Ultimately too, this is not the solution to the IFA's problems. Its issues in terms of the eligibilty issue are due its failure to build genuine bridges with the Nationalist population over a long period of time. I do acknowledge some attempts have been made, but the appointment of Armstrong and O 'Neill smack of desperation to me. Only by a seismic change in attitude, an acknowledgement of their past failings in relation to the Nationalist population and a more inclusive approach will they possibly begin to make the players who presently feel more comfortable representing us, consider NI as an option. What I do find frustrating is that despite the obvious issues they face, no one has tried to genuinely tackle the issue. The drain of players will continue until someone has the balls to give genuine leadership to the IFA.Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Erm, work it out? You're the one who's always blathering about research.
And to answer your dubious point on the JMcC thread re.revoking citizenship re. 'all your "Nationalist/Republican" 'mates', Yes, of course you should ask them.
Presuming they exist ? As you say. "Why not?"
Clearly it's really important to you.
But 99.9% of the rest of island define their citizenship by the passport they hold. Even if this is not your pedantic definition.
But is there even the slightest likelihood that the spurious realities of this proposal and the IFA will ever meet?
And even if it does, how or why should be enforced.
As said up thread, this will apply to virtually no-one anyway. And they wouldn't be breaking any FIFA rules. Probably.
The gift that just keeps giving.
On a 140 page on eligibility, which centres on the dual nationality of people born in Northern Ireland, as confirmed by a CAS ruling, AB now advises us that such dual nationality is a " pedantic definition".
Brilliant.
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...
As such an approach by the IFA would not be an IFA "rule", it, therefore, could not be "enforced".
Such an approach by the IFA would not compromise or breach FIFA rules either, or the rights of the player under FIFA rules.
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...
Irrelevant because its not what the IFA is doing and it's not an immediate approach supported by the main supporter group. Your friend Gary wants an end to Football Apartheid in Ireland (May 2011; http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/13518826) and states a duty to work towards a conclusion despite the conclusion drawn by the CAS (Nov 2011; http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/15766962).
I honestly believe that if the approach I suggest was to be implemented in an open, honest, and educational way by the IFA it could be a good thing - advising young players of their options openly, and honestly, and detailing why they might want to choose a path with the IFA. Parents could be involved, where appropriate.
Regarding "failings in relation to the Nationalist population", through debate on this forum, and elsewhere, I have sided with Danny's interpretation - it's not about symbols, anthems etc.
I believe that players want to play for the South, not because they feel alienated by the IFA on account of their background, but because they identify body and soul with the South.
Sure, I want change on the Anthem, for example - but not in some forlorn hope that more Nationalists/Republicans will play for and support Northern Ireland.
Out of curiosity, how do you feel the IFA should "tackle the issue"?
Last edited by Not Brazil; 08/02/2012 at 9:33 AM.
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...
My understanding is that the AONISC seek an age related "agreement" between the FAI and IFA.
I suggest a player driven indication of preference at age 18.
Not miles apart there.
I'll sit down for a good chat with Gary in the near future, and chew the fat on the "eligibility issue".
Last edited by Not Brazil; 08/02/2012 at 9:42 AM.
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...
Except I'm answering a question you posed...
I accept that definition. Where have I said I didn't?
Clearly you've had to settle for a very poor standard of 'gift'.
I notice you don't respond (thankfully) to numerous other points even you can't contradict...
We can't wait!The FAI must be on tenterhooks!
It should be PPV, broadcast on 'The Sleep Channel'...
Did you ever get around to revoking your British Citizenship AB?
PS. I'm delighted to learn that my son is set to make his competitive debut for Northern Ireland.
He has been selected in the 26 man Northern Ireland squad that will participate against Europe's finest in the Ukraine in the summer. God willing, I'll be there to see him play.
He was eligible to play for Scotland, but it was always his boyhood dream to play for Northern Ireland.
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...
One slight problem. I have never been nor will be a British citizen.
And what squad? Baton-twirling?
Though any dual eligibility explains a lot...
Isn't it enough that Ardee almost qualifies to be in Ulster? but British??
Apologies, I thought you were born in Northern Ireland - on reflection, there's maybe a clue in your username.
It would also explain your lack of knowledge of British Citizenship laws, as applicable to people born in the United Kingdom.
My boy is actually eligible to play football for three international teams:
Northern Ireland
Republic Of Ireland
Scotland
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...
An Lu was part of Ulaidh but not for a good 500 years or so sadly, I believe.
They should of course kept us on board...
History would turned out differently with them in the mix.
Anyway, here's a link for NB. which seems right up his street?
http://www.ulsternation.org.uk/ulster.htm
And now claiming is related to James McClean??
Poor fella.
Last edited by ArdeeBhoy; 08/02/2012 at 10:59 AM.
Regardless, whether a person does or does not revoke a real (or imagined) citizenship is totally irrelevant. What can not be imposed, even after generations of a family growing up in NI, is a British identity or an identity to the NI statelet. Shouting out that 'you're Northern Irish' or 'you're British' just to get some sort of a reaction, is the stuff of playgrounds.
Well done to the boy. You must be very proud.
Out of interest what age group and competition is that? We'll dispatch the team of FAI scouts with their nets to "whisper sweet nothings" into his ear.
End Apartheid Now! One Team in Ireland!
What I find odd about this apparent ambition to end "Football Apartheid in Ireland" is that re-introducing an age-cap wouldn't make any relative difference between the situation as it is now and a scenario where an age-cap would apply. Irish nationals would still have the option to instigate what the AONISC refer to as "apartheid". Also, if "apartheid" on the island was really an issue for the AONISC, why not advocate an all-island team? For me then, this talk of the FAI promoting "apartheid" is a sanctimonious cloak to conceal self-interest and divert responsibility. Don't get me wrong, self-interest is fine; it's just the bull**** and hypocrisy that gets me.
That was a little cheeky, I must admit. I doubt that the source will mind though.I've seen that said about OWC somewhere before Mr Fly.
...or alternatively, get him to sign up to foot.ie and we can chew the collective fat over here.
Last edited by The Fly; 08/02/2012 at 12:27 PM.
Indeed.
It would be more like a convention, as opposed to a written rule.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks