FIFA Considers Changes to Nationality Rules

[Honey Honey]

1 hour ago, SirBalon said:

Very true, but you can't deny and it's wrong to try and eradicate sentiment based on either of the two points.  As long as the sentiments aren't based on any superiority complex (based on race) then I have no problem with anyone's sentiment and reason for choice.  Culture and habits are a very big part of a sentiment of belonging and each individual isn't harming anything by making a choice.

There is political nationality and then there is cultural nationality....  If with the two you have the privilege to choose in something as trivial as football, then there isn't a problem.  People CAN actually feel they belong to two places for those affected by a particular situation and in some cases this is what's at stake here.

It's not where you're from its where you're at, as Ian Brown used to say. You cannot be a part of somewhere and not actually be a part of it at the same time. That is imagination.

We've got players playing for countries they've only ever been on holiday to simply because they can get a passport for that place. Well I've been on holiday to Cyprus, why can't I play for them if I can convince my imagination to "feel" Cypriot? This is where the only answer as to why not comes back to borderline racialist political ideology and not freedom of choice. You can play for X country because 25% of your genetics are shared with someone who lived there once LOL.

It is also makes a mockery of international football for someone whose football upbringing was done in the schooling and grass roots level of one country and then they go and play for someone else that their imagination prefers. Or in many cases, the country of the two that they are actually good enough to play for.

Scotland hire someone to check the ancestry of English born and bred players. Fuck me.

[SirBalon]

18 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said:

It's not where you're from its where you're at, as Ian Brown used to say. You cannot be a part of somewhere and not actually be a part of it at the same time. That is imagination.

We've got players playing for countries they've only ever been on holiday to simply because they can get a passport for that place. Well I've been on holiday to Cyprus, why can't I play for them if I can convince my imagination to "feel" Cypriot? This is where the only answer as to why not comes back to borderline racialist political ideology and not freedom of choice. You can play for X country because 25% of your genetics are shared with someone who lived there once LOL.

It is also makes a mockery of international football for someone whose football upbringing was done in the schooling and grass roots level of one country and then they go and play for someone else that their imagination prefers. Or in many cases, the country of the two that they are actually good enough to play for.

Scotland hire someone to check the ancestry of English born and bred players. Fuck me.

Racialism isn't an issue at all, racism is!  Let's not politicise something where many people aren't afflicted with a superiority complex where this issue is concerned.  Politicising everything and being hardline extreme left-wing is as repulsive and aggressive these days as the right-wing extreme equivalent...  It's the old "Horseshoe" problem here with modern society.

Your example of going on holiday somewhere and making light of feeling culturally connected is ridiculous because my example contained the fact you've been brought up in a household with parents from that country, parents who's parents, grandparents etc... etc... were from that other place.  Infact a first generation person born outside of their descendants cultural home tends to be as culturally connected to their parents' country as their descendants.  You can't know about this or understand the sentiment because you have no connection to it.

Another thing that's very wrong in today's very much politicised extreme-left rhetoric is the attempt to indoctrinate and cleanse every natural human instinct even when it doesn't contain an ounce of negativity.

There is nothing wrong whatsoever with choice based on fact!

[El Profesor]

I don´t think jus soli should the exclusive rule to define if a player is eligible or not to play for a national team. It would really hurt competitiveness and many good players would be prevented from playing in international competitions. For example, would Algeria be as strong without french-born players?

What could happen is that when a footballer signs his professional contract, he should inform FIFA which national team he wants to defend. The real problem now is that many swtich sides.

[El Profesor]

3 hours ago, VanPaddy said:

I agree it should be down to the individual but based on their parents and should be a limit to how far you can go back otherwise you have a problem like with the Republic of Ireland's teams in the 80s and 90's you were eligible to play for them if your great grandad had a pint of Guinness in any Irish county. 

I think FIFA does not need to rule on that matter. If the laws of the country grant the player right to citizenship then he should be eligible to defend that national team. 

[SirBalon]

Choice is one of the most wonderful things in life. Let’s not radicalise ourselves to supress choice!

Of course, once the choice is made in such a case as football at international level, then that’s it. National and international laws already provide us with enough on the rules subject to allow for choice. 

[6666]

You feel a part of the country you spent most of your formative years in so you can't begrudge someone playing for a nation they weren't born in if they moved there at a young age.

Birth is a weird one as moving away from the country you were born in a couple of days after being born means there's less chance of you really being attached to your country of birth but of course in most cases, most people grow up in the country they were born in. Either way, being born somewhere should mean that playing for that country is an option. 

After that there's citizenship gained in adult life after spending a significant amount of time in a country. Difficult to really convince that someone in this situation is really "from" that country but seeing as they're citizens, all rights apply to them which includes playing for the national team.

Second hand connections to a country shouldn't really qualify you to play for a country though. Didn't grow up in the country, weren't born there, never really lived there but that's somehow your nationality? Nah.

[ScoRoss]

Always thought it was strange that it went all the way back to Grandparents. 

Having a rule in about citizenship is fine, as long as it's age limited to becoming a citizen before a certain age. You only have to look at other sports and what Qatar have done to increase their 'sporting heritage' to see how citizenship rules can be exploited.

[Mel81x+]

2 hours ago, ScoRoss said:

Always thought it was strange that it went all the way back to Grandparents. 

Having a rule in about citizenship is fine, as long as it's age limited to becoming a citizen before a certain age. You only have to look at other sports and what Qatar have done to increase their 'sporting heritage' to see how citizenship rules can be exploited.

Think thats probably one part of the reason why FIFA is 'bending' things a bit here.