played for the FAI on the Iberian tour of 1946. They were Jimmy McAlinden, Billy McMillan, Jackie Vernon and Paddy Sloan.
So it seems as if the FAI made 2 pushes to select Northern born players. One in 1936/37 and one in 1946. The appeal for the dual internationals was to play 'home internationals' for the IFA and to play against european opposition for the FAI. The IFA and the FA disputed the FAI's right to select Northern born players while the IFA freely picked anyone from Ireland.
I have no idea when the FAI stated any 26 county born only policy. After 1950 didn't the IFA stick to the 6 counties and the FAI stick to the 26. Was Kernaghan the next non 26 county linked player to play for the FAI?
P.S. Was Shay Brennan the first non-Ireland born or just the first english born to play for Ireland? This didn't happen until 1965.
Last edited by Irwin3; 02/07/2011 at 1:58 AM.
I think Kernaghan would have been the next player to play for us through his northern roots, yeah.
I see the piece I wrote got a mention by Chris Donnelly on Slugger: http://sluggerotoole.com/2011/07/01/...y-hostilities/
I'd have to agree that this ought to be the closing of the final chapter. It would be a bit rich for the IFA to prolong the farce. Hopefully, NI fans can follow suit and acknowledge the reality of the consociational, bi-communal society in which they live.A number of sure signs that the football eligibility row has been permanently resolved could be detected in recent weeks. Firstly, there was the news that Northern Ireland manager, Nigel Worthington, was actively pursuing former Republic of Ireland international, Alex Bruce, as a prospective Northern Ireland international for the future.
...
Secondly, the news that Sinn Fein’s DCAL Minister has signalled her willingness to attend a Northern Ireland international fixture at Windsor Park indicates that Sinn Fein leaders are clearly of the belief that the eligibility row is over.
You could be right. For some reason, I though it was Charlie Gallagher who won the European Cup with Celtic in 1967, but it appears he was the first Scottish-born player to play for Ireland. He was the son of Donegal parents and made his debut for us away to Turkey in February of 1967.
The IFA, yes, probably? The rest, well some (a majority I reckon), to put it politely, doubtful.
By the way, this is only something I realised recently through research I was doing when writing the eligibility piece, but, to the best of my knowledge, it was only after the passing of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act of 1956 that Irish citizenship was offered to those born in the north. Likewise, it was only after this date that citizenship was conferred to the sons and daughters born of Irish citizens outside Ireland.
Prior to their amendment post-Good Friday Agreement, articles 2 and 3 of Bunreacht na hÉireann didn't actually make specific reference to the citizenship rights of those born in the north, or anyone for that matter:
And from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_nationality_law2. The national territory consists of the whole island of Ireland, its islands and the territorial seas.
3. Pending the re-integration of the national territory, and without prejudice to the right of the Parliament and Government established by this Constitution to exercise jurisdiction over the whole of that territory, the laws enacted by that Parliament shall have the like area and extent of application as the laws of Saorstát Éireann and the like extra-territorial effect.
I'm not so sure I agree with what Ó Caoindealbháin is purported to be saying, mind; that the legislation "conferred", or "inflicted", as Brookeborough described it, Irish citizenship upon those born in the north. To confer something, especially its use in the context above, possibly implies automaticity or a lack of choice and it wasn't being forced upon anybody who didn't want it. If you have a read of the 1956 Act, you'll see that section 7 states:The 1937 Constitution
...
With regard to Northern Ireland, despite the irredentist nature and rhetorical claims of articles 2 and 3 of the new constitution, the compatibility of Irish citizenship law with the state’s boundaries remained unaltered.
Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956
In 1956, the Irish parliament enacted the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956. This Act repealed the 1935 Act and remains, although heavily amended, the basis of Irish citizenship law. This act, according to Ó Caoindealbháin, altered radically the treatment of Northern Ireland residents in Irish citizenship law. With the enactment of the Republic of Ireland Act in 1948, and the subsequent passage of the Ireland Act by the British government in 1949, the state’s constitutional independence was assured, facilitating the resolution of the unsatisfactory position from an Irish nationalist perspective whereby births in Northern Ireland were assimilated to “foreign” births. The Irish government was explicit in its aim to amend this situation, seeking to extend citizenship as widely as possible to Northern Ireland, as well as to Irish emigrants and their descendants abroad.
The Act therefore provided for Irish citizenship for anyone born in the island of Ireland whether before or after independence. The only limitations to which were that anyone born in Northern Ireland was not automatically an Irish citizen but entitled to be an Irish citizen and, that a child of someone entitled to diplomatic immunity in the state would not become an Irish citizen. The Act also provided for open-ended citizenship by descent and for citizenship by registration for the wives (but not husbands) of Irish citizens.
The treatment of Northern Ireland residents in these sections had considerable significance for the state’s territorial boundaries, given that their “sensational effect … was to confer, in the eyes of Irish law, citizenship on the vast majority of the Northern Ireland population”.[42] The compatibility of this innovation with international law, according to Ó Caoindealbháin was dubious, "given its attempt to regulate the citizenship of an external territory ... In seeking to extend jus soli citizenship beyond the state’s jurisdiction, the 1956 Act openly sought to subvert the territorial boundary between North and South". The implications of the Act were readily recognised in Northern Ireland, with Lord Brookeborough tabling a motion in the Parliament of Northern Ireland repudiating “the gratuitous attempt … to inflict unwanted Irish Republican nationality upon the people of Northern Ireland”.
Nevertheless, Irish citizenship continued to be extended to the inhabitants of Northern Ireland for over 40 years, representing, according to Ó Caoindealbháin, "one of the few practical expressions of the Irish state’s irredentism." Ó Caoindealbháin concludes, however, that the Good Friday Agreement of 1998 altered significantly the territorial implications of Irish citizenship law, if somewhat ambiguously, via two key provisions: the renunciation of the constitutional territorial claim over Northern Ireland, and the recognition of “the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British or both, as they may so choose”, and that “their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments".
In regard to international law, Ó Caoindealbháin states that, although it is the attempt to confer citizenship extra-territorially without the agreement of the state affected that represents a breach of international law (not the actual extension), the 1956 Act "co-exists uneasily with the terms of the Agreement, and, by extension, the official acceptance by the Irish state of the current border. While the Agreement recognises that Irish citizenship is the birthright of those born in Northern Ireland, it makes clear that its acceptance is a matter of individual choice. In contrast, the 1956 Act continues to extend citizenship automatically in the majority of cases, thereby, in legal effect, conflicting with the agreed status of the border and the principle of consent".
I would have thought section 7 precluded the possibility of any automatic conferral of citizenship upon someone who'd be unlikely to want it, leaving a declaration of Irish citizenship as a matter of choice or entitlement to those born in the north to parents who were not Irish citizensIrish citizenship by birth or descent.
6.—(1) Every person born in Ireland is an Irish citizen from birth.
(2) Every person is an Irish citizen if his father or mother was an Irish citizen at the time of that person's birth or becomes an Irish citizen under subsection (1) or would be an Irish citizen under that subsection if alive at the passing of this Act.
(3) In the case of a person born before the passing of this Act, subsection (2) applies from the date of its passing. In every other case, it applies from birth.
(4) A person born before the passing of this Act whose father or mother is an Irish citizen under subsection (2), or would be if alive at its passing, shall be an Irish citizen from the date of its passing.
(5) Subsection (1) shall not confer Irish citizenship on the child of an alien who, at the time of the child's birth, is entitled to diplomatic immunity in the State.
Formalities to be complied with in certain cases.
7.—(1) Pending the re-integration of the national territory, subsection (1) of section 6 shall not apply to a person, not otherwise an Irish citizen, born in Northern Ireland on or after the 6th December, 1922, unless, in the prescribed manner, that person, if of full age, declares himself to be an Irish citizen or, if he is not of full age, his parent or guardian declares him to be an Irish citizen. In any such case, the subsection shall be deemed to apply to him from birth.
...
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 02/07/2011 at 3:17 AM.
1946 according to the documents filed to the CAS. The FAI requested from FIFA that players born in the South could not be selected for any other association.
That is the 'stated policy' as referred to on the FAI's website, with which there was one exception for the Iberian tour.
But the 'FAI has never accepted that Irish citizens could not be selected for its representative teams, whether they were living in Northern Ireland or elsewhere'
It's not so complicated, is it ?
Alex Bruce has switched to NI and good luck to him.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks