http://www.carlow-nationalist.ie/201...-must-stopped/
Scott Hogan - second highest scorer in League 2 - is eligible through Carlow born Grandparents according to Amond and was called up to the U-21's in February.
I'm pretty sure he wasn't called up to the U-21's at any stage. Could anyone clear that up?
Then again, Shane Long said Sean Morrison was eligible when they were both at Reading and it later turned out he wasn't.
Originally Posted by TheOneWhoKnocks
Links ain't as tenuous as the ones in post numero uno that I've quoted, but this Hogan chap surely qualifies for the "bang average" category.
Still, oh so awesome you're brain was engaged by the prospect of Hogan claiming for Ireland. A proper Irish sounding name an' all.
Last edited by Olé Olé; 03/05/2014 at 11:12 PM.
Eh ? What ? Which is it ?Or do you know yourself.
What are you babbling about? I was looking for clarification on whether he was called up for the U-21's like the article insinuates - because I'm pretty sure he never was - but thanks for your input anyway.
I don't have to like it if players declare for Ireland and whatever their motivations are for doing so but if a player declares for/called up for Ireland then it is relevant to post about it.
This guy takes a pretty liberal view of the whole issue of football and nationality:
http://www.lawinsport.com/articles/c...y-and-football
Law in Sport is a very good website actually. They had some good pieces on FFP and the European rugby situation.
Yep, I go to it quite a lot.
Not football, but http://rugbylaw.blogspot.ie/ is another you might be interested in.
He had a good article on transfer fees in rugby recently: http://rugbylaw.blogspot.ie/2013/03/transfer-fees.html
There's something of a corollary to League of Ireland football there, as it shows that the short length of rugby contracts (most don't exceed two years, like in the LOI) and the relatively small wage packets mean any "transfer fee" will only ever be relatively small.
Cheers for that. Interesting read. I'm tired, but I hope I've interpreted him correctly...
Isn't it necessary to have a defined threshold (albeit arbitrary) somewhere though in order to prevent potential or perceived abuse? From a philosophical perspective, all laws could be defined as ultimately arbitrary. Stipulating for three extra years of continuous living at least ensures for a greater, more tangible and less temporary connection between player and country/association concerned.
Isn't that the crux of the problem though? We can hope and pray all we like that states might keep the bigger picture in mind, but can they actually be trusted to do so? The examples of Qatar and Equatorial Guinea indicate perhaps not, which is why a strict regulatory framework is required.At the end, nationality is exclusively a matter of sovereign States, and it is they who must formulate cogent policies that focus on answering applications for nationality from foreign football players that have no previous relation to the country, and that are made ostensibly on the basis of obtaining the right to play for the national football squad. One just hopes they keep the bigger picture mind.
On the face of it, it does seem unusual, if not objectionable, that Diego Costa might have had the right to politically represent the people of Spain in the European Parliament before being deemed eligible to represent the country in the more trivial matter of football and the author also asks why footballers should be treated differently to any other person when it comes to considering the rights of an individual to nationality, but when players might be treated as special or exceptional cases by states granting them citizenship solely on the basis of their ability to represent that state's football association, surely some sort of special limitation or extra regulation is necessitated in recognition of such exception?
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 09/05/2014 at 12:21 AM.
I think he's confusing two issues: the right to nationality as conferred by sovereign laws and the right to represent a particular country as defined in FIFA laws. The former is very much a sovereign matter, the latter is a sporting matter and for the integrity of competition a strict regulatory framework is required, as you say.
As things stand the FIFA rules actually satisfy both aspects pretty well. The restrictions to country-shopping or country-hopping are justifiable for sporting reasons and the measures in place to curtail it are proportionate measures. They aren't unnecessarily restrictive.
He writes
'Recently, attention of the football society around the world has been drawn to the case of Diego Costa. Diego Costa is a Brazilian football player who, since 2007, has been continuously playing for various Spanish football clubs. On 5 July 2013, he obtained Spanish nationality and became a dual citizen of both Brazil and Spain. His high level of performance for his current club, Atletico Madrid, led the Royal Spanish Football Federation to make an official request to FIFA for permission to call Diego Costa to play for the Spanish national team, even though he had already made two appearances for the Brazilian squad in two friendly matches against Italy Russia'
.......
[I']Diego Costa is now linked to Spain in a formal legal way, which gives him the status of a Spanish national. Consequently, he is now, among other things, an EU citizens, and eligible to vote and even run for the European Parliament. The apparent paradox here, the author argues, is that Diego Costa has the unfettered right to represent the people of Spain politically in the European Parliament, whereas he needs a special permission to represent the people of Spain in the forthcoming World Cup'[/I].
It's normal to seek FIFA's rubber stamp for such an intl transfer. He makes it sound exceptional, that it was big procedure to go through, with palms being greased etc. that it was special. What does he think, that an international player can just walz around into different national team without anybody to validate the transfer?
If there was an issue, it was that Costa wasn't a Spanish citizen at the time he was capped by Brazil. But they were just friendly games, not official competition games.
You get the sense that he isn't into the football himself, when using the Diego Costa example. It's not as if Spain are desperate for quality players and Brazil are already flush. Considering that his club contract is probably lucrative, he is not desperate for international exposure for financial gain. The Diego Costa transfer to Spain is a good example of the statutes working.
I assumed (or maybe I applied a generous personal interpretation...) that the primary basis of his issue with the Costa case was that Costa had the "unfettered" right to represent Spain politically in the European Parliament by virtue of acquiring Spanish citizenship, but that any right that he has to represent the Spanish football team as a Spanish citizen was subject to satisfying a further criterion beyond the mere possession of that citizenship; that "special permission" being satisfaction of the clause stipulating five years of continuous living in Spain. Surely he couldn't be making a big deal out of the switch/transfer process itself, as if it amounts to some sort of substantial impediment to the rights of dual nationals...
That was precisely my point Danny, he was making a big deal that still special permission had to be sought as if was FIFA's prerogative to grant such favours based on a whim.
The concept of the football transfer has eluded him, that someone somewhere has got to check the paperwork and give the ok, he's obviously not a Pat's fan
The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist thinks it will change; the realist adjusts the sails.
How come Georgios Samaras is eligible to sing for Austria?
Fecking Granny Rulers
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
Tranny rulers, surely?
Up to a point...Next destination for the Jesus lookalike, Austria Vienna?
Touché sir. Touché.
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks