Shane Ferguson

[Not Brazil]

Maybe, though not if you believe certain of your, er, compatriots.

"Maybe" what?

[geysir]

Eligibility for British Citizens is dealt with under Article 16.

Yes indeed, it should be noted that Article 16 is a replica of the UK agreement signed in 1993? and annexed to FIFA rules at that time, formally brought into the statutes in 2008 as Article 16.

In line with that, the FIFA Legal Committee invited the FAI voluntarily to confine itself to selecting for its association teams Northern Irish players who meet one of the following requirements: a) the player was born in the Republic of Ireland, b) his biological mother or father was born in the Republic of Ireland, c) his grandmother or grandfather was born in the Republic of Ireland, or d) he has lived continuously, for at least two years, in the Republic of Ireland.

This was conveyed to the FAI by letter dated 7th March 2007.

No way would the FAI or Nationalists in the North accept that Irish citizens born in the North were not eligible for the FAI, unless they fulfill residency or other requirements down South.
Similar to the FIFA passport/id impasse, this was not a runner.

[Not Brazil]

No way would the FAI or Nationalists in the North accept that Irish citizens born in the North were not eligible for the FAI, unless they fulfill residency or other requirements down South.

I accept that, however, it challenges your earlier assertion that "the IFA refused all cooperation". In this instance, it was the FAI who rejected the proposal to operate on a similar basis to the British Associations re: eligiblity.

[geysir]

I accept that, however, it challenges your earlier assertion that "the IFA refused all cooperation". In this instance, it was the FAI who rejected the proposal to operate on a similar basis to the British Associations re: eligiblity.

I don't expect that FIFA automatically understand the Irish situation, sometimes like the passport/id thing, the Irish situation has to be spelt out for them.

I also wrote that the basis for compromise is that both associations understood the rules as they stand.
The IFA not only did not understand the rules but insisted with a vehement stubbornness that they were right.
It is nigh impossible to negotiate with another party who think they are absolutely right when in fact they are totally wrong.
Not only was the first FIFA offer completely out of whack but the IFA were not in a 'good place'.
Technically you can say the FAI refused the first compromise, but that would be rigidly simplistic in the extreme.

[Lionel Ritchie]

Not only was the first FIFA offer completely out of whack but the IFA were not in a 'good place'.
Technically you can say the FAI refused the first compromise, but that would be rigidly simplistic in the extreme.

I'm by no means the most bullish on this issue but I'd argue the first compromise was no compromise at all. It appeared to ask the FAI to deny itself access to a cohort of players they were perfectly entitled to select from for no other reason than peace and quiet.

[geysir]

Like a motley crew of irregulars asking for an unconditional surrender from an organised force who were in a vastly advantageous position.

[Paddy Garcia]

If this site has not produced a couple of immigration lawyers by now, then its a crying shame.

[seanfhear]

If the lad wants to come and play for us I would welcome him with open arms. If you and your family had supported Ireland (republic) all your life then it would be a no-brainer for me

[Wangball]

I think people get too caught up in the whole "poaching our players" guff, fact is its the player's choice and it has to be respected

If he wants to play for us then great and if he doesn't I hope he turns out to be an excellent player for the North

[ArdeeBhoy]

"Maybe" what?

As in they don't seem to universally share your pessimism....see numerous posts passim.

And in a vein of conciliation as suggested above, in the absence of a UI team, if they want to play for the North, then so be it.

[ArdeeBhoy]

If this site has not produced a couple of immigration lawyers by now, then its a crying shame.

Refer you to the three posters I mentioned previously, in this thread or similar.

[Not Brazil]

As in they don't seem to universally share your pessimism....see numerous posts passim.

And in a vein of conciliation as suggested above, in the absence of a UI team, if they want to play for the North, then so be it.

My "pessimism" merely stems from the belief that I feel the IFA made gross errors of judgement in their quest to see FIFA UPHOLD their own rules - their (the IFA and their legal representatives) lack of understanding not only of FIFA Statutes, but also of the irredentist Citizenship laws of the Republic Of Ireland, was quite staggering. Aside that, I shudder to think the money wasted on the whole charade which could have been better spent.

By the way, as I have pointed out to you previously, there is a de facto "UI team" - it is that which is operated by the FAI.

I acknowledge that you respect and uphold the right of choice for those players, eligible also to play for Northern Ireland, to play for Northern Ireland.

[DannyInvincible]

the irredentist Citizenship laws of the Republic Of Ireland

Erm...

[geysir]

Since the last century, that old irredentist bogey has been well and truly buried, buried in concrete.

That is of course, for people who understand what it means.

[paul_oshea]

an "historic" claim on the territory based on previous possesion of said territory? I certainly amn't offended by the term.

[Gather round]

the irredentist Citizenship laws of the Republic Of Ireland

I can understand nationalists being irritated by the term, but as long as the South's constitution says "it is the firm will of the Irish nation...to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland", it'll continue to be used. You can't really win of course, because dropping the clause entirely would prompt howls of anguish from northern nationalists.

Since the last century, that old irredentist bogey has been well and truly buried, buried in concrete. That is of course, for people who understand what it means

Except it hasn't, as above. It means literally 'unredeemed' and politically, seeking to annex part of another country (which needn't necessarily have been part of the first country).

an "historic" claim on the territory based on previous possesion of said territory? I certainly amn't offended by the term

Fine, but if you were-say- a Pole living in Gdansk, Wroclaw, Poznan or Szczecin (all cities now in Poland but which had majority German-speaking and identifying populations for centuries) you might be a tad urinated off if Berlin declared you part of the Fourth Rei...er, Federal Republic of Germany.

[EastTerracer]

When Saturday Comes appear to have joined the debate as well. Tactical capping is their proposed solution.

[SwanVsDalton]

When Saturday Comes appear to have joined the debate as well. Tactical capping is their proposed solution.

Wouldn't say it's being proposed as a solution - seems to be saying it's a bit of a shame but that's the way it'll inevitably go. Fairly fluffy, simplistic piece, but at least it refrains from ranty condescension.

[ifk101]

Terrible article.

The most obvious and simple solution would be for the IFA to read and understand the eligibility statutes.

The IFA is already engaged in tactical capping btw. So are we.

[EastTerracer]

Terrible article.

The most obvious and simple solution would be for the IFA to read and understand the eligibility statutes.

The IFA is already engaged in tactical capping btw. So are we.

I never suggested the article was any good!

Given how little attention this subject gets in Britain and how poor the level of understanding is, I just thought it was interesting that this is what the average football fan in Britain will read.