• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

International eligbility

davew

Coach
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
731
This is for all sports.

Should all sports gov bodies allow individuals to chose what country they represent or should it only be the country of their birth.
 

OldBlueLady

Junior Blues Coordinator⭐
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
48,326
Location
Benfleet
This seems to me to be a strange kind of question, but then I thought about those players who play for a country as a result of a grand parent, or something - Freddy being a prime example. I suppose a lot of players in the UK consider they have a better chance of playing for a country other than England which is why they choose to go that route. We also have Greg Rusedki to consider, plus a whole host of English cricket players born in South Africa.

Surprised that no-one has responded but I guess that might have something to do with the poll posts. It's actually quite an interesting discussion point. What about all those many celebs (for instance) born in India to parents as part of the British Empire? I am quite sure Joanna Lumley and Cliff Richard consider themselves to be British, and not Indian.
 

davew

Coach
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
731
This seems to me to be a strange kind of question, but then I thought about those players who play for a country as a result of a grand parent, or something - Freddy being a prime example. I suppose a lot of players in the UK consider they have a better chance of playing for a country other than England which is why they choose to go that route. We also have Greg Rusedki to consider, plus a whole host of English cricket players born in South Africa.

Surprised that no-one has responded but I guess that might have something to do with the poll posts. It's actually quite an interesting discussion point. What about all those many celebs (for instance) born in India to parents as part of the British Empire? I am quite sure Joanna Lumley and Cliff Richard consider themselves to be British, and not Indian.

For me you should only be allowed to rep country you were born in, does make a bit difficult, ref born somewhere while their parents were working abroad also people with dual nationality also if became a citizen of a country at a v young age (say under 18).

Nothing against Greg Rusedki and others who chose, just don't think it should be allowed.

Regarding celebs not really worried
 

Uncle Leo

This cook is an anti-semite
Joined
Nov 19, 2003
Messages
23,031
Location
NY Parks Dept
It's a complicated one, exemplified by Terry Butcher. For some the epitome of an English footballer, yet born in Singapore.

I think where it isn't really on is when an athlete changes allegiance for their own convenience, Tiffany and Cindy Ofili (Porter) may have a British mum but let's face it, they'd never have changed countries had they been the best hurdlers in the USA. Of course, in Tiffany's case she has since proven herself to be world class, but it still doesn't quite sit right with me.

Basketball player Kris Humphries was another one who, in the run-up to London 2012, saw the opportunity to play for GB even though he'd never even visited the country. Happily, he wasn't selected.

Then there is the thorny issue of British Oversea Territories. Zharnell Hughes can run for GB as Anguilla is a BOT and doesn't have its own Olympic committee. As such, competing for GB is his only chance of ever being in the Olympics. Can't blame him for switching, but at the same time it does seem a shame that he can compete for his own country in a Worlds but not the Olympics.

It is difficult to be hard and fast with these rules though and as the world gets smaller (so to speak) we'll only get more of these situations.
 
Last edited:

Ricey

Scott Forbes No.1 Fan⭐
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
34,302
Location
Braintree
Not my fault if you can't appreciate history. It was seismic. The equivalent of the USA beating England in 1950 football World Cup. It's that unpredictability that keeps us as sports fans coming back.

The last football World Cup was ok, but let's face it 2010 was a dud.

I appreciate history in sports that matter. The fact the Jap team is full of players from other countries who can't make it into their own team. 7 New Zealanders, 2 Tongans and an Aussie!
 

Ricey

Scott Forbes No.1 Fan⭐
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
34,302
Location
Braintree
Is that really the best argument that you can come up with?

No because you ignored the rest of my post.

Would it be sporting history if San Marino beat England if the team was full of Germans and Brazilians!
 

Yorkshire Blue

Super Moderator⭐
Staff member
Joined
Oct 27, 2003
Messages
36,624
Location
London
No because you ignored the rest of my post.

Would it be sporting history if San Marino beat England if the team was full of Germans and Brazilians!

It's not full of foreigners. Maybe that would have been a fair criticism in previous world cups but they've made huge strides in developing the game in Japan. Two-thirds of their squad was born in Japan and 90% still play in Japan. Those who weren't born there includes players like their captain, who was born in NZ to Fijian parents and moved to Japan when he was still at school, and speaks better Japanese than English. What country should he play for?

Do you not support England in football because Raheem Sterling was born in Jamaica to Jamaican parents? The FA have been assiduously signing up youngsters who qualify for more than one country for the u21s like Eric Dier (grew up in Portugal), Saido Berahino (Burundi), Chalobah (Sierra Leone), Dominic Iorfa (his dad played for Nigeria!) for years now to ensure they are England qualified. Had Owen Hargreaves even stepped foot in England when he was first capped?
 

Pubey

Guest
It's not full of foreigners. Maybe that would have been a fair criticism in previous world cups but they've made huge strides in developing the game in Japan. Two-thirds of their squad was born in Japan and 90% still play in Japan. Those who weren't born there includes players like their captain, who was born in NZ to Fijian parents and moved to Japan when he was still at school, and speaks better Japanese than English. What country should he play for?

Do you not support England in football because Raheem Sterling was born in Jamaica to Jamaican parents? The FA have been assiduously signing up youngsters who qualify for more than one country for the u21s like Eric Dier (grew up in Portugal), Saido Berahino (Burundi), Chalobah (Sierra Leone), Dominic Iorfa (his dad played for Nigeria!) for years now to ensure they are England qualified. Had Owen Hargreaves even stepped foot in England when he was first capped?

Indeed, this line of argument is so stupid. We want the best football to be played in this country, and are happy when it benefits our national team, but then use it to criticise others when they score a massive scalp against a world class team.

Also, Japan played some exceptional attacking rugby along the backs. I was so impressed with their set moves and finishing (the decisive try being a good example)
 

Ricey

Scott Forbes No.1 Fan⭐
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
34,302
Location
Braintree
They have 10 players not born in their country in their squad compared to just Raheem Sterling! 1 or 2 yeah fine but ****ing ten hardly a good comparison.
 

londonblue

Topgun Pilot
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
16,525
Indeed, this line of argument is so stupid. We want the best football to be played in this country, and are happy when it benefits our national team, but then use it to criticise others when they score a massive scalp against a world class team.

Also, Japan played some exceptional attacking rugby along the backs. I was so impressed with their set moves and finishing (the decisive try being a good example)

Not to mention their patience and discipline at the end. They could so easily have become anxious and given a penalty away. Instead they kept recycling the ball without giving the ref any chance to blow up and finish the match. That cycle of play went on for a good 6 minutes.

Probably the best piece of sporting drama I have witnessed for many a year and incredibly exhilarating to watch.
 

Jam_Man

Life President
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
25,545
Location
Southend
It's not full of foreigners. Maybe that would have been a fair criticism in previous world cups but they've made huge strides in developing the game in Japan. Two-thirds of their squad was born in Japan and 90% still play in Japan. Those who weren't born there includes players like their captain, who was born in NZ to Fijian parents and moved to Japan when he was still at school, and speaks better Japanese than English. What country should he play for?

Do you not support England in football because Raheem Sterling was born in Jamaica to Jamaican parents? The FA have been assiduously signing up youngsters who qualify for more than one country for the u21s like Eric Dier (grew up in Portugal), Saido Berahino (Burundi), Chalobah (Sierra Leone), Dominic Iorfa (his dad played for Nigeria!) for years now to ensure they are England qualified. Had Owen Hargreaves even stepped foot in England when he was first capped?

New Zealand or Fiji.

My opinion is the same as have for football, you play for the country of birth or your parents. Growing up somewhere doesnt change your nationality. My lad is 8, he is English to English parents. If we moved to France and lived there forever he would still be English.

Dont like it when England do it either in football or Cricket. It devalues the national teams if the teams are full of non-nationals.
 

rigsby

Life President⭐
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
14,594
New Zealand or Fiji.

My opinion is the same as have for football, you play for the country of birth or your parents. Growing up somewhere doesnt change your nationality. My lad is 8, he is English to English parents. If we moved to France and lived there forever he would still be English.

Dont like it when England do it either in football or Cricket. It devalues the national teams if the teams are full of non-nationals.

Agree with most of your comments but if you move when your just 8 and go through their sports system, education, etc then I think you have every right to play for that country.
 

londonblue

Topgun Pilot
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
16,525
New Zealand or Fiji.

My opinion is the same as have for football, you play for the country of birth or your parents. Growing up somewhere doesnt change your nationality. My lad is 8, he is English to English parents. If we moved to France and lived there forever he would still be English.

Dont like it when England do it either in football or Cricket. It devalues the national teams if the teams are full of non-nationals.

That's not necessarily your decision though. If your son reaches 20 and has lived in, say, France, from the age of 8, speaks better French than he does English, and is fully immersed in the culture, and feels more French than English why should your view that he was born English matter?

However, one rule I think they have right in football, and other sports can learn from is that once you have played for one country you can't then change allegiances. IMO other sports should follow suit.
 

Jam_Man

Life President
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
25,545
Location
Southend
That's not necessarily your decision though. If your son reaches 20 and has lived in, say, France, from the age of 8, speaks better French than he does English, and is fully immersed in the culture, and feels more French than English why should your view that he was born English matter?

However, one rule I think they have right in football, and other sports can learn from is that once you have played for one country you can't then change allegiances. IMO other sports should follow suit.

Shouldnt be a decision to be made, you play for the country of your nationality. The only exception is for parentage, not grandparentage.

He still will be English, born in England to English parents you are English. Fact. End Of.:smile:

You cant just change what nationality you are no matter how you feel. Even if he moved there when he was two and never learnt to speak English he would still be English. Even if he felt affiliated to France he still wouldn't be French so shouldn't be allowed to play for them.

Yes it would mean the likes of Sterling wouldnt play for us, but I personally would rather have a weaker team that was strong in National identity.

As soon as players can choose what team they play for just because they lived there a long time then the whole point of National sport becomes pointless.

England for the English.

Off to vote UKIP.
 

rigsby

Life President⭐
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
14,594
Even old Farage wouldn't agree with those rules. Say you moved to Australia when you were 2, are you really try to say you have to come back to England for youth tem trials, matches etc........Ridiculous
 

londonblue

Topgun Pilot
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
16,525
Shouldnt be a decision to be made, you play for the country of your nationality. The only exception is for parentage, not grandparentage.

He still will be English, born in England to English parents you are English. Fact. End Of.:smile:

You cant just change what nationality you are no matter how you feel. Even if he moved there when he was two and never learnt to speak English he would still be English. Even if he felt affiliated to France he still wouldn't be French so shouldn't be allowed to play for them.


Yes it would mean the likes of Sterling wouldnt play for us, but I personally would rather have a weaker team that was strong in National identity.

As soon as players can choose what team they play for just because they lived there a long time then the whole point of National sport becomes pointless.

England for the English.

Off to vote UKIP.

But if he's never known anything else, and by law is allowed a French passport, how can you deny a person that right?
 
Top