“‘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’.
This is something they both agreed upon and was instigated to stop each other selecting players from each others jurisdiction, which they both adhered to.”
This acceptance was upon FIFA’s instruction or guidance in order to ensure that the two associations would, from then on, know to maintain compliance with the eligibility regulation (article 21, al. 2 of the Regulations of the FIFA) that was already in place, for the IFA hadn’t been adhering to it prior to that; they were selecting players based upon what they viewed as their island-wide jurisdiction for British Home Championship games rather than selecting players based upon their status as British citizens connected to Northern Ireland. FIFA’s guidance did not amount to a gentleman’s agreement between the associations and I don’t see how it could be viewed as such – even the IFA in their submission to CAS referred to the instruction in their own terms as a “ruling” from FIFA rather than as some form of inter-associational agreement between themselves and the FAI – nor did it even remotely indicate that Irish nationals born in Northern Ireland would be ineligible to represent the FAI, never mind for forever more. What was the time-frame of this supposed accord? Was it indefinite or what? Surely agreements should operate within agreed frames of time. Even if an agreement was to exist indefinitely, such could no longer be deemed binding if circumstances later change from those under which terms were first agreed, as they did in this case. Indeed, if FIFA had intended for what the IFA called a “ruling” to render Irish nationals born north of the border ineligible to play for the FAI, FIFA would have submitted such to CAS. It is clear that what the IFA misunderstood to be the effect of FIFA’s instructions was not what FIFA had meant or intended to be the effect.
As we know, FIFA’s instruction mentioned nothing of the future status of potential Irish citizens. Their status was not relevant to this instruction as the island-wide right to Irish citizenship only became a reality in 1956. If one can acknowledge that – that the status of Irish citizens was never discussed – then I’m not sure how one can go on to argue that an agreement was in place governing the eligibility of Irish nationals, irrespective of the future conduct (or lack thereof) of the FAI.
It is also not clear that the FAI’s submission quoted above actually relates to eligibility to play for the FAI either. Eligibility was already being governed by article 21, al. 2 of the Regulations of FIFA. It merely mentions jurisdiction because the IFA were operating outside of theirs in selecting players who would otherwise have been ineligible to play for them. The FAI were then unable to select players born north of the border, not necessarily because of their birthplace, but because they would not have been Irish citizens at the time.
“The very fact that the FAI refrained from going down this route until the 1990’s, cements my thoughts that a common understanding was in place between the two; however they have now abandoned the accord that once existed.”
It’s incorrect to frame anything as an accord between the two associations when there is nothing whatsoever to indicate that the FAI ever discussed the then or future status of Irish nationals born north of the border with the IFA. The fact that the FAI didn’t select Irish nationals born north of the border up until the 1990s doesn’t mean they were upholding an accord; amongst other possible factors explaining why they may not have selected such players, it perhaps indicates that they themselves didn’t fully understand the extent of their rights under FIFA’s regulations. Just because they didn’t select such players for a lengthy period of time doesn’t mean we can automatically assume there was an accord in place with the IFA, especially when other factors can explain this phenomenon without needing to assume there was an agreement in effect. As mentioned earlier, I outlined those possible factors here:
http://backpagefootball.com/so-what-...for-fai/34570/
It is possible that even the FAI, who were more-or-less run by volunteers up until the mid-1980s, might not have been fully aware of the effect of the rules governing player eligibility in terms of the rights accorded to them as an association. In RTÉ’s recent documentary, ‘Green Is the Colour’, Johnny Giles and Eamon Dunphy spoke of the selection committee who selected FAI squads during that period as being a loose and shambolic group of businessmen whose lack of footballing knowledge, never mind their lack of knowledge pertaining to FIFA’s statutes and the realm of player eligibility, made them woefully inept at fulfilling the role with which they had been entrusted.
Besides, passivity (neglecting to call up certain eligible players) or silence cannot be construed as consenting to an agreement, nor does it necessarily indicate the existence of an accord. Connacht has been poorly represented in terms of player selection for the Irish senior team but it would be incorrect to infer from this that the FAI had some sort of policy in place whereby they would refrain from selecting players from Connacht or from certain counties in Connacht.
Bringing all of the above into consideration, I don’t see how the FAI can be seen as having acted immorally towards the IFA in the sense that you’ve failed to make clear what they owed the IFA in terms of behaviour and conduct. It is not the fault of the FAI that the IFA misunderstood FIFA’s instruction and governing regulations.
...
Quote
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Bookmarks