IFA begging Ireland players to play for them

[ziggysego]

You were also in the Irish Mail on Sunday yesterday Tony.

[T Fearon]

I was indeed. Campaign bubbling nicely, appeared in Irish News, Belfast Telegraph , Tribune, Indo and Mail on Sunday as well as an interview on BBC Talkback.

Support starting to appear in Belfast Telegraph, and no opposition to date.

Have also emailed the Orange Letter and the IFA's own magazine,but not holding my breath there

[saffron sam2]

Sammy, you are also being quite silly with your reference to Land Of Hope and Glory.  I watched the rugby world cup final and GSTQ was played there. I am assuming that it will be played before the England - Croatia game next week, so it is correct to use the term 'English national anthem' when referring to GSTQ.

You could just as easily have called in the Northern Irish national anthem speaking in a football context then

No you couldn't.  That is quite a mouthful and cutting and pasting it repeatedly isn't really an option. I'll stick to GSTQ if you find the 'English national anthem' objectionable.

As for some of the team singing and some not - this is one of my main points in favour of a NI-specific anthem. The playing of the anthem should be an occasion for a rallying cry and show of unity from the whole team. It's embarrassing that it occasions such different reactions from the players. I'd be similiarly embarrassed with the spectacle at Ireland rugby games in Dublin were I a nationalist. And I'd feel no loss at not having GSTQ played - I'm secure enough in my Britishness and have no need to have it reinforced at NI matches.

I think the singing of anthems by players is much more of a rugby thing anyway.  I have never seen any soccer body cry like the Argentinian rugby team do during their anthem. Or indeed compare the Welsh, Scottish and English rugby teams with their soccer counterparts. Still an anthem that makes any player feel uncomfortable is inappropriate, regardless of the sport.

As for getting rid of GSTQ, id say a good few who voted GSTQ + a ni song are being pragmatic, i know people who voted that way as more softly softly approach to reving gstq, with the idea of fazing it out.

I think that's fairly accurate. I'd be in favour of a complete change of anthem, but if we adopted the 'rugby solution' (or at least what the 'rugby solution' was perceived to be until recently...) it might provide some way of getting the status quo changed.

But that is only delaying making the real decision. How many other teams have two anthems? I would say, have the balls to go the whole hog or come up with a valid reason for retaining GSTQ. If you are confident of your Britishness without GSTQ, why not the other 13,999 around you also?

[saffron]

Excellent piece in todays Irish Times  - it appears that IFA only want to implement FIFAs rules when it suits them


Some Fifa members more equal than others

Emmet Malone on soccer

One of the more remarkable aspects of the current campaign by the Irish Football Association to have Fifa intervene on its behalf to stop players born north of the Border from playing for the Republic is the claim repeated by the association's chief executive, Howard Wells, on RTÉ radio at the weekend. Wells said he and his colleagues were only looking to have the international federation apply its rules equally in relation to its members.

Of course, it doesn't take a particularly in-depth analysis of Fifa's workings to realise that some members are more equal than others. Wells effectively admitted as much when he referred to the IFA's privileged status as one of the four "British Associations" as one reason for not having a unified Irish team.

Since 1946 the four have been allowed to nominate one of Fifa's eight vice-presidents - Africa, Asia and South America also get one vice-president apiece - while each is represented on the International Football Association Board, which gives the British 50 per cent of the votes on the game's ultimate rule-making committee.

Wells's apparent inability to sense the irony of the case he was making was truly perplexing. At one point he argued that Fifa's proposal to allow those born on the island of Ireland to choose which national teams they would prefer to play for would undermine the internal eligibility arrangements agreed between the British associations. The four have had a gentlemen's agreement since the early 1990s to apply the Fifa rules as if they were really four different countries because the rules, needless to say, don't actually apply to them.

Wells cites Fifa's Circular 901, the organisation's reaction nearly four years ago to an attempt by Qatar to make a mockery of the regulations on international eligibility by granting citizenship to a number of Brazilian players so they could play football for the country's national team.

In the document Fifa make the point that for a footballer to "change" his nationality specifically in order to play for another country is in breach of the spirit of its regulations. It lays down specific criteria that should be met to avoid such abuses and these essentially amount to what is known here as "the granny rule" or a requirement of two years' residency.

The intention, it is made crystal clear, is to "ensure that a player has a clear connection with the relevant country". They do not mention that as a result of particular political "complexities" in several parts of the world there are exceptions.

The circular was intended only to address a flagrant abuse of Article 15.1 of Fifa's statutes, which, under the heading "principles", states that "any player holding the nationality of a country is eligible to play for that country".

Nationality is the key here, and passports, dismissed by the IFA as irrelevant to the current dispute are the generally accepted norm of demonstrating that.

By citing Circular 901, indeed, Wells seems to be drawing a direct comparison between Brazilians being enticed to play for a Middle East state, with which they have absolutely no connection, on the basis of financial reward and young men from the nationalist community in a town like Derry wishing to play for a country to citizenship of which they are entitled from birth.

It suggests he is either being disingenuous or is staggeringly ignorant of the historical context of the community in which he is currently working.

The former seems far more likely, though when Wells, an Englishman, suggested on Sunday that if there were freedom of choice for players (it seemed that he meant within the four "British Associations") then "everyone would play for England if they thought they were going to get a better crack of the whip", it was hard to avoid the conclusion that someone should take him aside and have a quiet word.

He mentioned the IFA's work in the area of anti-sectarianism, and much credit is due to both the association and its main supporters' organisations for the progress made in this area over the last few years. Presumably, though, no one involved in the organisation seriously believes the problem has really been solved.

A large proportion of the nationalist community continue to believe they are treated unfairly at the hands of the IFA and there are many stories of Catholic footballers concluding they are not appreciated in quite the way their Protestant counterparts are.

There is a significant geographical aspect to it as well, one touched on by Stephen Kenny when he was manager of Derry City and observed that those in power in Belfast seemed to regard Derry as the North's fifth-most-important population centre rather than its second.

Darron Gibson's uncle Paul McLoughlin recalls that his nephew's defection was prompted by being told by the manager of his Northern Ireland team that if he went on a trial to Manchester United on a particular date he would never play for the North again. Predictably, the youngster was distraught, but he went to Manchester, signed for United and started playing for the Republic instead.

Wells maintains the current dispute is not about Gibson, and as someone who had opted to play for the North before being alienated, the midfielder really is a poor example. What it is about, as the Belfast Agreement puts it, is the right of people born in the North to be "accepted as British or Irish, or both, as they may so choose".

[Chrisowc]

Not really Saffron.  Nothing new here.

[SammyG]

Excellent piece in todays Irish Times  - it appears that IFA only want to implement FIFAs rules when it suits them

Christ talk about missing the point (not for the first time). There are many exceptions to the FIFA rules (UK, Faroes, Palestine etc) but the one thing they all have in common is that NONE of them involve playing for a country that you have no connection to. So they are totally irrelevant to the current case.

[Main Street]

The article comes close to understanding the FIFA statutes.
Wells did make a lot of noise about Darron Gibson, remember all that nonsense about points deduction
from the rabble.

[MW]

Excellent piece in todays Irish Times  - it appears that IFA only want to implement FIFAs rules when it suits them


Some Fifa members more equal than others

Emmet Malone on soccer

One of the more remarkable aspects of the current campaign by the Irish Football Association to have Fifa intervene on its behalf to stop players born north of the Border from playing for the Republic is the claim repeated by the association's chief executive, Howard Wells, on RTÉ radio at the weekend. Wells said he and his colleagues were only looking to have the international federation apply its rules equally in relation to its members.

Of course, it doesn't take a particularly in-depth analysis of Fifa's workings to realise that some members are more equal than others. Wells effectively admitted as much when he referred to the IFA's privileged status as one of the four "British Associations" as one reason for not having a unified Irish team.

Since 1946 the four have been allowed to nominate one of Fifa's eight vice-presidents - Africa, Asia and South America also get one vice-president apiece - while each is represented on the International Football Association Board, which gives the British 50 per cent of the votes on the game's ultimate rule-making committee.

Wells's apparent inability to sense the irony of the case he was making was truly perplexing. At one point he argued that Fifa's proposal to allow those born on the island of Ireland to choose which national teams they would prefer to play for would undermine the internal eligibility arrangements agreed between the British associations. The four have had a gentlemen's agreement since the early 1990s to apply the Fifa rules as if they were really four different countries because the rules, needless to say, don't actually apply to them.

Wells cites Fifa's Circular 901, the organisation's reaction nearly four years ago to an attempt by Qatar to make a mockery of the regulations on international eligibility by granting citizenship to a number of Brazilian players so they could play football for the country's national team.

In the document Fifa make the point that for a footballer to "change" his nationality specifically in order to play for another country is in breach of the spirit of its regulations. It lays down specific criteria that should be met to avoid such abuses and these essentially amount to what is known here as "the granny rule" or a requirement of two years' residency.

The intention, it is made crystal clear, is to "ensure that a player has a clear connection with the relevant country". They do not mention that as a result of particular political "complexities" in several parts of the world there are exceptions.

The circular was intended only to address a flagrant abuse of Article 15.1 of Fifa's statutes, which, under the heading "principles", states that "any player holding the nationality of a country is eligible to play for that country".

Nationality is the key here, and passports, dismissed by the IFA as irrelevant to the current dispute are the generally accepted norm of demonstrating that.

By citing Circular 901, indeed, Wells seems to be drawing a direct comparison between Brazilians being enticed to play for a Middle East state, with which they have absolutely no connection, on the basis of financial reward and young men from the nationalist community in a town like Derry wishing to play for a country to citizenship of which they are entitled from birth.

It suggests he is either being disingenuous or is staggeringly ignorant of the historical context of the community in which he is currently working.

The former seems far more likely, though when Wells, an Englishman, suggested on Sunday that if there were freedom of choice for players (it seemed that he meant within the four "British Associations") then "everyone would play for England if they thought they were going to get a better crack of the whip", it was hard to avoid the conclusion that someone should take him aside and have a quiet word.

He mentioned the IFA's work in the area of anti-sectarianism, and much credit is due to both the association and its main supporters' organisations for the progress made in this area over the last few years. Presumably, though, no one involved in the organisation seriously believes the problem has really been solved.

A large proportion of the nationalist community continue to believe they are treated unfairly at the hands of the IFA and there are many stories of Catholic footballers concluding they are not appreciated in quite the way their Protestant counterparts are.

There is a significant geographical aspect to it as well, one touched on by Stephen Kenny when he was manager of Derry City and observed that those in power in Belfast seemed to regard Derry as the North's fifth-most-important population centre rather than its second.

Darron Gibson's uncle Paul McLoughlin recalls that his nephew's defection was prompted by being told by the manager of his Northern Ireland team that if he went on a trial to Manchester United on a particular date he would never play for the North again. Predictably, the youngster was distraught, but he went to Manchester, signed for United and started playing for the Republic instead.

Wells maintains the current dispute is not about Gibson, and as someone who had opted to play for the North before being alienated, the midfielder really is a poor example. What it is about, as the Belfast Agreement puts it, is the right of people born in the North to be "accepted as British or Irish, or both, as they may so choose".

Mr Malone misses a crucial point in the whole deabte, rendering his whole article essentially pointless.

FIFA Circular 901 also refers to players whose nationality entitles them to play for more than one association.

[MW]

Excellent piece in todays Irish Times  - it appears that IFA only want to implement FIFAs rules when it suits them


"Wells's apparent inability to sense the irony of the case he was making was truly perplexing. At one point he argued that Fifa's proposal to allow those born on the island of Ireland to choose which national teams they would prefer to play for would undermine the internal eligibility arrangements agreed between the British associations. The four have had a gentlemen's agreement since the early 1990s to apply the Fifa rules as if they were really four different countries because the rules, needless to say, don't actually apply to them."

Firstly : wrong wrong, wrong. The four British Associations are following FIFA rules, which specifically recognise that they can organise seperately.

Also, Mr Malone must be a tad simple if he find's Wells's point "perplexing". It's really quite straightforward. The arrangement for British citizens is that they can only play for the association in whose territory they were born, have resided for two years, or had a parent/grandparent born in. FIFA now propose to let Irish citizens play for whatever team they chose regardless of such qualifications - and also to let British citizens from Northern Ireland play for the Republic of Ireland!

[MW]

The article comes close to understanding the FIFA statutes.

Not close enough.

Here's the FIFA statutes:

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/federation/fifa_statutes_0719_en_14479.pdf

(page 60-61 contain Article 15, which is on international eligibility - but note also in passing Article 10.5 - "Each of the four British Associations is recognised as a separate member of FIFA".)

Here's Circular 901 which qualifies Article 15:

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/ps_901_en_90.pdf


It sets out the eligibility conditions for players who have changed nationality: born in the territory, lived there for two years, or parent/grandparent born there.

It then goes on to say:


"On 4 December 2003, the FIFA Executive Committee approved the above conditions in the special regulations governing eligibility to play for national teams (players theoretically eligible to play for several national teams on account of their nationality.) As these cases are similar from a factual point of view, these conditions should also apply to the matter at hand"

There issues therefore are fairly straightforward:

- does FIFA recognise Irish citizenship as showing theoretical eligibility to play for Northern Ireland?
- are they prepared to apply their rules consistently in this part of the world?

[nifan]

Darron Gibson's uncle Paul McLoughlin recalls that his nephew's defection was prompted by being told by the manager of his Northern Ireland team that if he went on a trial to Manchester United on a particular date he would never play for the North again. Predictably, the youngster was distraught, but he went to Manchester, signed for United and started playing for the Republic instead.

This is exactly what ive said many times but was unable to find a reference - I cant recall who was asking for the evidence - main street perhaps.

Mismanagement by a p***k in the youth team management rather than any political point.

As ive said, sorting out the running of the youth team is paramount to retaining players.

[deiseach]

As I said at the start of all this, I have sympathy for the IFA's position. If they concede the point, they're inviting the FAI - as mendacious an organisation as you are likely to find - to comb NI for talent. But fighting it involves insisting with a straight face that no one born in Northern Ireland has a connection with the Republic by virtue of being born in NI - and what Nationalist worth their salt would want to represent an association with such an official attitude?

[MW]

Darron Gibson's uncle Paul McLoughlin recalls that his nephew's defection was prompted by being told by the manager of his Northern Ireland team that if he went on a trial to Manchester United on a particular date he would never play for the North again. Predictably, the youngster was distraught, but he went to Manchester, signed for United and started playing for the Republic instead.

This is exactly what ive said many times but was unable to find a reference - I cant recall who was asking for the evidence - main street perhaps.

Mismanagement by a p***k in the youth team management rather than any political point.

As ive said, sorting out the running of the youth team is paramount to retaining players.

The story I've heard relating to Tony Kane's defection is somewhat similar.

He was due to go abroad on a tour with the Blackburn first team, but was told to go to the Milk Cup to play for NI U-19s. When he got to the Milk Cup, however, it was found he hadn't been registered to play in it. He ended up playing in a reserve game for Blackburn, back in England.

Take a bow, Roy Millar

[MW]

As I said at the start of all this, I have sympathy for the IFA's position. If they concede the point, they're inviting the FAI - as mendacious an organisation as you are likely to find - to comb NI for talent. But fighting it involves insisting with a straight face that no one born in Northern Ireland has a connection with the Republic by virtue of being born in NI - and what Nationalist worth their salt would want to represent an association with such an official attitude?

The only argument that needs to be made is that Irish citizenship be treated equally with British citizenship and that FIFA's rules are applied consistently.

[deiseach]

The only argument that needs to be made is that Irish citizenship be treated equally with British citizenship and that FIFA's rules are applied consistently.

Isn't that what Fifa's proposals would involve?