QuoteYou what?Originally Posted by geysir
On a thread pertaining to eligibility rules?
and the IFA got involved as wellThis eligibility stuff is nearly as bad as the Lisbon treaty.
You what?
On a thread pertaining to eligibility rules?
The Englishmen came over in the year 2005
But little did they know that we'd planned a wee surprise
Sir David scored the winner, and Windsor Park went wild
And this is what we sang...
Blanchflower,
You and those who share your opinion essentially base your case on the above analysis of Article 16.
And I accept in a technical sense, the language of the Article supports your interpretation.
However, I think we are all in danger of failing to see the wood for the trees. To go back to first principles, it seems to me obvious - indeed it is stated by FIFA in their Preamble etc - that the insertion of Article 16 (plus the re-working of Article 15) is specifically designed by FIFA to address not the Irish situation, but the Cape Verde/Qatari-Brazilian situation.
We know that must be so, since all this activity, Resolutions, re-drafting etc by FIFA was prompted by those cases. Therefore, the first step in understanding exactly what FIFA means with its new Articles MUST (imo) be to put everything in that context, not ours.
And if you try to apply your interpretation of Article 16 (above) to e.g. a Qatari-Brazilian, it simply doesn't work. That is, whether you consider such a player Brazilian, or whether you consider such a player Qatari, neither definition makes him someone whose "nationality (singular) entitles [him] to play for more than 1 country"
That is, how is your average Qatari entitled to play for more than one country (Association)? Or your average Brazilian? Quite simply, they are not.
Therefore, the only way in which Article 16 can extend its four conditions to these Qatari-Brazilians is if we interpret the word "nationality" (singular) actually to mean "nationalities" (plural).
And if we do that, then in the absence of either a specific exemption for the FAI, or a distinction between automatic birth nationality and suddenly granted nationality (neither of which exists), then I feel Article 16 MUST also be applied to those NI-born players who automatically have both UK and Irish Nationality from the moment of their birth. In which case, the four conditions also apply.
Otherwise, by their re-working of Article 15 and insertion of Article 16 (plus 17 and 18), FIFA will be failing to stop e.g. Qatar giving out Nationality (singular) to people born outwith Qatar from having to comply with one of the four conditions. And we know that FIFA's intentions in this area are the exact opposite!
All of which will explain for me the most puzzling aspect of this whole affair, namely the way the IFA and the FAI are both each confident their case has prevailed. That is, the FAI is relying on a narrow, technical interpretation of the Articles. Whereas the IFA understands, presumably from discussions with FIFA, that these Articles are intended to be applicable to all individuals who have more than one nationality, however acquired, including those born in NI.
Indeed, I am further persuaded by the IFA's case by two lesser aspects of this matter. First, Article 15 is re-drafted with an unusual English construction (imo), namely, "holding a permanent nationality that is not dependant on residence in a certain country". Qatari nationality is presumably not dependent on residing in Qatar for any period (otherwise we wouldn't have this problem of the Brazilians etc in the first place). And as we know, Irish nationality does not depend on living in any certain country, either.
Second, I do not think it coincidental that FIFA chose to frame their birthplace condition (the first of the four Article 16 conditions) with the phrase "born in the territory of the relevant Association". As such, this neatly sidesteps any problem with defining a country/nation/jurisdiction etc. Indeed, it allows them to retain absolute control over this, since it is they who determine what an Association is and what territory it covers.
As such, this reflects their policy always to maintain equally the integrity of each Association over every other, including the small or weak against the large, strong or, ahem, "covetous"
Over to you.
Well, we are dealing with technicalities, after all!
And - in a practical sense - FIFA has actually stated that the legal position hasn't changed as a result of the new articles!
Er, first principles are that international teams are restricted to players with the nationality of that team.
The Qatari situation is dealt with by Article 17 (Acquisition of a New Nationality).
Article 17 stops them doing that.
Condescending príck of a post.Citizenship laws are irrelevant to a discussion about eligibility for international football (which is based primarily on citizenship)???
Are you sane?
Er, yeah, I know - that's what I've been arguing all along! Try reading my posts before you start embarrassing yourself.
Discuss the citizenship laws amongst yourselves.
In fact would be more fiting to go back to your OWC caves to dicuss the Republic's constitution there.
All you OWC wits are just drooling at the opportunity to discuss the Republics Constitution
The FIFA Eligibility discussion is done and dusted.
It's a wrap.
As you've stated that "the language seems quite clear and unambiguous", why the need to "interpret" word(s) to suit your preferred understanding of the FIFA text EG?
maybe he doesn't like to be wrong?!
I'm a bloke,I'm an ocker
And I really love your knockers,I'm a labourer by day,
I **** up all me pay,Watching footy on TV,
Just feed me more VB,Just pour my beer,And get my smokes, And go away
Sure we all know Ealing Green is never wrong!maybe he doesn't like to be wrong?!
EG is right about one thing, the wording IS clear and unambiguous.
[COLOR=#005600]http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affeder ... _47752.pdf[/COLOR]
13.2 REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE APPLICATION OF THE STATUTES
13.2.1 Eligibility to play for representative teams
'The objective is the complete integration of the various circulars and provisions within the regulations into the FIFA Statutes without altering the current legal situation (cf. Annexe 2 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, circular no. 901 dated 19 March 2004 and circular no. 1093 dated 21 June 2007). Under the proposal approved by the Executive Committee, all relevant provisions have been summarised and added to the Regulations Governing the Application of the Statutes. Accordingly, art. 15 in the chapter “Eligibility to play for representative teams” of the Regulations Governing the Application of the Statutes should be amended and new art. 16 to 18 should be included.'
The new articles 16, 17 and 18 don't apply to northern born players because they qualify under article 15.
It cant be made any clearer than that. Nothing has changed.
End of discussion.
Last edited by kingdomkerry; 05/06/2008 at 12:47 PM.
However your point still boils down to somebody born in NI automatically getting UK nationality. Now I appreciate they are entitled to UK nationality but the GFA allows for somebody born in NI to be considered British or Irish or both.Blanchflower,
You and those who share your opinion essentially base your case on the above analysis of Article 16.
And I accept in a technical sense, the language of the Article supports your interpretation.
However, I think we are all in danger of failing to see the wood for the trees. To go back to first principles, it seems to me obvious - indeed it is stated by FIFA in their Preamble etc - that the insertion of Article 16 (plus the re-working of Article 15) is specifically designed by FIFA to address not the Irish situation, but the Cape Verde/Qatari-Brazilian situation.
We know that must be so, since all this activity, Resolutions, re-drafting etc by FIFA was prompted by those cases. Therefore, the first step in understanding exactly what FIFA means with its new Articles MUST (imo) be to put everything in that context, not ours.
And if you try to apply your interpretation of Article 16 (above) to e.g. a Qatari-Brazilian, it simply doesn't work. That is, whether you consider such a player Brazilian, or whether you consider such a player Qatari, neither definition makes him someone whose "nationality (singular) entitles [him] to play for more than 1 country"
That is, how is your average Qatari entitled to play for more than one country (Association)? Or your average Brazilian? Quite simply, they are not.
Therefore, the only way in which Article 16 can extend its four conditions to these Qatari-Brazilians is if we interpret the word "nationality" (singular) actually to mean "nationalities" (plural).
And if we do that, then in the absence of either a specific exemption for the FAI, or a distinction between automatic birth nationality and suddenly granted nationality (neither of which exists), then I feel Article 16 MUST also be applied to those NI-born players who automatically have both UK and Irish Nationality from the moment of their birth. In which case, the four conditions also apply.
Otherwise, by their re-working of Article 15 and insertion of Article 16 (plus 17 and 18), FIFA will be failing to stop e.g. Qatar giving out Nationality (singular) to people born outwith Qatar from having to comply with one of the four conditions. And we know that FIFA's intentions in this area are the exact opposite!
All of which will explain for me the most puzzling aspect of this whole affair, namely the way the IFA and the FAI are both each confident their case has prevailed. That is, the FAI is relying on a narrow, technical interpretation of the Articles. Whereas the IFA understands, presumably from discussions with FIFA, that these Articles are intended to be applicable to all individuals who have more than one nationality, however acquired, including those born in NI.
Indeed, I am further persuaded by the IFA's case by two lesser aspects of this matter. First, Article 15 is re-drafted with an unusual English construction (imo), namely, "holding a permanent nationality that is not dependant on residence in a certain country". Qatari nationality is presumably not dependent on residing in Qatar for any period (otherwise we wouldn't have this problem of the Brazilians etc in the first place). And as we know, Irish nationality does not depend on living in any certain country, either.
Second, I do not think it coincidental that FIFA chose to frame their birthplace condition (the first of the four Article 16 conditions) with the phrase "born in the territory of the relevant Association". As such, this neatly sidesteps any problem with defining a country/nation/jurisdiction etc. Indeed, it allows them to retain absolute control over this, since it is they who determine what an Association is and what territory it covers.
As such, this reflects their policy always to maintain equally the integrity of each Association over every other, including the small or weak against the large, strong or, ahem, "covetous"
Over to you.
Therefore my interpretation would be that any NI born person CAN claim to be Irish (as in Roi nationality) and only Irish even if they live all their lives in NI and pay their taxes to Her Majesty's Government.
This would imply that Article 15 only applies and they can play for the RoI.
I don't think it is an open and shut case btw. i've heard reference to "football nationalities" and jurisdiction of Football Associations however Article 15 makes no reference to these.
The GFA is irrelevant for 2 reasons:
1. It is UK law which determines UK nationality, not the GFA.
2. Being able to "identify" as "Irish only" is not the same as having only ROI citizenship. It's a meaningless "right" that we enjoyed before the GFA and would continue to enjoy if there were no GFA.
They can claim whatever they want, but the reality is that they are a dual national.
They can play for ROI under Article 15 as a dual national. They don't have to be one or the other.
You think he'd be used to it by now. I've never known him to be right in any of his posts.maybe he doesn't like to be wrong?!
god, all the OWC nordies lurking in the shadows waiting to get their say in. i cringe at this stage when i see a thread related to the north.
There are Government ministers who don't know whats in the Lisbon treaty.
So I checked out the FIFA post congress press conference to hear what Sepp Blatter has to say.
Sepp has said that the eligibility of dual nationals is not affected by the changes to the Eligibility Chapter in the rule book. Dual National eligibility is the same as before.
In case some prack decides to tell me that Sepp Blatter's word is not law, I know.
But I found it reassuring all the same
On the contrary
It appears that the IFA and most supporters do not know what the status of Norther Ireland is.
It hasn't sunk in that Northern Ireland is British or what it means to be an integral part of the United Kingdom.
What was the war all about?
And they complain that FIFA hasn't made it clear for them.
I suppose FIFA did take that one for granted, that an association like the IFA would have realised that Irish citizenship does not qualify you to play for NI.
Maybe FIFA also presumed that the IFA would know that NI is British, it is an integral part of the UK and you have to be a British National to qualify to play for Northern Ireland.
That being born in NI makes you an automatic British National.
And they mocked us when we poked fun at their identity crisis.
I agree.
I thought this thread was about Martin O'Neill's views on an all-Ireland team but we see the usual suspects banging on about the FIFA's decision that the FAI can carry on 'poaching'their players. Some people (not me obviously) would have some sympathy with them if 50% of NI's players were 'defecting' but the number either willing AND good enough is er, just two in the past 40 odd years since the criterior was changed, and one of those couldn't play for NI because the IFA's rules (not FIFA's) prevented him from playing for them.
Still, keep putting the whinge back into our whinging country (sic.).
This is the cooooooooooooolest footy forum I've ever seen!
We feel your pain, Scooby.
Ye could always ignore the threads of course. Just a thought, like.
While I realise the thread has moved on, it's original theme was clear enough. You can hardly be surprised that a few NI fans chose to argue that our team shouldn't be abolished.
Bring on the Slovaks.
Last edited by Gather round; 12/06/2008 at 1:02 PM.
The rules are straighforward and clear and don't need to be haggled over here.
The only thing which isn't clear is whether the FAI is involved in recruiting in NI which would be wrong, and whether the IFA will in future try and block players with a genuine desire to play for the ROI which would equally be wrong.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks