QuoteO'Neill has not disputed the right to change, but he has said that he doesn't think playing for your national team is what international football is about. One wonders what he thinks international football is about. Confusion reigns.
Taking bets on the first usage of "Roman".
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
O'Neill has not disputed the right to change, but he has said that he doesn't think playing for your national team is what international football is about. One wonders what he thinks international football is about. Confusion reigns.
End Apartheid Now! One Team in Ireland!
Indeed.Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
He has spoken at various events organised by the IFA Community Relations Department.
I interviewed him at one such event.
To be effectively ignored for the post surprised me and many others.
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
"New NI boss Michael O'Neill 'will tackle' eligibility issue": http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/16353548.stm
Contains an audible interview with former NI goalkeeper Tommy Wright.
Not sure about Devine but surely Marc Wilson has been capped in a competitive international given he's been playing for our teams since under-18 level?Tommy Wright believes new Northern Ireland manager Michael O'Neill will tackle "head on" the issue of players switching to the Republic of Ireland.
Former Northern Ireland keeper Wright, a close of friend of O'Neill, believes the new manager will use his "personal skills" to convince players to stay with the country of their birth.
...
"Also some of the players who have gone to play for the Republic haven't been capped yet (by the Republic) so the door can still be opened to them.
"Michael will work hard to get as many people as possible available for selection."
Northern Ireland-born players who have switched to the Republic but have not yet been capped in competitive internationals include Stoke's Marc Wilson and Preston's Daniel Devine.
Also came across this nugget on OWC yesterday:
The subsequent face-palm hurt more than my Christmas hangover, and that had been pretty bad.Another question surrounding eligibilty..
Is there an existing NI international, born outside of the UK, that posseses only an Irish passport?
If so, would that prove that irish nationality allows you to play for 2 diffent countries and therefore the same conditions that apply to the home nations would also apply. i.e. you, your parents, or grandparents have to have been born in the area of the association that you want to play for.
"Capello hits out at player 'theft'": http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/291220...yer-theft.html
I think Capello could do a bit of homework. There is no difference in theory that I can see between, say, Mesut Özil and Danny Welbeck.Fabio Capello has questioned Germany's use of players with Turkish origin at last summer's World Cup and called upon football's rulers to end the "theft of talent" that goes on between teams.
England's 4-1 defeat to the Germans in Bloemfontein remains a major stain on his otherwise impressive managerial CV. The Three Lions were completely undone by a squad that contained 11 players who had an opportunity to represent another country, including star man Mesut Ozil, plus Miroslav Klose and Lukas Podolski, who both scored in the rout.
"A line needs to be drawn," Capello said, in comments reported at the Dubai International Sports Conference. "Richer clubs are talent-scouting and stealing players by bidding higher and not thinking about the consequences for those countries."
He added: "These players are acquiring new passports. Germany had five of Turkish origin who opted to represent them and we all know what happened. Problems need to be addressed. Decisions need to be made. Players can be bought, especially when they come from poorer backgrounds, where their families need the financial resources.
...
He denied the accusation of double standards given he has capped Manchester United striker Danny Welbeck, much to the frustration of Ghana, who were hopeful of persuading the 21-year-old Mancunian to represent the country of his parents' origin.
Capello said: "Ghanaian journalists have asked me why I selected Danny Welbeck to play for England because now he cannot represent Ghana. But this isn't true. He was already at Manchester United. Before the selection I called his father and asked if I could select the boy. The father took time before agreeing to the selection."
"It was a personal decision, I spoke to the family and they were fine with their son playing for England. He was born and brought up in England. The rest of the German national team players were born in Germany or have never played for the national team of their origin."
Matthias Sammer responded critically: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...ts-shared.html
But Federation sporting director Matthias Sammer insisted Germany were blameless and that Capello had failed to grasp how immigrants settling there deserved equal opportunities.
Ozil was born in Gelsenkirchen, as a third-generation immigrant, and although his World Cup team-mates Lukas Podolski and Miroslav Klose were born in Poland, they moved to Germany as small children.
'Immigration is a social development that we react to in a proper way and I can assure Capello that we never entice players away from other countries,' said Sammer.
'That is something we would never even contemplate and I simply cannot understand what he is saying. It is the duty of sport to welcome players under these circumstances.
'When our country opens its doors to immigrants, so does the Federation and that is only right.'
It's probably worth pointing out that Capello is a moron.
Sure wasn't it only fairly recently that the DFB relaxed the rules on who could actually represent Germany.
As far as I am aware and someone correct me if I'm wrong but there was some rule in placed that said that only "pure" Germans aka those with a German mother and father who have a German mother and father could represent Germany hence the seeming influx from the year 2000 or so.
Heading out the door now for beer so haven't got time to check that one out but it is in my mind's eye that some rule like this existed.
Also, whilst we are on the subject, It seemed that Capello didn't see France from 1998 onwards eh?
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
If Capello's point relates to clubs poaching players from all parts of the world, rather than national federations poaching players, then I'm fine with that.
Of course it's great that a kid from a latin American backstreet can carve a career at a club like Barcelona or wherever, but let's face it - despite FIFA's rules on exploitation of young talent, exploitation is exactly what goes on. Nobody hears about the losers separated from their families as teenagers who don't become stars. An article in 442 recently (the same issue that highlighted the holistic and unified approach taken to youth development in Uruguay - October?) spoke of children being lured from desperately poor African villages, just as young girls are from poor eastern Europe. Modern day slavery basically.
One one hand Arsenal can be commended for blooding Cesc Fabregas at 16, but the only reason they got anywhere near him was because the minimum legal age for awarding a prefessional contact was lower in UK than in Spain.
Football does great things for underprivileged children globally, but the flipside is that many are badly exploited and we casually support it by admiring the end-product of the relatively few who benefit. Football needs to get serious about its moral responsibilities, and international labour law needs to recognise the exceptions posed in the football context.
Last edited by Stuttgart88; 30/12/2011 at 10:38 PM.
Except that's as likely as the equally admirable aim of 'World Peace' ?
Quite an astonishing display of ignorance by Capello.
couple of items Radio Ulster this morning including an interview with MON
Jim Gracey not noticing the big grey animal with a trunk in the room
MON - seems to be going down 'you will have a better chance of an ntentional career with N'I route which is fair enough
Are the IFA becoming bully boys now in the sense that they will be putting huge pressure on young lads from the north to make the play for NI?
I wonder if MON will now start throwing 17 and 18 year old's into competitive games to tie them down - is that not a bit unfair too?
I reckon players from the North should always be allowed the choice without being bullied into making a decision.
This issue was discussed again on Talkback earlier this afternoon, in light of Michael O'Neill's appointment as NI boss.
(It takes up the first half of the program)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b018wf0q
Last edited by The Fly; 05/01/2012 at 4:55 PM.
No pain is too deep that a bit of compensation cant rectify
Wendy probably getting tired after decades of this compo culture mentality, as the discussion from the owc reps rambled on and on about compensation, finally intervened to move it on, she was later accused of having a sectarian agenda
Fair play to the listener who said that it was offensive to state that nationalists were declaring for another country when in fact they were declaring for their country. Not that that made the slightest impact on the OWC reps who kept on repeating that were declaring for another country.
My advice would be if the OWC reps are serious about stopping the flow then they should stay off the airwaves. They just can't help themselves.
And what I learned was that in order to have a change in NI, you have to ask the right question first, i.e.how much will it cost for you to feel compensated?
Have to laugh, compensation, compensation, compensation quite pathetic really, you would of thought that they may have argued for a declaration at a certain age. As if financial compensation would in any way be a runner with FIFA.No pain is too deep that a bit of compensation cant rectify
Wendy probably getting tired after decades of this compo culture mentality, as the discussion from the owc reps rambled on and on about compensation, finally intervened to move it on, she was later accused of having a sectarian agenda
Fair play to the listener who said that it was offensive to state that nationalists were declaring for another country when in fact they were declaring for their country. Not that that made the slightest impact on the OWC reps who kept on repeating that were declaring for another country.
My advice would be if the OWC reps are serious about stopping the flow then they should stay off the airwaves. They just can't help themselves.
And what I learned was that in order to have a change in NI, you have to ask the right question first, i.e.how much will it cost for you to feel compensated?
Favorite bit was when Wendy read out a text 'we have a FIFA vice president get him to propose play for the country you are born in ........job done' absolutly delusional
Agreed.
No. It's hardly bullying to lobby NI under-age internationals to remain available for selection for the senior team. Of course some will never have played for NI at any level, perhaps through their own choice. Fine, their decision. Bye
I doubt this will happen. First, no-one in our U-19 and U-21 teams stands out as good enough; second, it's pointless making the lielihood of defeat even higher- Worthington and Beaglehole's tactics are discredited; third, it doesn't guarantee the players will continue to turn out for NI. International football isn't a press gang.I wonder if MON will now start throwing 17 and 18 year old's into competitive games to tie them down - is that not a bit unfair too?
They are and they aren't, respectively.I reckon players from the North should always be allowed the choice without being bullied into making a decision
Fair enough, although the declaration need only apply when an adult player (ie over 18) actually plays nternationally.
You do realise that declaration at a certain age may not be a runner either with FIFA; it may be that the next change to eligibility rules makes it even easier to change countries...
Last edited by Gather round; 05/01/2012 at 9:54 PM.
Thought that was one of the better discussions I've heard aired, bar the puzzling references to a "sectarian agenda".
Gary McAllister of the AoNISC:
"Any manager wants to pick from the biggest pool of players available to him."
The pool of players available to Michael O'Neill has not been diminished, nor would that pool increase if FIFA prevented the FAI from selecting northern-born Irish nationals. It would remain the exact same and ultimately players would still have the choice whether or not to represent the IFA.
What exactly is this "closure" of which he speaks? To me, it's just another word for the IFA/NI fans unconditionally getting their way. I always understood this to have amounted to closure for all parties concerned: http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/docu...ard%202071.pdf
McAllister mentions "previous statutes" in relation to place of birth, place of parents/grandparents birth and residency with the implication being that some new statute has paved the way for northern-born Irish nationals to declare for the FAI. I get the feeling he hasn't read the CAS judgment because the general principal always has been based on nationality (and, more recently, nationality not dependent on residence). As far back as 1946, the eligibility requirement outlined in article 21 of the Regulations of FIFA was that players be "subjects" of the country for whom they wished to play.
As Aiden Fitzmaurice points out with the case of Michael Keane switching from the FAI to the FA recently, it is not the IFA who suffer uniquely in the world of football from players switching association. McAllister also fudges the argument of the caller who highlights that these players are declaring for their country rather than "another country" by focusing on an irrelevant distinction as far as this particular argument is concerned between citizenship (the statutes actually refer to "nationality" if he'd wanted to be über-pedantic about it) and passports as regards player eligibility. Essentially and in general, a passport provides FIFA with proof of citizenship/nationality, save in the IFA's case where they were granted an exception so as not to necessitate the possession of a British passport in order to play for them. Possession of British citizenship is still a requisite in that case though. It is up to the IFA to prove that by methods other than the production of a particular passport. In essence, however, the callers point still stands and is a crucial one; these Irish nationals are declaring for their country.
Generally, the compensation argument is riddled with practical pitfalls. It's also questionable as to whether it's morally compelled by current circumstances or even justifiable in the first place. A few issues/counter-arguments off the top of my head:
- Players are not the possessions or servants of associations. Unlike club football, international football is entirely voluntary rather than contractual; thus, no obligations arise from the conduct of either association or player with regard to player selection.
- Having a player sign a contract of service would be in breach of FIFA regulations.
- What about players like George McCartney or Stephen Ireland who opt out of international football or those who retire "early" from international football to further their club career? Ought the discretion to decide as to when it is suitable or acceptable for a player to retire be left to an associations under which they might have played once or twice? Does joining up for one training session compel a whole career of servitude? Where and when does the supposed obligation end?
- Who pays the compensation; individual players or associations?
- If compensation were to be introduced, the IFA would also have to recompense the FA for the likes of Oliver Norwood and Lee Camp or the FAI for the likes of Alex Bruce, Johnny Gorman and Ryan Brobbel.
- It's too simple to say that it's a waste of time and resources developing so-called defectors. The relationship between player and association is not a one-way relationship whereby only the player is a beneficiary. Players selected for international "duty" return the "favour" to both the association that has selected them and the fans who pay to watch them by providing their service or playing a role within whatever particular squad they are chosen. That is something of substance returned. Not that there is a strict duty anyway, but international squads are selected on a game-to-game basis; thus, even if selection did give rise to obligations, any obligation would cease once the player had performed his "duty" within that particular squad which then ceases to be. Take Shane Duffy, for example; he was called into IFA squads and offered what you might call "carrot caps" even after openly expressing his strong desire to switch association. Even with the knowledge of his intentions in mind, the IFA still deemed him the best or most suitable available candidate to them for a number of their squads, including a senior friendly. Otherwise they wouldn't have selected him. Duffy offered his service and provided them with an option. Duffy did not compel the IFA to select him nor were the IFA under any obligation to choose him. If NI fans want to moan about Shane Duffy taking the place of some other "poor bugger", blame the IFA for selecting whoever they deemed to be the best player available for the place in whatever squads he was chosen. It also must be remembered that Shane Duffy gave back quite a bit to the squads in which he was chosen. Likewise, there is more to an association than merely its senior men's international team.
- The families of players from nationalist backgrounds and their communities - or those delighted to see the likes of Darron Gibson in an Ireland jersey, in other words - make up a significant portion of the population north of the border and contribute substantially as taxpayers to the IFA's income. If their money goes towards training young northern-born lads who want to play for Ireland, fair's fair, no?
- How much do the IFA contribute to player development anyway? How is this quantified?
Like newryrep, I also particularly enjoyed the text suggesting that Jim Boyce propose to FIFA that players be allowed to play only for their country of birth; "problem solved". Irish nationals born north of the border are Irish by birth; Ireland is their country of birth. Problem solved, indeed...
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 05/01/2012 at 9:43 PM.
Probably true, but a peculiar message for a mentor to impart upon a budding footballer with a bright future ahead of him. Essentially, it's saying, "Don't dare to dream; accept your limitations before all else".
Bright futures tend not to be unlimited in practice. Essentially it's actually saying 'By all means aspire, but at least consider a realistic alternative'.
The 'realistic alternative' still exists (in some form), should the 'dream' fail to materialise.
Oh woe on the player who has to trudge wearily back from the dream to the grind of the realistic alternative
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks