Adam Barton

[Stuttgart88]

I just learnt what "133t" means. I'm chuffed.

[The Fly]

Aye, I reply point by point, and as far as possible briefly to what others say. Why throw in unncessary flowery language? It doesn't impress people, just makes you look arrogant and pompous.

Is that a dig at EalingGreen?

Try "dick". Beating the censor is next up on Fly's crash-course in how to be 133t, but you can get there before him in three easy steps...

To any new members out there, please familiarise yourselves with the context of this statement. It's not some sort of foot.ie rite of passage, and I'm not that way inclined.

I just learnt what "133t" means. I'm chuffed.

Likewise, we must be slow learners.

How are you coming along with the whole 'writing over links' challenge?
I must confess...it did go to my head a bit.

[SwanVsDalton]

Care to elaborate on who you mean by "certain posters"?

Do you...

He can't (a ) because he is already tied to NI, and (b ) because a player may only switch once.
Apart from that, nice try...

...have to...

Your under-age teams contain more non-native born players than ours, so your future would appear to be more "plastic" than ours...

...respond to...

Considering our refusal of the invitation to pool our resources in an all-UK U-21 team (for the London Olympics), why on earth should we do so with your lot?

...every little...

But hey, you've still got until September before the 10th Anniversary of the last time you beat a decent ranked opponent in a competitive international...

...flippant comment?

Not being mean, just genuinely concerned you're some sort of robot. Data from Star Trek's got a better handle on humour than you.

[SwanVsDalton]

Likewise, we must be slow learners.

How are you coming along with the whole 'writing over links' challenge?

That's makes three.

BTW maybe we should have some kind of Hyperlink HTML Tournament in off-topic? Winner gets a an £25 Amazon voucher written in binary code, loser gets wrapped in carpet and thrown off a bridge.

[DannyInvincible]

To any new members out there, please familiarise yourselves with the context of this statement. It's not some sort of foot.ie rite of passage, and I'm not that way inclined.

Haha, I do apologise for any scurrilous insinuation perceived. That was mischievous of me.

[ArdeeBhoy]

In five minutes of competitive international football Gorman has managed something no RoI player has managed since 1994. Wolves third-teamer or not.

Really, do share?
Guessing he was born the same time as Houghton scored v.Italy in USA '94....

Your under-age teams contain more non-native born players than ours, so your future would appear to be more "plastic" than ours...

Except around 5 years ago you were proclaiming on the web, how "pure" 'your' player pool was.
But besides the 50 or so players born outside the North who've played for your senior side, your B, U-21 & Youth squads are full of players born outside the Six Counties.
And given the trend towards emigration by Unionists to the Brit mainland (& further afield) , it's liable to happen more and more. Especially if England, us or Scotland don't want them.....

And why shouldn't they be....based on all those rules which you usually misinterpret, when it suits.

Considering our refusal of the invitation to pool our resources in an all-UK U-21 team (for the London Olympics), why on earth should we do so with your lot?

Er, Irony. Do try it sometime?
It was hardly serious. But AI Olympic soccer team, does have a ring to it.

Aye, I reply point by point, and as far as possible briefly to what others say. Why throw in unncessary flowery language? It doesn't impress people, just makes you look arrogant and pompous*.

Erm....

I'll assume from the above that you think any comment from any NI-supporting poster on this broad issue is inherently worthless.

Not any, just some.


NB & yer man Awec seem to manage to keep a sense of perspective, generally.

This isn't merely narrow-minded (contrary to your claim above), it's infantile*.

* See above.
Sadly don't think you're being Ironic.

[the bear]

That's makes three.

BTW maybe we should have some kind of Hyperlink HTML Tournament in off-topic? Winner gets a an £25 Amazon voucher written in binary code, loser gets wrapped in carpet and thrown off a bridge.

waste of carpet

[SwanVsDalton]

waste of carpet

I know but foot.ie got in trouble after the last tournament for all the bodies that washed up at Poolbeg...

[the bear]

I know but foot.ie got in trouble after the last tournament for all the bodies that washed up at Poolbeg...

in that case you should wrap them in trolleys and syringes so they blend in

[tetsujin1979]

I just learnt what "133t" means. I'm chuffed.

you'll be joining Anonymous before you know it!

[DannyInvincible]

yeah but I think the point is the entitlement from birth.

I'm not sure where you're getting that from. There's nothing about it in the statute book, to my knowledge anyway. Let me take you on a wild ramble.

Under article 15, eligibility to play for a national team relies simply upon possessing a "permanent nationality that is not dependent on residence in a certain country" as a general principle. If Barton's appearance in a friendly for Northern Ireland means nothing to FIFA for the purposes of deciphering his permanent nationality/nationalities and international eligibility, or, in effect, he never was or had to be "registered" with the IFA in the first place to line out for them in a friendly, or, in other words, if any formal link with that association (or any other, including the FA) was never "effected" in the first place in the eyes of FIFA because he never represented them in a competitive game at any level, and Barton possesses permanent Irish nationality (that is, permanent from the date of his birth being registered with the Foreign Births Register in Ireland, in spite of his Irish nationality not having been passed onto him automatically from the moment of birth or applying retroactively after the date of his birth being registered; it's still permanent, after all), then I'm coming to think that he might well be eligible to play for us under this article alone. The fact he is legally British by birth and may have assumed permanent Irish nationality at a later date (could have been last week even for all we know) might well be of no significance to FIFA at all seeing as they'll officially remain unaware of his British nationality. For their official purposes and following on from what I've written, as soon as he makes a competitive appearance for Ireland at any level, his nationality in their eyes may well be considered to be Irish, solely or primarily, and to always have been so since he started playing competitive international football (any level), at the exclusion of any other permanent legal nationalities he might also happen to possess simultaneously, simply because another of his permanent legal nationalities was never "effected" in the eyes of FIFA or made known to them formally. That's a bit long-winded - apologies - but I hope it makes sense. It's something that's just struck me as a possibility in light of reading what geysir had written in relation to Bobby Zamora, especially, in the post to which Predator provided a link above in post #116.

Edit: I'll outline it in simpler points as it might be easier to understand that way. I'm confusing myself as it is.

1) FIFA are officially unaware of Barton’s legal nationality as he has never represented an international team in a competitive game.
2) We/I understand that Barton possesses permanent Irish nationality via having an Irish-born grandparent and his birth subsequently registered with the Foreign Births Register. His Irish nationality may only be effective from the date of registration and not the moment of his birth, but it is still permanent in nature from that date onward. "Permanent" does not mean the same this as having existed eternally and something can become permanent after having come into existence and being designated such a quality.
3) Let's say, Barton happens to represent Ireland in a competitive game.
4) As a result, Barton is registered with FIFA as an Irish national. He might have been an Irish national from birth for all they know, although they couldn't care less, just so long as he is in possession of a permanent Irish nationality and satisfies any other relevant issues; hasn't played in a competitive international for an association other than the FAI, for example, and so forth.
5) If the competitive game in which Barton played for Ireland was not an 'A' international, Barton, in theory, still has the choice of assuming a new nationality in the eyes of FIFA - the one change of association permitted to him - which might be deemed to be his already-legally-existing British one (in spite of having held it from birth) if, say, he sought to represent England.

Does that make sense/stand up to scrutiny or is it a complete misinterpretation?

[Gather round]

Is that a dig at EalingGreen?

No, a reply to Geysir. If I want to reply to EG, I'll quote his original comment.

[paul_oshea]

Fly, whats binary code?

[geysir]

Not Brazil has provided a link to an article containing direct quotations from the player himself. The article clearly states that he was considering NI, but was unsure, since he was still hoping for a future England career.

The only quotes from Barton in that article related to his enjoyment of the experience of playing for NI, he mentioned nothing about his options.
It was noted that Barton was tightlipped.

NI/IFA have been in close contact with the player for nearly two years, primarily through Steve Beaglehole. They were prepared to "keep the door open" whilst he decided between NI and England; I cannot believe they would have done so had he asked for such consideration whilst he decided between NI, England and ROI.

All the evidence suggests that this is just another example of a player being a d i c k - something with which eg followers of the career of a certain Stephen Ireland should be familiar.

The fact that you choose to ignore the evidence and prefer instead to accuse NW of lying etc, says more about you than it does of him.

And then you have the brass neck to bleat about being "open-minded".

My open mindedness is beyond question, it is a proven fact.
I never accused NW of lying, I just don't believe the IFA account. The IFA may believe their perception to be true but I don't believe it without having anything substantial to go on. The facts are, Barton considered playing for the IFA, decided not and then declared for the FAI almost straight away. Those actions do not suggest to me that he was waiting for an England call up.
I doubt that a young lad could string along the IFA on a merry dance.
Any number of things could have happened to affect the experience. Just because the IFA thought they were grooming him they think they have first call on his services and now Barton has jilted the IFA ye lot a bit sore.

[ArdeeBhoy]

Fly, whats binary code?

A tenuous sub-dialect of Ulster-Scots??

[geysir]

I have nowhere said that Barton is not eligible to represent the FAI. Rather I have queried how he might be. I do so because I cannot see how he is eligible under Article 15 (Irish National from birth) and I can't see how he is eligible under Article 17 (Acquiring a new nationality).

And because you don't see it, means you don't get it.

You have not "explained" anything. Rather you have made a case* of sorts, which I do not accept

Well you would have to understand the rules to some degree, in order to understand the explanation for how they apply to 3rd generation Irish nationals, whose citizenship criteria is fulfilled by having a grandparent born in the 6 counties.
Everything that I have explained in the eligibility thread is supported by FIFA actions and will continue to be supported by FIFA actions until that time they chose to change the rules.

For the record, right back to the start of the Gibson dispute, I made it crystal clear, both on this forum and elsewhere, that I considered that the case could go either way.

I can't think offhand of one example of crystal clear thinking from you on the eligibility issue.
Quite frankly, your continued waffling on this issue just shows that you are a academic fraud, the incurable kind.

[paul_oshea]

I'd assume the reason its quite on here from NB, GR and EG is because they have gone back home to dublin for the parade and are on the beer as i now speak.

Just the few expats left like me, the witch doctor, the goalkeeper, the guitar player....and tets.

[paul_oshea]

And yes thats not a mistake, incase anyone thinks it is.....

[Gather round]

I'd assume the reason its quite on here from NB, GR and EG is because they have gone back home to dublin for the parade and are on the beer as i now speak

Sadly not a bank holiday where I am...

[Predator]

Good lord. You're like a kindergarten school kid in a playground. Maybe with future intentions of making the cheer-leading team at college. There's absolutely no difference in IFA policy from FAI policy, be that by the means or by the ends; stop kidding yourself that there is.

Spot on.

Why ought his door have been shut if he has, as has now become very apparent, clearly harboured intentions to play for us, as well as England? Why would or should having us as another valid option for him be any different from having merely England as an option?

I too am quite interested to hear EalingGreen's response to this. No vitriol when a player is unsure between two eligible teams, but when the FAI come into the equation, all hell breaks loose.