NI support

[Réiteoir]

I suspect this one meets your brief, for example :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Proposed_NI_Flag.png

And it also cunningly includes elements of both traditions to a balanced degree.

Or we could go down the Cypriot route and use this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Alliance_ni_flag.png

or this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:N...oposal1111.JPG

[EalingGreen]

Or we could go down the Cypriot route and use this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Alliance_ni_flag.png

or this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:N...oposal1111.JPG

It's actually a whole lot easier to go down the route which thousands of fans from all backgrounds are following right now, which is just go to the match and enjoy the bloody football.

I've posted it here before, but people have got to realise that not only is it physically impossible to come to one single arrangement which suits absolutely everybody re. flags and anthems and all the other peripheral issues, but (imo), it is not actually even desirable, since to attempt to do so would only be to hold the game hostage to purely political considerations, so that all that it takes is for one disaffected or mischievous or extremist party to complain that they are dissatisfied/outraged/discriminated against, for the "arrangements" to fall apart.

Instead, we presently have a set-up which is recognised by all neutral observers such as FIFA and UEFA as being tolerably acceptable to all reasonable people, so that no football fan need be deterred from supporting the team for reasons of race, colour, religion etc
That is not the same as saying that everyone "enjoys" or agrees with all of these issues as being perfectly to their liking (personally, I would like to see GSTQ replaced by a distinctively NI anthem for example); however the key term is "reasonable".
And for anyone who wishes to see what actually happens at a match at Windsor Park, they will find that the audience is made up of people of all backgrounds, none of whom has been deterred by reason of that background, but all of whom are there merely to watch 11 guys from their own wee part of the world take on 11 guys from some other part of the world.
Sometimes this experience is desperate (Iceland) and sometimes it is glorious (Spain), but no-one says these days that they wouldn't go back because they couldn't stomach a two minute anthem before the kick-off, or the fact that some of the fans were waving different flags from that which hangs from the lamppost outside their house.

Which is what "Football For All" is all about - simply, it is for all those Northern Ireland fans who want to support Northern Ireland. If some other people don't wish to do so, for whatever reason or none, that is their prerogative.
In the meantime, the rest of us will just get on with watching the bloody game...

[dcfcsteve]

I've posted it here before, but people have got to realise that not only is it physically impossible to come to one single arrangement which suits absolutely everybody re. flags and anthems and all the other peripheral issues, but (imo), it is not actually even desirable, since to attempt to do so would only be to hold the game hostage to purely political considerations, so that all that it takes is for one disaffected or mischievous or extremist party to complain that they are dissatisfied/outraged/discriminated against, for the "arrangements" to fall apart.

Is it really that impossible ? South Africa managed it superbly.....

Instead, we presently have a set-up which is recognised by all neutral observers such as FIFA and UEFA as being tolerably acceptable to all reasonable people, so that no football fan need be deterred from supporting the team for reasons of race, colour, religion etc

As if FIFA care, let alone understand, the divisive nature of GSTQ etc. It's not an issue they can do anything about - it's an IFA issue.

If flags and anthems are as unimportant as you say, and the current ones are clearly causing problems, then surely the one genuinely easy thing to do is to just change the bloody things ??

[EalingGreen]

Is it really that impossible ? South Africa managed it superbly.....

As if FIFA care, let alone understand, the divisive nature of GSTQ etc. It's not an issue they can do anything about - it's an IFA issue.

If flags and anthems are as unimportant as you say, and the current ones are clearly causing problems, then surely the one genuinely easy thing to do is to just change the bloody things ??

I'm not sufficiently clued up on the politics of South African sport to make a facile comparison with the situation in NI. I do know, however, that the post-Apartheid changes were imposed by an 85% majority on a 15% minority which knew it was powerless to provide any meaningful objection. Also, SA had Mandela and De Klerk at the helm, whereas we've got Paisley and Adams! Besides, if you Google e.g. SA Rugby+race quotas, you'll see that not all the changes have been managed quite so "superbly" as everyone might hope - even years later.

And as for the state of knowledge of FIFA over GSTQ, I wouldn't like to speculate, but it is quite simply untrue to imply that such issues are solely the preserve of the IFA. As far back as 1950 for example, FIFA intervened to direct the IFA that they should cease to call the team they administer "Ireland", replacing it with "Northern Ireland"; at the same time they instructed the equivalent to the FAI. And as recently as last month they threatened to bar the Greek FA and all Greek footballers from all international competition, if the Greek Government insisted on passing a law which FIFA felt gave them undue political influence in the affairs of the Greek FA. (The Greek Government backed down, btw).

As for flags and anthems, I don't say that they are "unimportant"; rather, that they are only as important as somebody makes them. To take an analogy, at every Ireland rugby international at Lansdowne, the identity of thousands of Northern fans, reflecting one of the two jurisdictions comprising the Ireland team, is ignored. No matter, we continue to respect the Soldiers Song and Tricolour, as well as the "Official" presence of Mary McAleese, since we are there to watch a rugby match, not engage in some sort of petty constitutional convention! If Northern Unionists can show that tolerance at Lansdowne and increasing numbers of Northern Nationalists also can show equal tolerance and forebearing at Windsor, I don't see why anyone should have a problem. Unless, of course, they want one...

In the end, politics in NI are nothing if not a "zero sum" game. You can be quite certain that if you change something to suit one "aggrieved" party, you will cause equal "offence" to some other party. Which is why it better not to let the politicians call the shots.
As I say, we currently have an arrangement at Windsor which, although hardly perfect, works tolerably well for all people of a tolerant and reasonable disposition.
Why change that in order to suit one disgruntled section of the population who don't appear willing to adopt the same degree of reasonableness, especially when some of them could never accept any arrangements which reflect a "partitionist" team, indeed aren't even interested in football at all?

The fact is, we've changed - some of our critics haven't, whose problem is it?

[dcfcsteve]

In the end, politics in NI are nothing if not a "zero sum" game. You can be quite certain that if you change something to suit one "aggrieved" party, you will cause equal "offence" to some other party. Which is why it better not to let the politicians call the shots.
As I say, we currently have an arrangement at Windsor which, although hardly perfect, works tolerably well for all people of a tolerant and reasonable disposition. Why change that in order to suit one disgruntled section of the population who don't appear willing to adopt the same degree of reasonableness, especially when some of them could never accept any arrangements which reflect a "partitionist" team, indeed aren't even interested in football at all?

EG -your arguement here is based on the false premise that anyone who raises issue with the symbolism that the NI team chooses to attach to itself can only be inherently opposed to the NI team, so their viewpoint is purely scurrilous in nature and can therefore be ignored/is irrelevant.

There can be no doubt that many people opposed to the concept of the NI team use anthems and flags as a stick with which to beat that team. But there are also people who actively go to Northern Ireland games who have very strong views on this issue (e.g. Maribor, who posted previously) and others who are not at all opposed to the concept of a Northern Irish football team, would be willing to go to games, but just want a matchday experience that isn't wrapped up in the identity of one or other of our two communities (e.g. myself). Dismissing those viewpoints by ascribing a negative agenda to them (even though, as is clearly in the case of Maribor, it is often patently incorrect to do so) is just a convenient/lazy way of brusing genuine issues concerns under the carpet.

The bottom line still stands - how can a deeply divided society present a face to the world that is draped in the symbolism of only one side of that divide, and then claim that it is a truely representative body for the whole of that society ? Answer - it can't. No matter what aspersions you may cast at those who point-out that bottom line, it still stands.

I'm not sufficiently clued up on the politics of South African sport to make a facile comparison with the situation in NI. I do know, however, that the post-Apartheid changes were imposed by an 85% majority on a 15% minority which knew it was powerless to provide any meaningful objection. Also, SA had Mandela and De Klerk at the helm, whereas we've got Paisley and Adams! Besides, if you Google e.g. SA Rugby+race quotas, you'll see that not all the changes have been managed quite so "superbly" as everyone might hope - even years later.

You said that it would be impossible to address the flag and anthem issue. I pointed out to you that South Africa had done a good job of it. The point was about choice of symbolism, and nothing to do with sport, so you don't need to be clued-up on anything regarding South African sport to understand it. Interestingly, the new South African flag faced opposition from within the white community when it was first launched, but over-time they have embraced it fully (bar the odd nut-job Afrikaaner extremist). Would it be so unlikely that any initial oppositon here to a new flag might also change with time if an appropriate and balanced flag was introduced...?

And as for the state of knowledge of FIFA over GSTQ, I wouldn't like to speculate, but it is quite simply untrue to imply that such issues are solely the preserve of the IFA. As far back as 1950 for example, FIFA intervened to direct the IFA that they should cease to call the team they administer "Ireland", replacing it with "Northern Ireland"; at the same time they instructed the equivalent to the FAI. And as recently as last month they threatened to bar the Greek FA and all Greek footballers from all international competition, if the Greek Government insisted on passing a law which FIFA felt gave them undue political influence in the affairs of the Greek FA. (The Greek Government backed down, btw).

There are some things that are clearly within FIFA's remit, and some that aren't. 'Footballing matters' is the key differentiator. Having 2 teams in international football using exactly the same name was clearly a ridiculous situation, and a footballing one, so FIFA had every right to mandate a change (though to adddress this evil interloping by FIFA, how's about we change the name back now....? ) The Greek example again was clearly a footballing matter, so they had every right to intervene. What particular anthem a team selects for itself in international football has clearly got feck all to do with football and everything to do with politics (hemnce why a one-sided choice has been made in NI), so it is completely and utterly outside FIFA's remit to care about, let alone intervene.

As for flags and anthems, I don't say that they are "unimportant"; rather, that they are only as important as somebody makes them. To take an analogy, at every Ireland rugby international at Lansdowne, the identity of thousands of Northern fans, reflecting one of the two jurisdictions comprising the Ireland team, is ignored. No matter, we continue to respect the Soldiers Song and Tricolour, as well as the "Official" presence of Mary McAleese, since we are there to watch a rugby match, not engage in some sort of petty constitutional convention! If Northern Unionists can show that tolerance at Lansdowne and increasing numbers of Northern Nationalists also can show equal tolerance and forebearing at Windsor, I don't see why anyone should have a problem. Unless, of course, they want one...

Your example re the rugby is rather self-defeating, as the IRFU has at least done something to acknowledge the sometimes divisive impact of anthems - e.g. introduced Ireland's Call. I've been to many's an Ireland international game over the years where that has been the only anthem used. There are a number of other ways the IRFU could have addressed the issue of anthems other than choosing to play '2' in Lansdowne Rd, for example, but the point is that they recognised there was an issue and they did something to tackle that. These are 2 steps that the IFA steadfastly refuse to take.

The fact is, we've changed - some of our critics haven't, whose problem is it?

No one sensible is denying that the NI matchday experience has improved significantly from what it used to be. But likewise, no-one sensible should be explicity or implicitly suggesting that there is no more change that either could or should be made to make it a truely involving, non-divisive, representative experience. Anthems and flags are well-known as being extremely divisive issues in the north generally, so it should be no great surprise that they raise issues here either when it comes to a team that is designed to openly represent us all internationally. Ignoring these issues, or castigating those who dare raise them, is not the solution.

[Gather round]

EG -your arguement here is based on the false premise that anyone who raises issue with the symbolism that the NI team chooses to attach to itself can only be inherently opposed to the NI team, so their viewpoint is purely scurrilous in nature and can therefore be ignored/is irrelevant

You what? He's made clear that many of our fans- including him and me- don't like our lack of a distinct anthem. Holding such a gripe, or repreating it to anyone willing to listen, doesn't make us any less fans or any more inherently opposed!

The bottom line still stands - how can a deeply divided society present a face to the world that is draped in the symbolism of only one side of that divide, and then claim that it is a truely representative body for the whole of that society?

Look it up in Marca, or the Daily Telegraph last year. They saw their football teams well beaten, not a political demo, as Ealing suggests.

It represents two sides on the field, and increasingly again in the stands, media, wider support etc.. That's because the games are just that, games, whatever Billyfest they may have been before.

d that it would be impossible to address the flag and anthem issue...would it be so unlikely that any initial oppositon here to a new flag might also change with time if an appropriate and balanced flag was introduced...?

Maybe. Everything can change in politics. Alternatively, if ye don't like the flag with the crown, wave one without? No-one will mind.

ample re the rugby is rather self-defeating, as the IRFU has at least done something to acknowledge the sometimes divisive impact of anthems - e.g. introduced Ireland's Call

Last time I looked the IRFU had ****ed off unionists by playing AbF in Dublin but not GStQ in Belfast. In other words, they figured that was less a problem than irritating their own support and the Lenadoon Nazi-hunter

The IFA and supporters are trying to do something less contentious, by making the atmosphere more welcoming without risking a 'themwuns get everything' argument. Which is inevitable, alas, if you stop playing Brenda's anthem. Much as I dislike it.

No one sensible is denying that the NI matchday experience has improved significantly from what it used to be. But likewise, no-one sensible should be explicity or implicitly suggesting that there is no more change that either could or should be made to make it a truely involving, non-divisive, representative experience

I'm not, nor is Ealing nor most NI fans I know. You're stirring, Steve.

[EalingGreen]

Thank you for replying, GR, that's just about what I would have put myself (only somewhat more succinctly, I fear )

Indeed all I can add is that last Wednesday evening, they could have flown the Tricolour, played the Wolfe Tones over the tannoy and had Gerry Adams take the "Presidential Salute" at Windsor and I couldn't have cared less!

Football For All (Politics for Everyone Else)