Adam Barton

[EalingGreen]

English isn't his first language. Would there have been any confusion if he had said "Irish citizens by heritage"? IMHO, he's clearly just making a distinction between those who qualify by heritage rather than by adopting a new nationality based solely on residence.

OK, Blatter's English might not be perfect, but "birthright" is a fairly straightforward word i.e. "by right of birth". He didn't qualify his point with talk of "heritage" (or ancestry) that I recall, nor was it alluded to in the BBC/Sunday Life report.

Peut-être dans ces moments là, on se raccroche à ce qu'on peut?

[paul_oshea]

You're correct - a person applying for citizenship through the foreign birth register is not a citizen until they are registered, and only from the date they register (it's not backdated to their date of birth).

Are you sure that achieving citizenship in this way is considered 'acquiring a new nationality'?

I asked this at the very begining of the Thread geysir started. Applying common sense I would say its not.

[EalingGreen]

You're correct - a person applying for citizenship through the foreign birth register is not a citizen until they are registered, and only from the date they register (it's not backdated to their date of birth).

Ta.

Are you sure that achieving citizenship in this way is considered 'acquiring a new nationality'?

I guess unless I hear it straight from someone at FIFA, I can't be sure of anything!

But if as you say, such a person is NOT (automatically) an Irish national at the moment of birth, but subsequently becomes an Irish National after being Registered etc, I cannot conceive of how he is doing anything other than "acquiring a new nationality". Indeed, any other interpretation would be illogical (imo), even absurd.

[boovidge]

FIFA see it differently because Irish citizenship is an entitlement from birth, whether or not you have to fill in a form. There are no other requirements such as residency.

[EalingGreen]

I'd say the Foreign Births Register is just a procedural matter, rather than anything deeper.

I've posted my own situation here before to illustrate: I was born in Glasgow because my dad had a job there for 3 or 4 years. My Irish family moved back to Ireland when I was 3 and I lived there for 28 years until I moved to London. My kids have been born here and to obtain an Irish passport I need to complete the Foreign Births Register. In this instance I think it's hard to argue that there is any distinction between my kids being Irish* by procedural quirk or by birth right.

I feel the distinction is entirely pertinent, not because 2nd generation Irish (eg your kids) are any less inherently "Irish" than 1st generation or native-born Irish, but because the date of official confirmation is the moment of Registration, not of birth.

And following Sepp Blatter's pronouncements etc, I believe FIFA's Statutes treat the two differently i.e. Irish by Birthright = Article 15, whereas Irish by Registration = Article 17.

Unless, of course, Danny Invincible is correct, and I don't actually believe what I am posting...

*They're British too, though with recent rugby & cricket results their Irishness is very much to the fore. My little fella told his English mum that "English is rubbish" on St. Patrick's Day. I almost felt guilty.

To go off topic slightly, as somebody who is also British, but decidedly NOT English, I understand your kids' feelings perfectly.
However, I was recently reading Dara O'Briain's (truly excellent) book, "Tickling the English". In it he reprises one of his stage routines, "Why I Will Love my English Child".
I must confess, it caused me to reappraise some of my attitudes on the subject. If you've not read/heard it, you might find it very interesting (indeed the whole book).

[EalingGreen]

FIFA see it differently because Irish citizenship is an entitlement from birth, whether or not you have to fill in a form.

Then can you explain to me why the Irish Government itself makes a distinction between Native-born/1st generation and 2nd generation i.e. by requiring the latter to register? There has to be some distinction.

(Btw, without meaning to be pedantic, I don't think it's correct to say that (all) "Irish citizenship is an entitlement from birth", since aiui, the most recent Constitutional Amendment on the subject withdrew such entitlement to children born in Ireland to non-EU parents etc (basically Nigerian mothers and such flying to Dublin to give birth to an "Irish" national who will consequently have, and confer upon its parents, EU right of residence etc.)

There are no other requirements such as residency.

True, but that doesn't detract from my argument, which is to do with the timing of becoming Irish, not the means by which one may do so.

[Qwerty]

You guys can talk about this until the cows come home and I know you will do just that but either way the rights to Irish citizenship are really quite straightforward, anyone with an Irish grandparent born on the island of Ireland is entitled to Irish citizenship. End of story. Them's the rules.

[osarusan]

But citizenship and eligibility are not the same thing.

[Qwerty]

But citizenship and eligibility are not the same thing.

Indeed, and those rules are clear as well.

So far at least FIFA has ruled along predicted lines in a number of cases in the past couple of years, IFA appeals have failed in every case I think. I'm open to correction, so what the heck is there to talk about?

[DannyInvincible]

My recall is as follows. Soon after the Gibson Ruling by FIFA, the IFAB held one of their regular meetings, coincidentally in NI (the Slieve Donard).

Afterwards there was a Press Conference and (unsurprisingly) Blatter was asked about the Gibson situation etc. In his reply, as reported, he made it clear that his understanding was that the reason why NI-born players such as Gibson etc were entitled to represent the FAI was because they were Irish citizens "from birth". This was a clear contrast to the earlier situation with Qatar and Cape Verde, who were conferring their nationality (entirely legally, btw) upon "second tier" Brazilians, in order to cap them for themselves.

My recall is always capable of being faulty, I suppose, but in this case I am confident it is not and as evidence, I need only quote from the source which you cited earlier, namely:
"As the Fifa legal committee understood the issue, the situation in Northern Ireland is such that all Northern Irish players could opt to play for both Association teams, given that they have a birthright to an Irish passport." (my emphasis)

Indeed; your emphasis. As Stutts points out, he was most likely making a distinction between the likes of Gibson specifically and those who might be eligible based on residence alone, as is the express qualifier that article 15 brings into play. It is patently obvious that Blatter wasn't offering clarification on all the potential implications that arise from the wording of article 15 because he didn't even mention the rule specifically. CAS, however, who were vested the responsibility of interpreting the statutes in question, one by one, were more meticulous with their language because they had to be and - despite your claim to the contrary, for which I still await evidence, although an admission that you were talking nonsense would suit fine - they give no mention to the notion of "birthright" whatsoever as no such word or similar appears in the text of article 15, nor is citizenship granted by birthright the sole category of permanent citizenship granted to Irish nationals besides citizenship granted based on residence.

My contention is that unlike someone born in NI, or someone born outside of Ireland to an Irish-born parent, someone born outside Ireland whose closest "connection" to Ireland is an NI-born grandparent (eg Barton) does not have a "birthright" to Irish nationality (Passport). That is, they may apply for Nationality (i.e. via Register of Foreign Births), and be successful, but they cannot be in the same category as native-born, or 1st generation Irish. (Otherwise, why would the Irish Government make a distinction?).

Why can't they be in the same category? Of course they can. They may not be considered as part of the same category with regard to how they go about acquiring Irish nationality and the date from which it takes effect in the eyes of the Irish government, but why would that necessitate FIFA to make any distinction? All forms of Irish nationality you mention above are permanent from the date they are granted and FIFA don't make any further distinction within that just so long as they're not dependent on residence and a player in question hasn't represented an association under another of his dual or multiple nationalities.

As for my "lying and deceit etc", I am capable of mis-remembering things. I am also capable of misunderstanding things, or not explaining myself completely clearly. I am sometimes wrong.

But "lying" involves deliberately stating something which one knows to be untrue. I have never done so, either here or anywhere else. Imo, your accusation of "lies and deceit" etc against me, with no proper evidence, actually says more about you than it does about me.

Well, what it says about me exactly, I'm not entirely sure, but you did say that CAS had confirmed that article 15 related only to those nationals who were Irish nationals by birthright and I would argue that you are quite prone to misrepresenting things on a fairly regular basis. I don't know where you got the claim regarding CAS from other than having made it up or seriously misunderstood something, although I'm not sure how you could "misunderstand" something to the effect of believing it means a certain thing where no such words even exist to indicate or suggest what you believe it to mean. Clearly you seek a solution to something you perceive to be a problem and you let your interests cloud your interpretation and memory of the facts. You're clearly also quite intelligent so maybe I find it difficult to reconcile the two and consequently assume that you're intentionally trying to mislead when you appear to be continually misinterpreting or regularly misremembering something.

Rather, if I reached the stage where I couldn't take it, I'd bugger off somewhere else.

On which point you might as well know that you are a hell of a way short of that stage.

My intention certainly isn't to see the back of you or have you bugger off. If anything, I'm more than happy to have my views challenged and placed under scrutiny by someone with polar interests to my own.

Indeed, seeing as you are clearly working through my (many) posts both here and on OWC etc in an attempt to find more examples of what you infer to be my habitual lying etc, and the above is the best you can come up with, I am entirely confident that you won't, either.

That's not the case at all. As I've already stated, I didn't visit OWC, never mind trawl though it, with the intention of digging up posts made by yourself just so I could set about attacking you. You hadn't even been on my mind. I simply stumbled upon what you'd written and thought it relevant to the discussion here. In fairness to you, there's an awful lot of ignorance and nonsense on there from others with which I'd take greater issue.

[DannyInvincible]

However, someone born outside of Ireland, whose closest connection is an Irish-born grandparent is, as I understand it, only an Irish National from the moment they successfully apply for it.

That is correct, but...

As such, FIFA's Statutes treat them as someone who is "acquiring a new Nationality" i.e. Article 17.

... here is where you make a jump too far. What makes you think that FIFA's statues treat them as someone who is "acquiring a new nationality"?

As per its own official guidelines (cited earlier), the Irish Government makes a distinction between people born outside of Ireland to an Irish-born parent, and people born outside of Ireland to an Irish-born grandparent. The former is clearly automatically an Irish National from birth, whereas I can only conclude that the latter must not be, otherwise why would the Government make the distinction in their Rules i.e. treat them differently, eg by requiring them to be Registered etc?

Btw, just in case someone accuses me of lying about all this, I would reiterate that this is only how I interpret the Irish Government guidelines, in conjunction with how I interpret FIFA's Articles. I am open to being persuaded otherwise, but to date, no-one on this site or elsewhere has made a sufficiently convincing case. Nor will I be somehow "intimidated" into acquiescence by abuse, sarcasm and ganging up etc.

Your interpretation of the Irish government's guidelines and procedures is entirely correct, but, again, why should certain governmental particularities necessitate FIFA to make distinctions or view anything differently in this case just so long as they're dealing with a status of nationality that is permanent and not based on residence at the time of first representing an association?

P.S. That last paragraph wasn't addressed at you, Osarusan.

Directed at me, was it?

[Stuttgart88]

I am open to being persuaded otherwise, but to date, no-one on this site or elsewhere has made a sufficiently convincing case. Nor will I be somehow "intimidated" into acquiescence by abuse, sarcasm and ganging up etc.

P.S. That last paragraph wasn't addressed at you, Osarusan.

I hope it's not addressed at me either. I'm disagreeing with you and trying to persuade you to change your mind, but I'm certainly not ganging up on anyone.

As far as I'm concerned the issue is very simple. You yourself mentioned that the rules were hurried through to deal with Qatar offering nationality to Brazilians based solely on residence.

The other route to eligibility is through what I'd call "natural" nationality, for want of a better word. Blatter simplified this in an off-the-cuff remark by referring to "birth", whereas I expect most impartial people - in this specific context - would understand this to mean nationality through heritage. I could have been born in Scotland to Irish parents and moved to Ireland at one day old. I have only ever held Irish nationality and an Irish passport and yet my kids have to go through a procedural quirk to have their (half, dual, official, whatever...) Irishness confirmed.

No rational or impartial person, in my opinion, would argue that my birthplace should be the determinant of their Irishness. But they certainly are not Irish by sole virtue of residence. That's the distinction I am almost certain that Blatter was meaning, regardless of what actual words came from his mouth.

[ifk101]

How did Adam Barton qualify for the IFA?

[osarusan]

Is Adam Barton in the same boat as Carl Magnay? Some interesting comments in there.

[Not Brazil]

How did Adam Barton qualify for the IFA?

He was eligible by virtue of Article 16.

[ifk101]

He was eligible by virtue of Article 16.

An NI born grandparent? Born where and when?

[Not Brazil]

An NI born grandparent? Born where and when?

Belfast - not sure when.

Barton's da was born in (in England)1962, but not sure about his granda.

[ifk101]

Belfast - not sure when.

Barton's da was born in (in England)1962, but not sure about his granda.

TBH I'm not 100% sure how Barton is eligible to play for us and without knowing Barton's complete circumstances, his grandparent was most likely born at a time when, in the eyes of FIFA, NI was part of the FAI's "footballing territory". The IFA have previously suugested that both the FAI and IFA claimed to be the governing footballing bodies for the island of Ireland between the 1920's - 1950's. This is a time when the IFA wasn't a member of FIFA.

[paul_oshea]

An interesting case (talking football only)would be for someone born in ROI to declare for England with only links to ROI. And yes that is possible, if its possible for someone born in England(for example) who has a grandparent in NI to play for NI or England or whoever. BUt i don't think anyone born in ROI would ever want to play for NI or England.

[ifk101]

BUt i don't think anyone born in ROI would ever want to play for NI or England.

There're examples from other sporting codes and underage football to suggest otherwise.