The Darron Gibson Saga

Guy:Incognito

leninbenjamin wrote: »

i know HE does, but from here on in a nationalist who wont swear allegiance to the British crown to get a passport wont by the sounds of it.

So they are willing to live, pay tax etc and do all the things associated with being from Northern Ireland/the uk (which will most likely include playing for an Englis club) but perish the thought that they should actually play for the country they are from (born and bred in and where your family are all from)

darkman2 wrote: »

Well, if you think that highly of a sporting organisation your missing the point. They have no right whatsoever to interfer in an agreement that makes individuals (if they choose) citizens of our country. As citizens they are entitiled to the full works. End of story. The IFA took this action (i understand why they did) but this wont last. Its to shut them up in the short term basically. If you understood what happened to Neil Lennon you would know where I am coming from. You dont understand. You have not lived through the abuse he has. FIFA are not going to dictate that that is what must happen to be in the NI team. We should stick by these players.

How are they interfereing with an agreement? Gibson is still an Irish citizen last time I checked. They just have rules on who can take part in the competitions they own. It's an opt-in system, if people dont agree with the rules they have no obligation to opt-in.It will last as long as FIFA want it too. The EU have no say , this is not restricting trade or preventing someone from earning a living like it would in club football, it's a seperate issue.

As for the Neil Lennon situation, he's one player who decided (at a lateish stage in his career anyway) that he had enough abuse and opted out. Should any Black player getting racially abused be allowed to jump ship to an African country and play for them?

Time Magazine

Stekelly wrote: »

Heres where you dont see the rule difference. The EU intervene in club football to stop things like homegrown quotas etc because that stops people moving freely and earning. International football has nothing to do with earning a crust so employment issues dont come into it, which is why the EU have no say in the issue.

You'd be surprised. They're professional footballers whose reputation is greatly enhanced by playing internationally. The connection is not as tenuous as you might imagine.

Aside from this, there's a strong possibility in the future for a much greater influence of the ECJ in light of the treaties that will be voted on in the next couple of years.

Again it's FIFA's competition. If anyone wants to play they play by FIFA's rules or they dont play. Simple as. Because of the above about employment the EU have no say.

It's not as simple as that. The ECJ can rule that FIFA are contravening intra-national law and threaten to fine it every day it fails to recognise this. If FIFA refuse to pay the fine, things then get very messy. (You don't refuse to pay a fine to an extremely strong court and get away with it.) Fines are often imposed on organisations whose bases are outside the EU. As I mentioned earlier and people seem to have conveniently ignoring, Microsoft are currently engaged in legal proceedings against a €497m fine from the Commission. Microsoft's HQ is Washington.

You're not really suggesting that the ECJ, the court that has entirely changed law in this community, doesn't have power over a football organisation simply because its base is in Switzerland, are you?

There would be uproar if there was a mass exodus of all our top players ocming through to the north. This is being seen from the point of view of us, the country that has the most to gain and the least to lose. It's very easy to say "**** the IFA" when its us that are ****ing them. If England were creaming off the top Welsh, Scottish and Nordie player people would be up in arms.

As I've stated before, I'm not seeing this with green-tinted glasses. Anyone born in the six counties is constitutionally entiteld to Irish citizenship and is considered a member of the Irish nation - and vitally, the people of Northern Ireland - who supersede the IFA - voted to approve this motion. There was been no such agreement between Brazil and Qatar or any other nation as far as I know.

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Thats what the ECJ rule on, so it was implied.

Brush up on what the ECJ do.

But the IFA are won their case that the GFA was irellevant to FIFA rules. Please try to keep up, its all over the press.

Try to keep up on what the ECJ do, human rights boy :rolleyes:. They won a case in a FIFA court. Which does not hold weight over, well, anything.

It is you know. FIFA is not based in the EU, so very much 'above' their remit. A simple google would have told you that.

I know where FIFA are based. I also know where Microsoft are based. And even with my limited knowledge, I know a damn sight more than you about EC law so it's you that should use simple Google searches.

Again, you might as well appeal it to the Mexican High Court. FIFA live in Switzerland, and like it or not the IFA are members too.

Microsoft? Operations within the EU is activity enough.

Of course its plausible that the CSA might arbitrate on a case when the Mongolian Supreme Court or what other court with no remit you waste your time petitioning over a Swiss corporation are finished dismissing your case. Then you will realise 'trade' has nothing to do with it as its unpaid international sport.

Interesting you use 'trade' and 'corporation' and say there's no association. I repeat, again, I'm not saying it's definite or anything like that, but international football has an awful lot of revenue, actively employs people and greatly enhances the professional prospects of footballers. Stranger things have happened than it being ruled as a commercial activity.

Until the next nationalist who has no UK passport decides to take an individual case to the CSA, this debate is done. We lost.

The debate is done until it arises again in a couple years? Good argument. This will come up again, very soon. All it takes is an U-17s player born in Derry to declare for the Republic. It's not exactly mass-tectonic movement.

OhNoYouDidn't

IBID, I could pick holes in that all day, but the fundamental difference between Microsoft and FIFA is that Microsoft were breaking the law and the EU (not the ECJ) took a case. The ECJ have no remit over sport, regardless of juristiction arguments.

The FAI cannot realistically appeal this without being suspended from international games accross the board, its up to an individual player to take a case to CAS. I hope he wins and FIFA make an exception for Irish nationalists, but be pragmatic here, we broke a clear rule and were lucky to escape censure

The amount of hyperbole being spouted here is hilarious.

Time Magazine

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

IBID, I could pick holes in that all day, but the fundamental difference between Microsoft and FIFA is that Microsoft were breaking the law and the EU (not the ECJ) took a case. The ECJ have no remit over sport, regardless of juristiction arguments.

The FAI cannot realistically appeal this without being suspended from international games accross the board, its up to an individual player to take a case to CAS. I hope he wins and FIFA make an exception for Irish nationalists, but be pragmatic here, we broke a clear rule and were lucky to escape censure

The amount of hyperbole being spouted here is hilarious.

The ECJ don't take cases. They're a court. Nor do they deal with human rights as you suggested. The case could possibly be taken by the player, the FAI or the EU as a whole. But not the ECJ.

You say the ECJ have no remit over sport but failed to address my points that it influences players' professional careers, that it raises huge funds of revenue and directly employs people.

I'm still not sure where I stand on the issue of whether Northern nationalists should be allowed play for the Republic. But being pragmatic, as an Irish fan, with the clear legal stance of the GFA in my mind, I wouldn't say an intervention is totally out of the question.

Time Magazine

FIFA have proposed a fairly funny compromise. Linky.

FIFA has sent a letter to the football associations of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland suggesting that players from either side of the border should have free choice about who they play for.

The proposal was formulated by FIFA's legal committee in response to a long-running argument between the two FAI and IFA over the selection of international players.

Currently, players born in Northern Ireland are generally eligible to turn out for the Republic of Ireland providing they have not yet played a competitive match for Northern Ireland but the same does not apply in reverse.

Under the new suggestion put forward by world soccer's governing body, players born in the Republic of Ireland and holding Irish nationality could choose to play for Northern Ireland.

FIFA said on Tuesday it had sent the proposal to the two associations and asked for their feedback.

It added that any final decision on the matter would have to be approved by FIFA's executive committee.

A FIFA spokesman said that no deadline had yet been set for that decision.

The case of Darron Gibson, a former Northern Ireland schoolboy player who has since been selected for Ireland, particularly infuriated the IFA, which wanted FIFA to ban future changes of allegiance.

The FAI welcomed the decision by FIFA and described it as 'a common sense approach'.

'In principle we are very happy with the decision and delighted that common sense has prevailed,' FAI chief executive John Delaney told Reuters news agency.

'We will discuss and evaluate the proposal put forward. We have worked hard behind the scenes with FIFA to reach a compromise which was right. It is good news for Irish football.'

Fairly funny compromise for obvious political reasons but a compromise nonetheless.

GuanYin

Ibid wrote: »

Fairly funny compromise for obvious political reasons but a compromise nonetheless.

I can't wait to see the IFA's offical response to this, should be fecking hilarious.

On a serious issue, I work with a Belfast catholic and he made a very good point that the IFA should be concentrating on sorting out their fans before they start trying to sort out their players. The sectarianism is a huge issue up their, but to paraphrase Eddie Izzard, abuse your own players, we're quite OK with that, abuse someone else's players and people take action.

He reckons that catholic players will always find it difficult to play for Northern Ireland and as much as he'd like a Northern team to do well, he wouldn't expect anyone to suffer the abuse Lennon got and while it goes on, he'll support the republic.

He also said that no catholic in their right mind would enter the Northern Ireland football supporters club.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

Seaneh

Stekelly wrote: »

The unionists dotn need to start whinging because everything is still the same and the can continue being British. .

Nobody born in northren ireland is british.

Northren Ireland isn't part of great britian, it's part of the united kingdom, massive differance.

If you're born anywhere on this island you are Irish.

darkman2

www.bbc.co.uk/sport

World governing body Fifa has suggested that players born in Northern Ireland should be allowed to opt to play for the Republic of Ireland.
Fifa's legal committee wrote to Irish FA officials in the north and their FAI counterparts in the Republic outlining their view on the long-running dispute.

The IFA had expected Fifa to back its argument that players born in the north should turn out for Northern Ireland.

Fifa said it had asked for feedback from the two associations.

It added that any final decision on the matter would have to be approved by Fifa's executive committee.

A response is expected from IFA officials on Wednesday.

The FAI has welcomed the latest stance from Fifa.

"We are pleased that Fifa has once again upheld the principle that players born in Northern Ireland should be free to choose whether they wish to play for the Republic of Ireland or Northern Ireland," said an FAI statement.

"The FAI will now meet with its legal advisors to review in detail the proposals contained in the Fifa letter before formulating a response."

On-loan Wolves midfielder Darron Gibson recently played for the Republic in a Euro 2008 qualifier.

He was born in Londonderry in Northern Ireland but elected to switch to the Republic after representing the north at Under-16 level.

_blank_

He was born in Londonderry in Northern Ireland

rofl.

If he was born in Londonderry he wouldn't have opted to play for the Republic I reckon.

redspider

> He was born in Londonderry in Northern Ireland

No, he wasnt, he was born in Derry ! (maybe even Free Derry)

kraggy

I'm confused.

If players from the North already can play for the Republic, why are they suggesting that they should be allowed to?

Mitch Connor

Because the IFA and FAI are going head to head over the issue, and Fifa's "suggestion" is a way of them looking like they are doing something without having to make an actual stand or ruling.

bohsman

Mr Justice Weatherup ruled on 25 January 2007 that the city officially remained Londonderry. The judge ruled that just because the council had changed its title to Derry, this did not mean the name specified by the 17th century Royal Charter was changed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derry/Londonderry_name_dispute

GuanYin

I'm gonna merge this with the Darren Gibson thread because alot of good discussion has already gone on there regarding this matter an dI'm far to lazy to cross post.

GuanYin

Ok, so the question now remains, have FIFA done a U-turn on this matter or was the standard of journalism so ba (imagine that) in the first reports that they just made stuff up.

Either way, it looks like the status quo remains and the naysayers here are a big egg-faced.

OhNoYouDidn't

psi wrote: »

Ok, so the question now remains, have FIFA done a U-turn on this matter or was the standard of journalism so ba (imagine that) in the first reports that they just made stuff up.

Either way, it looks like the status quo remains and the naysayers here are a big egg-faced.

No, the IFA had a technical case and won on the point of law. The FAI had a moral case and now FIFA are exploring making an exception to the rule for Irish players.

No-one here has egg on their face, the realists like me were proven right in that the IFA's case was, unfortunatly, within the rules as laid out. But FIFA have accepted the point that the rule is inappropriate in this case and may change it.

We all won.

_blank_

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

We all won.

Huzzah!

GuanYin

DesF wrote: »

Huzzah!

Queue Ewok music and dancing!

Nuttzz

banned. deliberate trolling.

cruiserweight

For some funny reason the IFA aren't happy

http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2007/1107/eligibility.html

The Irish Football Association have been 'staggered' by a FIFA proposal to settle the eligibility row with the Football Association of Ireland.

World football's governing body - invited to rule on the issue by the IFA - have suggested that players born on both sides of the border should be able to represent Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland.

However, IFA chief executive Howard Wells told the BBC that the FIFA compromise was 'totally inconsistent with the body's own rules which apply to the other 206 countries in FIFA'.

Wells added: 'I am extremely surprised about this, to say the least, staggered in fact.

'All we are asking is for FIFA to apply their own rules consistently to all members of their organisation.'

The issue has been brought to a head by the case of Manchester United midfielder Darron Gibson, who was born in Northern Ireland and played for the Province at under-16 level before switching allegiance to the Republic of Ireland.

Gibson, on-loan at Wolves, recently appeared for the Republic in a Euro 2008 qualifier even though he would not ordinarily be eligible to play for Steve Staunton's side because neither he, his parent nor his grandparents were born south of the border.

The Football Association of Ireland believe they are entitled to pursue players born in Northern Ireland under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement, which guarantees the right of anyone born anywhere on the island of Ireland to apply for an Irish passport.

The FIFA proposal would enshrine this right for football purposes, as well as the right of a player from south of the border to represent Northern Ireland.

Given few footballers from the Republic are likely to want to play north of the border, the IFA would have little to gain from agreeing to the recommendation.

But the proposal - which effectively upholds the status quo - has been welcomed by the FAI.

FIFA will listen to submissions from both bodies before a ruling is made by their executive committee, although IFA boss Wells has hinted he will consider legal advice.

A FIFA spokesman told the Belfast Telegraph: 'The current situation is that for the Irish Football Association, players can choose also to play for the Football Association of Ireland, but the vice-versa is not possible.

'With the objective to find an amicable solution which is acceptable for both member associations the FIFA Legal Committee has made the following new proposal: any player holding the nationality of the Republic of Ireland that was born on the territory of the Republic of Ireland would, by agreement between the two associations, also be eligible for the representative teams of the Irish Football Association.'

The_B_Man

heres a silly question:

IF a player is born in the say Dublin, but wants to play for the North, say if FIFA rule he cant, but then, you would assume the reason he wants to play for the north is because he most likely has family roots that are from the north, eg a parent or granny. Now, would this not make all this jibber jabber irrelevant due to the granny rule?

maybe in the opposite case, coz of the loyalists/republicans, they may wanna play for the Rep coz they consider themselves Irish and all that jazz, but then if they;re blocked, the republic is the loser, coz the players born down south can play for the north, but the northern players cant come down. Seems the IFA are tryin to pull a sneaky one!

Does Gibson have a "southern" granny?

_blank_

The_B_Man wrote: »

heres a silly question:

IF a player is born in the say Dublin, but wants to play for the North, say if FIFA rule he cant, but then, you would assume the reason he wants to play for the north is because he most likely has family roots that are from the north, eg a parent or granny. Now, would this not make all this jibber jabber irrelevant due to the granny rule?

maybe in the opposite case, coz of the loyalists/republicans, they may wanna play for the Rep coz they consider themselves Irish and all that jazz, but then if they;re blocked, the republic is the loser, coz the players born down south can play for the north, but the northern players cant come down. Seems the IFA are tryin to pull a sneaky one!

My understanding, from listening to various radio programmes today, is that FIFA have suggested that it works both ways. Born on the Island, play for either.

In reality though, I can't see many Southern lads choosing NI.

The_B_Man wrote: »

Does Gibson have a "southern" granny?

Nope.

Derry thru and thru.

smackbunnybaby

as discussed on the last word today , it is very hard to not see this turning into a protestant NI versus catholic ROI team.

OhNoYouDidn't

smackbunnybaby wrote: »

as discussed on the last word today , it is very hard to not see this turning into a protestant NI versus catholic ROI team.

whats wrong with that?

although i'm sure southern protestants would remain southern.

GuanYin

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

whats wrong with that?

although i'm sure southern protestants would remain southern.

More than likely, the outcome will be purely that Northern Catholics will play for the Republic and everyone else will stay put.

The flip being maybe if Northern Ireland get to finals that we don't.

The fact of the matter is, the current climate makes the prospect of playing for the North, very unappealing for catholics (see above)

_blank_

All Island Team/League ftw.

Big Ears

So basically we're back to the way we were before 1950 , with the exception that you can't play for one team and then go on to play for the other .

Keith186

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

why are the IFA so confident?

does he not have an Irish Passport? did he not personally choose the republic over the North? is his decision not backed by the good friday agreeent ? and should it matter wether it was intended to cut across sporting statutes? intended or not it does.

The rules were brought in because the king of Qatar gave some Brazillian player a passport so he could play for them, they want to cut this out.

Given the unique circumstances FIFA shouldn't bring it in here or in any other places that are in a similar political position.

If only FIFA were so sensible with all rules we could have a better game, just apply common sense!!

OhNoYouDidn't

psi wrote: »

More than likely, the outcome will be purely that Northern Catholics will play for the Republic and everyone else will stay put.

good.

Mr.Nice Guy

I'd like to congratulate FIFA for coming to their senses on this matter. Anyone born on this island should have the right to play for the Irish team.

astrofool

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I'd like to congratulate FIFA for coming to their senses on this matter. Anyone born on this island should have the right to play for the Republic of Ireland or Northern Ireland team.

I corrected your mistake.

done

Mr.Nice Guy

astrofool wrote: »

I corrected your mistake.

Correct the 'Nothern Ireland' bit too.