O'Neill gives his backing for a United Ireland team

[EalingGreen]

A person who is born in the North who avails of their right to Irish Citizenship
is defined as a multiple citizen.

By whom? Is this concept of "multiple citizen" contained in FIFA's articles etc?

Article 16 refers to nationality - not dual nationality - not place of birth.
It refers to a Nationality that qualifies a player to declare for 2 federations.

What nationality "qualifies a player to declare for two federations"?

The proposed new Article 16 states:
"A player who, under the Terms of Article 15, is eligible to represent more than one Association on account of his nationality, may play an international match for one of those Associations only if, in addition to having the relevant nationality, he fulfils at least one of the following conditions -
[Born, Parent, Grandparent, Residence]"

I assume you are relying on the use of the singular ("nationality", emboldened) to infer that an Irish National, whether born in Dublin or Derry, can only represent one Association (FAI), so that the four conditions which follow from those "eligible to represent more than one Association", are not applicable in the Irish situation?
However, the title of that article is:
"Nationality entitling players to represent more than one Association".
Since (to my knowledge, at least), there is no single nationality which automatically entitles someone to represent more than one Association, then the use of the singular must be read as meaning nationalities (plural).
Consequently, I feel more confident than ever that Article 16 is to be applied generally to individuals who possess more than one Nationality, and hence may in principle be eligible to represent more than one Association.
And since anyone born in NI is eligible in principle for both the FAI and IFA, in the absence of a specific exemption for the FAI (or IFA), he must also comply with one of Article 16's four conditions in order to validate his choice of the two.

Irish nationality does not qualify you to play for the North.
British Nationality does not qualify you to play for the Republic.

Just as e.g. French Nationality does not qualify you to play for China and Chinese Nationality does not qualify you to play for France. So what?

Someone born in e.g. Derry is automatically entitled to Irish nationality, so may in principle represent the FAI, should he choose. But he is also entitled to British nationality, so may represent NI (should he choose).
Therefore, he is someone who has Dual Nationality, and under Article 16 must satisfy one of the four conditions. He obviously may do so for NI (i.e. birth), but unless he has a parent/grandparent from ROI, or has lived there, then I don't see how he can be eligible for FAI/ROI.

The conditions that Article 16 seeks to impose do not apply to Irish citizens.

Why not?

Article 15 Eligibility applies to NI born Irish citizens, permanent citizenship without residency conditions.

This new version of Article 15 recognises that there will be some individuals who may take advantage of a country's nationality, for the purposes of footballing eligibility, without also automatically ever having to have been resident there. Included amongst these are Irish nationals from NI.

But that doesn't help your case; on the contrary, I feel it harms it, since Article 16 states that all such (Article 15) nationals who have more than one Nationality have now to comply with one of the four conditions.

It's just another case of premature OWC ejaculation.

Hilarious.

FIFA with their proposals are clarifying the situation using more clear language.

Indeed.

[eelmonster]

But that doesn't help your case; on the contrary, I feel it harms it, since Article 16 states that all such (Article 15) nationals who have more than one Nationality have now to comply with one of the four conditions.

Yes, but Northern Irish people may have simply one nationality (or regard themselves as 'both' -- and, in my reading of the amendments -- these individuals would be subject to article 16).

[EalingGreen]

The old Ealing Green had died and a new one has been reborn
as one
who claims he can now read FIFA rules,
and that his wishes are somehow transformed into a rational interpretation of FIFA rules by rubbing extra hard on his "genie".

OR
its the same old Ealing Green and that when he writes "it appears", that actually means in the biblical "Angel Gabriel" sense of appearances.

OR
and that when he writes "I do not see anything" he thinks that everybody else is blind.

OR
That when he writes "i have no doubt that for FIFA's purposes" he is clearly delusional and should be sectioned along with Gazza.

You are the one who has maintained a certainty over a situation which most other observers agree is not clear-cut. This betrays (imo) arrogance on your part.

Whereas I have always conceded that this issue is by no means straightforward; indeed, I have always acknowledged that the case has two sides to it.

However, the more I study it, the more optimistic I am becoming that the IFA's case will prevail.

So carry on with your jibes if you must, whilst I will pay heed to the old adage "Pride goes before a Fall".

Yes, but Northern Irish people may have simply one nationality (or regard themselves as 'both' -- and, in my reading of the amendments -- these individuals would be subject to article 16).

You may be correct about NI-born players only having "one nationality", though I'm not aware of any facility or procedure within FIFA whereby one may formally renounce* any given Nationality.

One thing which is absolutely clear, however, is that every NI-born player is entitled to represent the IFA (by virtue of birthplace with that association's territory). The question must be, therefore, whether he is also alternatively entitled to represent the FAI.

I am increasingly inclined to believe that as an Article 15 national (i.e. "holding a permanent nationality that is not dependent on residence in a certain country"), who is also a "dual national" (i.e. Irish and British), he must therefore also comply with one of the four Article 16 conditions for whichever Association he chooses.


* - Obviously, a player over 21 who opts for one given Association is by implication "renouncing" all other Associations for which he may be eligible.

[geysir]

EG Trolling for attention
Not getting enough attention you have to dig up an older post.

But this particular line has to be awarded special mention in all of the wild things you have written.
"Since (to my knowledge, at least), there is no single nationality which automatically entitles someone to represent more than one Association, then the use of the singular must be read as meaning nationalities (plural)".

Because you don't know something, therefore a singular in a legal document must read as plural.

[EalingGreen]

EG Trolling for attention
Not getting enough attention you have to dig up an older post.

Which particular post is that?

But this particular line has to be awarded special mention in all of the wild things you have written.
"Since (to my knowledge, at least), there is no single nationality which automatically entitles someone to represent more than one Association, then the use of the singular must be read as meaning nationalities (plural)".

You were the one who first referred to "a Nationality that qualifies a player to play for two federations [sic]"

Now that the four British Associations have clarified the procedures whereby in the absence of birth/parent/grandparent, UK nationals may only represent one of the four British associations, I am not aware of any such Nationality. It is hardly "wild" to say so.

Because you don't know something, therefore a singular in a legal document must read as plural.

It is not "Because I didn't know something" that I drew that conclusion. Rather if, as I suspect, there is no actual nationality (singular) which by itself qualifies someone for more than one Association, then that is the only logical inference I can think of to draw from that particular phrase in Article 16.

But if you can supply me with an example of such a nationality, then I might conclude differently.

Over to you.

[irishultra]

So has this ruling actually gone through?

Where does this leave Marc Wilson?

[osarusan]

16 Nationality entitling
players to represent more
than one Association
1 A player who, under the
terms of art. 15, is eligible
to represent more than one
Association on account of
his nationality, may play in
an international match for
one of these Associations
only if, in addition to having
the relevant nationality, he
fulfi ls at least one of the
following conditions:

This is the new amendment, and I think that this -
1 A player who, under the terms of art. 15, is eligible to represent more than one Association on account of his nationality,
- is the key sentence.

Gesysir's interpretation is that the word 'nationality' refers to a single nationality which makes a player eligible for more than one association. But as nationality of ROI alone does not qualify a player to play for NI, article 16 is irrelevant.

Ealing Green's interpretation is that the word 'nationality' refers to a dual or multiple nationality which makes a player eligible for more than one association. In this case article 16 is relevant, and further criteria are imposed.

It comes down to how the word 'nationality' is to be interpreted - is that correct?

[Carnloughred]

The IFA do not yet seem to realise that the vast majority of nationalists do not feel any affiliation to the NI team. They would much rather play for or support the Republic. NI are a British team. It is embarrassing watching, as they play the British national anthem, the token nationalists Chris Baird and Sammy Clingan stand silently, heads bowed, as their British colleagues sing God Save the Queen with gusto.
The IFA press ahead with their attempts to force players to play for a team that they do not wish to play for.

[geysir]

But if you can supply me with an example of such a nationality, then I might conclude differently.
Over to you.

I am somehow responsible for making a case for you to conclude differently

Unfortunately for our Board, your addiction to seeking attention far surpasses your ability to comprehend and conclude anything different to your alternate owc universe.
In fact your ability to comprehend is not very different to a long running soap opera, plenty of episodes but no plot or character development.

Article 16 does not apply to Irish citizens.
It is obvious that article 16, for example, applies to British nationality.
the last part of article 16
states
"Regardless of par. 1 above,
Associations sharing a
common nationality may
make an agreement
under which item (d) [residency] of
par. 1 of this article is
deleted completely or
amended to specify a
longer time limit. Such
agreements shall be lodged
with and approved by the
Executive Committee."
The 4 UK federations sharing the same UK nationality have lodged an agreement with FIFA determining their terms of eligibility.


The preamble to the FIFA articles of eligibility also require some study.
There is no alteration of the current legal situation.
There is just clarification of what was previously agreed upon.
All the bits and pieces have been put into the statutes without changing the legal situation.
Instead of ONE FIFA statute and 3 bits of paper (the 2 circulars and the annex) flying around,
we now still have the FIFA statute 15 and added some new statutes 16, 17, 18

FIFA statute 15 is re worded to make it crystal clear to everybody who lives outside the OWC universe that
Any person holding a
permanent nationality
that is not dependent
on residence in a certain
country is eligible to play
for the representative teams
of the Association of that
country
Thats us, you and us. They wrote that for Howard. Will he get it? will he féck

FIFA preamble to the eligibility statutes
Explanation:
"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 901 and circular_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."

[Blanchflower]

At their recent Congress in Sydney, FIFA have amended the Rules regarding international eligibility and it seems that one consequence of the amendment will be that NI-born players who do not have a parent/grandparent from ROI, or who have not resided in the ROI for at least two years, will no longer be eligible to represent ROI merely by virtue of having Irish nationality.

The relevant section from this FIFA Statement is Section 13.2.1 - Eligibility, specifically Article 15 (as amended) and Article 16 (new):
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affe...enda_47752.pdf

With its reference to "the territory of the relevant Association", the language seems quite clear and unambiguous, and one or two sources in the NI media are already reporting this as a "victory" for the IFA.

Personally, I am remaining cautious over this, as I have done all along, probably until I hear it from someone in the FAI. Nonetheless, unless I am missing something, I am becoming ever more optimistic that the IFA has, indeed, "won the war", even if it did "lose the battle" (over Darron Gibson), to borrow the metaphor used by John Delaney to an RTE reporter at Dublin Airport, as he rushed back from Zurich to sack Staunton the following day.

There is no substantial change in the rules. NI players are still eligible for the South.

[Blanchflower]

Really? Your argument is that by virtue of having been born in e.g. Derry, a footballer is automatically entitled to Irish citizenship, therefore should be entitled to represent the ROI, without any other qualifying criteria needing to be applied.

But by exactly the same token, such an individual is also automatically entitled to UK citizenship, and must therefore be entitled to represent the appropriate British Association (in this case the IFA) whether he chooses to, or not.

Therefore by Article 16, mustn't such an individual actually be "eligible to represent more than one Association", and so must meet at least one of the four specified conditions in order to represent his chosen Association?

You need to read Article 15. Article 16 doesn't apply to the NI/ROI situation.

[ifk101]

NI players are still eligible for the South.

South

The name of the country is Mexico. And while I'm at it - Welcome Sven Göran! South Africa here we come.

[Newryrep]

EG , single nationality, more than one association, Denmark and Faroes; China and Hong Kong; France and Guadeloupe; Netherlands and Aruba, etc and of course British. If you check out the debate on Slugger, some of your compatriots agree with Geysir on the principal point -

• the nationality it refers to is a single nationality not multiple
  nothing has changed
  The IFA should of argued for a change in the rules not enforcement of the rules
  Irish nationality on its own does not entitle anybody to play for the IFA

[Blanchflower]

Correct, Newryrep

[geysir]

This is the new amendment, and I think that this -
1 A player who, under the terms of art. 15, is eligible to represent more than one Association on account of his nationality,
- is the key sentence.

Gesysir's interpretation is that the word 'nationality' refers to a single nationality which makes a player eligible for more than one association. But as nationality of ROI alone does not qualify a player to play for NI, article 16 is irrelevant.

Ealing Green's interpretation is that the word 'nationality' refers to a dual or multiple nationality which makes a player eligible for more than one association. In this case article 16 is relevant, and further criteria are imposed.

It comes down to how the word 'nationality' is to be interpreted - is that correct?

If you are talking about the difference in this matter, between me and EG, comes down to the interpretation of Nationality as used in article 16?
That like saying the difference between the Shinners and the DUP in the negotiations over the GFA was about the interpretation of the word permanent

There are many key sentences in the new FIFA wording
The "Explanation" which preambles the statutes spells it out in black and white.
No change to the legality.
Just a tidying up operation.

[ifk101]

So any up and coming players you want to recommed for us Blanchflower?

[kingdomkerry]

I am somehow responsible for making a case for you to conclude differently

Unfortunately for our Board, your addiction to seeking attention far surpasses your ability to comprehend and conclude anything different to your alternate owc universe.
In fact your ability to comprehend is not very different to a long running soap opera, plenty of episodes but no plot or character development.

Article 16 does not apply to Irish citizens.
It is obvious that article 16, for example, applies to British nationality.
the last part of article 16
states
"Regardless of par. 1 above,
Associations sharing a
common nationality may
make an agreement
under which item (d) [residency] of
par. 1 of this article is
deleted completely or
amended to specify a
longer time limit. Such
agreements shall be lodged
with and approved by the
Executive Committee."
The 4 UK federations sharing the same UK nationality have lodged an agreement with FIFA determining their terms of eligibility.


The preamble to the FIFA articles of eligibility also require some study.
There is no alteration of the current legal situation.
There is just clarification of what was previously agreed upon.
All the bits and pieces have been put into the statutes without changing the legal situation.
Instead of ONE FIFA statute and 3 bits of paper (the 2 circulars and the annex) flying around,
we now still have the FIFA statute 15 and added some new statutes 16, 17, 18

FIFA statute 15 is re worded to make it crystal clear to everybody who lives outside the OWC universe that
Any person holding a
permanent nationality
that is not dependent
on residence in a certain
country is eligible to play
for the representative teams
of the Association of that
country
Thats us, you and us. They wrote that for Howard. Will he get it? will he féck

FIFA preamble to the eligibility statutes
Explanation:
"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 901 and circular_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."

Good work Geysir,

I was watching BBC newsline at half six yesterday and they reported like the rules had changed. Jumped the gun again.

Now the only thing to do is make ensure every player from kerry to derry antrim to waterford who is good enough and wants to play for Ireland does.

"North men south men comrades all dublin belfast cork and donegal were on the one road singing along singing a soldiers song........."

[geysir]

It's just unfortunate that there is a ring of truth in Pat Spillanes famous putdown of the Nordies ..... Puke football

[ifk101]

I have a degree of sympathy for the IFA but their jumping of the gun on not one but two occasions has been good for a giggle especially after reading the following on the IFA website - "The IFA’s Chief Executive says that it is his intention to write to the Football Association of Ireland with regards to the clarification of the matter."

However future cooperation between the two associations, for example the joint FAI/IFA bid for a Euro U21 Championships that's probably dead in the water now, are going to be strained and I don't think that's something we want.

[Blanchflower]

I have a degree of sympathy for the IFA but their jumping of the gun on not one but two occasions has been good for a giggle especially after reading the following on the IFA website - "The IFA’s Chief Executive says that it is his intention to write to the Football Association of Ireland with regards to the clarification of the matter."

However future cooperation between the two associations, for example the joint FAI/IFA bid for a Euro U21 Championships that's probably dead in the water now, are going to be strained and I don't think that's something we want.

A very embarrassing gaffe by the IFA, but the case still remains that - notwithstanding the FIFA rules (under which Northerners have always been eligible anyway) - the FAI is breaking a gentleman's agreement by picking NI players. The IFA should refuse any co-operation with the FAI until some sort of agreement is reached.