Compensation and "Bigotry"

In recent radio discussions regarding the nature of FIFA's eligibility rules as they apply to Ireland, the chairman of the AONISC, Gary McAllister, argued for the introduction of a system compensation.

However, the whole idea that the principles of club football should apply to international football is fundamentally flawed. In fact it is best described as a "hopeless non-starter".

Daniel Collins wrote, in a comprehensive study of the eligibility situation in Ireland*, that there were many problems with the idea that the FAI should recompense the IFA when individual players decide not to play for the IFA and instead opt to hold out for a call up to FAI representative teams. Indeed, he argues that the IFA would be liable for so-called "poached" players such as Oliver Norwood and Lee Camp and even Johnny Gorman and Alex Bruce.

"The problem with a compensation argument is that it casts individual players as possessions of associations. The reality is that choice still ultimately rests with dual national players as to for who to declare, regardless of an association's future hopes and intentions for that player."

He continues to cite cases whereby players are adjudged to have retired "prematurely", namely George McCartney:

"Even if a Northern Ireland-born player was not to declare for the FAI, it would still be his right to refuse to represent the IFA regardless. By the same token as above, ought there be calls for individual players such as George McCartney to recompense the IFA for any losses accrued by the organisation in their development due to their later refusal to represent Northern Ireland?"

Perhaps most importantly, Collins suggests that, if the IFA attempted to introduce a contractual obligation for young players to remain "loyal" to their association, the consequences could arguably be much more severe for them:

"Beyond the hurdle of having a minor enter into an agreement of a legal and binding nature, such a contract, whilst, for the sake of argument, maybe having legal standing under the law of the state, would have no standing whatsoever under FIFA’s statutes. It would be in breach of the regulations and FIFA would in no way condone it as they expressly endorse the idea that not even a friendly game ought to tie a player to an association. Essentially, it would amount to an attempt by the IFA to transcend or subvert their rules, whichever way one wanted to view it. If a player breached such a contract, it would make no difference to FIFA as such a contract would not be regulated by their statutes. However, if the IFA then proceeded to ensure the contract was upheld in a court of law after what they considered to be a breach by the player concerned in order to deny this player his right to switch association under the Regulations Governing the Application of the Statutes, FIFA would promptly threaten to suspend the IFA from competition under what would amount to third-party involvement in the running of the association; a breach of articles 13 and 17 of their General Provisions."

If McAllister and those enlightened and inspired souls at the AONISC have not already read Daniel Collins' essay on the matter, they should do so soon, preferably before they clog up the airwaves with more uneducated and blindly pro-IFA babble.

Interestingly, on the same radio show, McAllister complained that certain callers and even the show host, Wendy Austin, were acting on an agenda and "sectarianising" the argument. He did so without foundation, I must add, and to my utmost amazement, it was not challenged. Similarly, when I asked McAllister, via Twitter, what exactly Gerry Armstrong was doing when he was "working tirelessly on player eligibility", the chairman of the AONISC scathingly, maybe somewhat intolerantly, told me, "As if I'd tell someone who opposes a cross-community NI team!", before adding the hash tag, "#youlittlebigot".

Firstly, McAllister's crude assumption is false; I am not opposed to IFA's representative teams being cross-community entities and why would I be? I believe that their football teams are, always have been, and always will be, comprised of players from all communities and I contend that the idea of the FAI causing "football apartheid" is simply and utterly ludicrous. Secondly, as you might imagine, I don't think that I am "a little bigot". I am merely someone from a different background to McAllister, who happens to be a proponent of dual-national players having the choice of which national team they wish to represent. I do not, as a bigot might do, castigate any player for their choice, or try to remove that choice, regardless of who they choose to represent.

McAllister, and others, too often get away with labelling those who are in favour of the choice of people from Northern Ireland to play for either the IFA or the FAI as a result of their nationality as intolerant, divisive, sectarian bigots. In McAllister's case, as the chairman of the AONISC, should he really be leading from the front with such blinkered accusations? I'm sure that has endeared him to potential fans and players. On what grounds exactly, one also wonders, does McAllister come to these conclusions? I have yet to get an explanation.

I suppose I can seek some consolation in the irony of the fact that I was chastised and excluded by a man who says he champions all-inclusiveness.

*The entire essay can be found at this address: Player Eligibility in Ireland

Gary McAllister and the Letter to the FAI

FAI causing "Apartheid" according to the AONISC

After overcoming Estonia over the two legs, Ireland have made it to the final stages of the European Championships. On Tuesday night, the result of 1-1 was irrelevant and the carnival atmosphere was king; the Lansdowne Roar is back.

The celebrations carried on well into the night and no doubt there were quite a few suffering yesterday as a result, FAI CEO John Delaney probably among them. I wonder, then, what he thought when he received a hand-delivered letter from Gary McAllister, the Chairman of the Amalgamation of Official Northern Ireland Supporters' Clubs, asking him not to select northern born Irish nationals?

I'd say the letter still hasn't got to him, but if and when it does, he'll probably dismiss it, along with the other inane ramblings of Northern Ireland fans against the FAI. The letter apparently refers to an “ongoing situation” that is supposedly “immoral in footballing [sic] terms” and calls upon the FAI “to enter into a new, bi-lateral agreement with the Irish Football Association on the matter”.

Playing on Delaney's response to the acrimonious nature of elimination from the 2010 World Cup, Mr McAllister pleaded for the FAI Chief Executive “to apply the same principles of integrity which he himself had advocated when the Republic of Ireland fell victim to the infamous hand-ball elimination aganist France in 2009”.

What would such a bi-lateral agreement look like, I wonder? The Northern Ireland fans are proposing that the two associations reach an agreement that is not mutually beneficial: it suits the IFA only. If this is indeed a fan-driven incentive, I would suggest that FAI fans also have a say before any agreement is even considered. That would make things interesting, don't you think?

Furthermore, not only is the issue of player eligibility not "ongoing" having been settled since the autumn of 2010 when the IFA resoundingly lost their Court of Arbitration case, but to describe a northern born Irish national's decision to play for his country as “immoral” is outrageous. It is an insult. To accuse the FAI of encouraging a type of "Football Apartheid" is also utterly ludicrous. Sheer unbridled sensationalist tripe, is what it is. What about the fact that Northern Ireland fans insist on dividing the island into two teams, while other sports continue playing on an all-Ireland basis, could that be considered "Apartheid"? No, no. The FAI and players who look to Dublin rather than London (or even Belfast) are the bad guys here.

Thankfully I'm not the only one who considers these charges against the FAI and players who wish to play for their country as outrageously insulting; FAI CEO John Delaney has repeatedly made it known that he is extremely pleased that Irish nationals have the choice to play for their country - I'm sure he'll be keen to defend that choice, in the interests of protecting the integrity of national identity.

The Gag that keeps on Giving

Steve Beaglehole

It seems that the "eligibility row" is the gag that keeps on giving in Irish football these days.

This time, it's Northern Ireland's under-21 manager Steve Beaglehole who has once again waded in with his insight, suggesting that more players will switch association now that Ireland have qualified for the 2012 European Championships and that he would like to see compensation introduced.

Taking the shine away from Ireland's qualification for Euro 2012, Beaglehole complained that, because the FAI has more money than the IFA and, of course, is more successful, more players within the Northern Ireland youth teams will declare for Ireland.

"The FAI are spending more money on recruitment, on scouting, they go away three or four days earlier than we do when they meet up and they put them in top hotels. Now they will have even more money and their budget will go up again. Northern Ireland not qualifying means our budget remains the same or even goes down. For them that can mean extra training days or a couple of new members of staff. And in terms of the attractiveness of playing for the Republic, it's something their recruitment people can use. They can say 'look at at us. look at the success we've had'. It's like the academy system in club football: if your first team is doing well it's easier to keep people and get others to come."

Fair enough, the IFA struggle to compete when it comes to the hearts and minds of players from a nationalist background, that's a reality, but to whinge about the fact that the FAI now has quite a bit more money than the IFA, is desperate. Does he want to FAI to work within the same budget as the IFA, or what? Will he be calling for FIFA to make sure each association has the exact same amount of money?

Leaving that aside, Beaglehole's perception is fundamentally flawed. His summation of the situation completely diminishes the importance of national identity to the players who opt to play for the Republic of Ireland rather than Northern Ireland, flippantly putting their decisions down to the allure of success. He also implies, like so many delusional Northern Ireland fans, that the FAI is "poaching" players when he talks of recruitment. To date most, if not all, of the players who have declared for the FAI have done so of their own volition, the FAI apparently practising a policy whereby players from the North would have to make their intentions known to them - a policy I disagree with. Why should an Irish national from the north be treated differently to any other Irish national?

Interestingly, Beaglehole admitted that, were he in the position of the FAI, he would also select northern born Irish nationals:

"I don't blame the Republic for wanting to look at Paul George or Shane Duffy. If I was working for them I would want to because they would improve the team"

He also believes that a system of compensation should be in place for scenarios where a player might switch association, but such a system could be extremely problematic, not to mention taxing on the IFA who have several players in their teams who played for other associations, including the FAI. As he said, his own employers simply don't possess the financial muscle to cope with it.

For more information on the "eligibility row", including the pitfalls of introducing a compensation scheme, I strongly urge you to see 'FIFA Player Eligibility in the Context of Ireland' by Daniel Collins.

Wise Up, Gerry

Gerry Armstrong

The IFA's Elite Player Mentor, Gerry Armstrong, has issued a robust warning to those who are considering changing from the IFA to the FAI. He is urging them “to look before [they] leap”.

In his recent newspaper column for the Sunday Life, Armstrong has penned his most embarrassing article to date, an article which is characterised by an astonishing level of paranoia and outright ignorance. Indeed, such is the utterly delusional nature of his rambling that one might be forgiven for mistaking it for the blind-rage-fuelled rhetoric of the conspiracy theorists who accuse the FAI of sectarianism and plotting the downfall of the IFA. In fact, I suspect the column may, in fact, be the work of a conniving ghost-writer, but enough of my conspiracy theories.

“I've thought for some time and I still hold the view that the predator that is the FAI is simply taking players for the sake of it and at the same time knowing they are depriving Northern Ireland.”

- Gerry Armstrong.

In describing the FAI as a “predator”, Armstrong's credibility begins to crack, before it crumbles entirely with his erroneous statement that the FAI “may be within their rights because of the Good Friday Agreement”, concluding with his perfect moral compass that “what they are doing is morally wrong”. Two things: not only does the Good Friday Agreement have nothing to do with the scenario and since when did Gerry Armstrong and the IFA have a monopoly on moral judgement (and that's completely disregarding the fact that they too, are in the business of “poaching”)? Someone should remind him that they do not exist in a bubble.

Not content with flaunting his ignorance in those statements, the former international then goes on to expose what is quite an insulting and narrow-minded viewpoint - that national team eligibility should be determined by where one was born, not nationality - and that, my friends, just about sums the mindset up.

For, you see, the simple fact is that the IFA is as self-interested as any other football association. It does not possess the moral high-ground that it so foolishly tries to claim. Its agents have indulged and continue to indulge in the same type of “poaching” it claims to be a victim of and, crucially, it does not own players who are eligible for its teams.

Just read the CAS ruling, Gerry, or at least have a look at Daniel Collins' piece on the matter. Good man.

Irish nationals playing for the Football Association of Ireland? Get outta town!

Former Derry City and current Sunderland player, James McClean

It's an issue that was seemingly resolved in the summer of 2010, but the practice of Irish nationals playing for the Irish national team (that is, the FAI) amazingly continues to incite a capricious whirlwind of hysterical furore.

Over a year later and there still exists a hardcore element of the Northern Ireland support who maintain that, somehow, FIFA are acting contrary to their own rules and mindlessly facilitating a so-called "loop-hole", despite the numerous clarifications that have since surfaced. The Belfast Telegraph, known to be extremely sympathetic to the IFA's cause, is possibly one of the chief offenders in this regard, continuously peddling myths and misinformation about the "eligibility row". It is simply perturbing to think that such ignorance prevails in a period where information is so readily available. These ignorant hacks could do everyone a favour and educate themselves by having a read of Daniel Collins' extensive article, Player Eligibility in the Context of Ireland. Or, if their political sensibilities are easily upset, they could simply read over the report issued by the Court of Arbitration for Sport in the aftermath of the IFA -v- Daniel Kearns case. It's obvious that many have not.

For some, while the issue of eligibility is settled, the idea that the "flow" needs to be "stemmed" is beginning to emerge. The IFA has employed former Northern Ireland international, Gerry Armstrong, as a kind of pastoral officer (humorously titled "Elite Player Mentor") whose objective is to dissuade potential "defectors". Armstrong is said to come from a nationalist background, but he has been vocal in his support of the IFA.

"If a player wants to play for the Republic of Ireland then that is his view and he’s entitled to it but we need to cast the net wide and make sure players feel a sense of belonging with Northern Ireland... Perhaps peer pressure is influencing them but we need to talk to them, understand why they are thinking the way they are and encourage them that they can wear the Northern Ireland shirt with pride."

While Armstrong is something of a cult hero among Northern Ireland supporters, having played 63 times, scoring 13 goals, he is generally not held in the same esteem by those who have grown up solely supporting the Republic of Ireland, so it will be interesting to see how he is received when he incredulously enquires why the likes of Shane Duffy, Darron Gibson and James McClean would rather play for their country.

 

It is insulting to read articles in the media of the southern state advocating division and the effective exclusion of Irish nationals from playing for the Irish national team. Paul Rowan for example, who has covered the "eligibility row" in great detail, recently wrote of how "more must be done to stem the flow of players from the North to the Republic", claiming that the likes of Martin O'Neill, Mal Donaghy and Pat Jennings (all of whom are brazenly assumed to be Catholics) played for Northern Ireland without objection (Sunday Times, A division of loyalty, 14.08.11). Of course, how true that is, is open to debate; players are entirely able to have enjoyed their experience but at the same time to have held certain reservations.

 

There is no doubting that the whole saga has produced a lifetime of drama. However, the outcome of the IFA -v- Daniel Kearns CAS case has, after all these years, provided a degree of finality that should be respected.  Nobody likes a sore loser, so the IFA and its fans should leave the bitterness to lemons and get on with things.