Because fielding a team with no Englishmen wasn't enough

[H. Pedersen]

So where do you draw the line? What rules are enforceable and which ones aren't?

Should Owen Hargreaves play for England? Should Zidane have played for France? Desailly? What about Deco and Portugal, or Eduardo and Croatia?

What are the hard and fast rules you live by? I'm interested.

Given that he was born in Marseille, I'd say yes.

The Eduardo thing is bullshit though.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

So where do you draw the line? What rules are enforceable and which ones aren't?

Should Owen Hargreaves play for England? Should Zidane have played for France? Desailly? What about Deco and Portugal, or Eduardo and Croatia?

What are the hard and fast rules you live by? I'm interested.

Given that he was born in Marseille, I'd say yes.

The Eduardo thing is bullshit though.

]For what it's worth I agree with both you and Brucie, although I'd also still have a rule allowing naturalisation, but with a limit of maybe 15 or 16 for when you move to the country. I don't think Almunia, who is clearly Spanish, and only moved here to further his career as a professional footballer should count as English, but someone who moved here as a kid when his parents did, who speaks English and grew up in English culture at an Englsh school, should, if they want, be eligible to play for England.
My original reason for coming on here, was not I think the current international system is all fine, but because I think of all the sticks with which to beat Mr Wenger, this is a poooooor one.

Yep, I'd buy that. Just want to stop people doing what Eduardo's done re. Croatia & now Almunia wants to.

One thing for Nolan ... despite being almost begged to sign-up for Ireland he said "no".

Why is Eduardo put forward as an example of the most objectionable kind of case?

After all, he was only 16 when he moved to Croatia, so he seems to fit into the test that Prufrock suggests and Bobo endorses (while himself citing Eduardo as one of the egregiously disagreeable cases).

Just to ham it up a little bit and introduce a little OTT fiction, let's imagine that both of Eduardo's parents were born in South American countries other than Brazil, but moved to Rio before having him. Imagine then that Eduardo for some reason doesn't fit in in Rio (perhaps even by dint of having foreign parents...) and has a generally unhappy childhood of being bullied by peers, failing at school, and having his talents overlooked by Brazilian football clubs. Enter stage right Dinamo Zagreb's scouts, who whisk him off to Croatia aged 16... he loves his new home, learns the language, embraces the culture, and for the first time feels as though he belongs in his surroundings. Imagine that he falls more and more in love with his adopted country in his impressionable, formative, teenage years, and in no time at all he passes the Tebbit 'Cricket Test' - he supports 'his' beloved Croatia against all-comers in the world, including Brazil and the two different countries of his parents. Let's go mad and say that he falls in love with a Croatian girl and marries her by the age of 20, the service for which is conducted in Croatian, which he now speaks fluently.

Is it still absolutely clear cut that his playing for the Croatian national team would be objectionable?

[FaninOz]

I wish we could make Jussi English!

Too late he's already played for Finland and one of the rules is you can only ever play for one National team at senior level.

Even though he would probably qualify to become British and hold dual nationality with Finland as he has lived here so long.

[FaninOz]

Is it correct that, atm, if you are a naturalised citizen you can choose between any of the 4 home 'nations'? So you could be born in - say - Congo. Be granted (understandably, and legally) asylum, live in London, find yourself on arsenal's books, be transferred to Birmingham, then to Bolton Wanderers, and be eligible to play for Wales...

I believe that if said Conganese did come to the UK he would only be able to play for the football "Country" that he chose to reside in. e.g. he would have to choose to reside in Wales to eventually play for Wales, etc, etc.

Muamba did just that but his parents chose to live in England so is only elidgable to play England not Wales or Scotland. Mind you Ireland appears to welcome anyone so who knows who's elidgable to play for them.

[bobo the clown]

[Why is Eduardo put forward as an example of the most objectionable kind of case?

After all, he was only 16 when he moved to Croatia, so he seems to fit into the test that Prufrock suggests and Bobo endorses (while himself citing Eduardo as one of the egregiously disagreeable cases)?

... there you go, splitting hairs .... your career is mapped out properly, clearly.

OK, he was 16 & so OK, that example doesn't quite fit against the specific version suggested. There will be other examples & I've got better things to do than search one out. The point remains that we have to have full & proper standards and let's just agree that Almunia doesn't fit any of them.

If we go down this line, we are 1 step away from agreeing that previous recognition doesn't count (indeed, if I recall correctly, we already have situations where people have represented a country ay junior levels & then move on to another at senior level. The example I give of Kenyan atheletes being persuaded to decide they are Bahraini would the be the next breach.

The solution is to have proper & rational rules or let's just stop playing International footy altogether.

[Lord Kangana]

Clubs get to pick (just about) whichever players they like. If Countries go down that route, how long before England play in the Premier League?

International Footie is already loosing its lustre against the onslaught of the all pervasive champions league. At least let it die with a little dignity.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

[Why is Eduardo put forward as an example of the most objectionable kind of case?

After all, he was only 16 when he moved to Croatia, so he seems to fit into the test that Prufrock suggests and Bobo endorses (while himself citing Eduardo as one of the egregiously disagreeable cases)?

... there you go, splitting hairs .... your career is mapped out properly, clearly.

OK, he was 16 & so OK, that example doesn't quite fit against the specific version suggested. There will be other examples & I've got better things to do than search one out. The point remains that we have to have full & proper standards and let's just agree that Almunia doesn't fit any of them.

If we go down this line, we are 1 step away from agreeing that previous recognition doesn't count (indeed, if I recall correctly, we already have situations where people have represented a country ay junior levels & then move on to another at senior level. The example I give of Kenyan atheletes being persuaded to decide they are Bahraini would the be the next breach.

The solution is to have proper & rational rules or let's just stop playing International footy altogether.

For what it's worth, I'm in 100% agreement with all that.

[Prufrock]

[Why is Eduardo put forward as an example of the most objectionable kind of case?

After all, he was only 16 when he moved to Croatia, so he seems to fit into the test that Prufrock suggests and Bobo endorses (while himself citing Eduardo as one of the egregiously disagreeable cases)?

... there you go, splitting hairs .... your career is mapped out properly, clearly.

OK, he was 16 & so OK, that example doesn't quite fit against the specific version suggested. There will be other examples & I've got better things to do than search one out. The point remains that we have to have full & proper standards and let's just agree that Almunia doesn't fit any of them.

If we go down this line, we are 1 step away from agreeing that previous recognition doesn't count (indeed, if I recall correctly, we already have situations where people have represented a country ay junior levels & then move on to another at senior level. The example I give of Kenyan atheletes being persuaded to decide they are Bahraini would the be the next breach.

The solution is to have proper & rational rules or let's just stop playing International footy altogether.

For what it's worth, I'm in 100% agreement with all that.

Me also, but don't accept the delusion this is a modern thing. Predictions such as the one I have emboldened suggest this is a steady relaxing of the rules, but that is not necessarily true. Alfredo Di Stefano played international football for Argentina, Spain AND Italy.

I'd still be sticking with my 16 cut off. After that you may move to a country and integrate, and fair enough for doing so, but I doubt you could claim nationality.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I'd still be sticking with my 16 cut off. After that you may move to a country and integrate, and fair enough for doing so, but I doubt you could claim nationality.

Well, it's clear that in the technical legal sense you can, but yes, I know what you mean.

[Prufrock]

I'd still be sticking with my 16 cut off. After that you may move to a country and integrate, and fair enough for doing so, but I doubt you could claim nationality.

Well, it's clear that in the technical legal sense you can, but yes, I know what you mean.

Oh indeed, I should specifiy 'footballing nationality'. I'd have no problem if Almunia was say, Brazilian, and he wanted a British passport to avoid work permit regulations and to become a nationalised citizen of the country he lives in, but I don't think he should be eligible for an English national team. I do find it worrying this is even being discussed however, as he is w*nk.

[Tombwfc]

I don't disagree that it's not ideal, or even the way i'd have it. But as they are the rules, I can't honestly say that I'd mind if we won the World cup with a naturalised British citizen in the side.

Like I mentioned previously, the lynchpin for Spains recent success has been a midfielder born in Sao Paulo, who didn't set foot in Spain until 2002, and didn't gain citizenship until he was 30.

[Prufrock]

I don't disagree that it's not ideal, or even the way i'd have it. But as they are the rules, I can't honestly say that I'd mind if we won the World cup with a naturalised British citizen in the side.

Like I mentioned previously, the lynchpin for Spains recent success has been a midfielder born in Sao Paulo, who didn't set foot in Spain until 2002, and didn't gain citizenship until he was 30.

Bang on. I don't agree with the system, but such as the system is, Germany (big footballing nation) have gone to a world cup with two polish strikers, a swiss french striker, and a half spanish striker, portugal(big nation) have gone with a brazillian central midfielder, spain (big nation) with a brazillian midfielder, Italy (big nation) recently tried to call up a brazillian, half of Mexico's( at least according to FIFA, big nation) team is brazilian. I do agree with the idea it makes a mockery of the idea of an 'international' tournament, but it is by no means a new thing.

I would add though, if you are talking about an 'international team', surely that should also be reflected in the coaching terms.....?

[Bruce Rioja]

half of Mexico's( at least according to FIFA, big nation) team is brazilian.

Indeed, something about which the Mexicans are absolutely enraged and despised Eriksson for endorsing.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

I don't disagree that it's not ideal, or even the way i'd have it. But as they are the rules, I can't honestly say that I'd mind if we won the World cup with a naturalised British citizen in the side.

Like I mentioned previously, the lynchpin for Spains recent success has been a midfielder born in Sao Paulo, who didn't set foot in Spain until 2002, and didn't gain citizenship until he was 30.

Bang on. I don't agree with the system, but such as the system is, Germany (big footballing nation) have gone to a world cup with two polish strikers, a swiss french striker, and a half spanish striker, portugal(big nation) have gone with a brazillian central midfielder, spain (big nation) with a brazillian midfielder, Italy (big nation) recently tried to call up a brazillian, half of Mexico's( at least according to FIFA, big nation) team is brazilian. I do agree with the idea it makes a mockery of the idea of an 'international' tournament, but it is by no means a new thing.

I would add though, if you are talking about an 'international team', surely that should also be reflected in the coaching terms.....?

In an ideal world yes. But I think that countries new to football (relatively) probably need foreign coaches to help them improve. Maybe the answer is for them to have a period of say 20 years where they are allowed to bring in experience and bring their coaching standards up. After that they have to coach themselves along with everyone else. I'd rather see countries allowed some leeway with the coaching if it means we have less cricket score matches in qualifying and competitions...

[KeeeeeeeBaaaaaaab]

I don't disagree that it's not ideal, or even the way i'd have it. But as they are the rules, I can't honestly say that I'd mind if we won the World cup with a naturalised British citizen in the side.

Like I mentioned previously, the lynchpin for Spains recent success has been a midfielder born in Sao Paulo, who didn't set foot in Spain until 2002, and didn't gain citizenship until he was 30.

Bang on. I don't agree with the system, but such as the system is, Germany (big footballing nation) have gone to a world cup with two polish strikers, a swiss french striker, and a half spanish striker, portugal(big nation) have gone with a brazillian central midfielder, spain (big nation) with a brazillian midfielder, Italy (big nation) recently tried to call up a brazillian, half of Mexico's( at least according to FIFA, big nation) team is brazilian. I do agree with the idea it makes a mockery of the idea of an 'international' tournament, but it is by no means a new thing.

I would add though, if you are talking about an 'international team', surely that should also be reflected in the coaching terms.....?

In an ideal world yes. But I think that countries new to football (relatively) probably need foreign coaches to help them improve. Maybe the answer is for them to have a period of say 20 years where they are allowed to bring in experience and bring their coaching standards up. After that they have to coach themselves along with everyone else. I'd rather see countries allowed some leeway with the coaching if it means we have less cricket score matches in qualifying and competitions...

Better option would be to allow foreign coaches for any country ranked outside the top, say, 25 in the FIFA rankings. Once in there, you're on your own. The chance to improve the standard of international football accross the board is desperately needed, and even countries that have been playing it for a long time have languished for years. As Abdi's Twin says, countries new to, or crap at, football needs foreign coaches to improve the standard of playing and coaching. Budding coaches can learn a lot from those from countries that have established coaching programmes. All you need do is look at how Russian football has improved immeasurably after Hiddink and Advocaat have taken up posts there, or how the African nations have flourished since French coaches flooded their international teams. Sure, the money's helped in Russia, but you don't become a better player just by having £10,000 chucked at you each week.

[fatshaft]

Now then, I'd like to move this on a little if I may be so bold.

As Blurred points out 'them's the rules', which of course, they are. However, he then goes on to claim 'nowt wrong with 'em'. Isn't there?

We've got several examples of players that have represented a country not of their birth and often to which players can only claim a tenuous connection at best. Isn't that farcical? I mean, there has to be some leeway of course due to people moving around the place, but would it perhaps not be fairer, and to a certain degree make it a little less pointless, to alter the criterea to being:

(a) The Country in which you were born?

(b) The Country in which either of your parents were born?

Eleven of your finest versus eleven of ours, and that's it! Afterall, is that not the whole point of international football?

Totally agree. Contrary to what blurred says, there is a bloody lot wrong with it. And like you I would like to see the 'grandfather' rule kicked out, and restrict it to your country of birth and that of your parents. Otherwise it just becomes glorified club football.

We've had similar in Scotland with Novo expressing a desire to play for Scotland, the genral feeling is gtf.

Remeber as well, if he's eligible to play for England, then he is eligible to play for Scotland, maybe we'll pick up Arteta, Almunia and the like instead

[FD]

Almunia is Spanish, not English.

For me, although he's a better goalkeeper than any of our current crop, he shouldn't ever play for England, because he's not English.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Almunia is Spanish, not English.

For me, although he's a better goalkeeper than any of our current crop, he shouldn't ever play for England, because he's not English.

Are you happy to endorse Bruce's test, or do you have your own criteria to determine 'Englishness'?

[FD]

I have my own criteria.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I have my own criteria.

Care to share?