Kasey McAteer

[hackneyfox]

18 hours ago, Frances Dempsey said:

He couldn’t care less about Republic of Ireland I can guarantee you that!! Knows he won’t get an England call up fact!

 

Exactly

How long have you known him for?

long enough to discuss how he thinks about ROI I assume.

[Sampson]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

 

 

I hate residency laws that encourage mercenaries to move to represent succesful national teams. I don't think that's a problem we have in football so much compared to rugby and their "project players" (ugh.) But residency laws that allow genuine migrants to come and represent the country they call home or the place they've grown up? Yeah I'm all for that. 

 

There is no way you can legally differentiate the two though.

I think only the weirdest nationalists would have a problem with someone who moved to that country, lived there for several years, learnt the language, worked and contributed to that society, fell in love and/or started a family with a "native" citizen from that country being able to claim naturalised citizenship and represent that country.

Yeah you might get so called "projecct players" who just go to another land to try and win things, but they may end up feeling at home in that country anyway. There's no way you can really tell apart a person's intention and whether those intentions changes after years of living in a country anyway.

 

I don't think you can really have residency laws changed without affecting people who genuinely call that country home.

At the end of the day, I think people like to think it matters, but if the players are helping them win games, it soon goes out the window. When England were the #1 test team in the world, I don't think many cared the likes of Andrew Strauss and Keven Pieterson were not born in the UK. No one cared Raheem Sterling wasn't born in the UK when he was England's best player in their run to the Euro 2021 final either.

Also, I've seen interviews with Muzzy Izzet and Wes Morgan have both talked incredibly positively about the experiences of playing in a World Cup semi-final and continental final respectively, even though they both only qualified through grandparents.

Edited 19 October 2023 by Sampson

[LCFCJohn]

2 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

Playing international sport isn't always about being a patriot.

 

It's like saying every player, plays for the love of the game, for some it's a job, other it's about money or fame.

 

It can simply be about a desire to play at the highest level and play in the biggest competitions.

 

 

True. And worth noting, this Euros in a few years that will be the UK and Ireland hosting, presumably all 5 home nations will be in automatically as hosts so it’s a chance to play in a home tournament as well.

[Sampson]

2 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

True. And worth noting, this Euros in a few years that will be the UK and Ireland hosting, presumably all 5 home nations will be in automatically as hosts so it’s a chance to play in a home tournament as well.

They're only allowed to give 2 places to host nations, it would be a bit much with 5 tbf, so all 5 nations have to qualify, but the 2 best performing nations in the qualifiers who don't qualify will also be given a spot.

[Finnegan]

50 minutes ago, Sampson said:

no way you can legally differentiate the two though.

 

I've thought about this a lot. Mostly in the context of rugby because, like I say, the rules are absolutely terrible in rugby and the sport is rife with project mercenaries that defeat the point of international sport imo. 

 

Best solution I've thought of, personally, is that players just simply can't "gain" nationality throughout their careers. 

 

The teams you're eligible for when you hit 21 are the teams you're eligible for for your career. That way if you're Robert Earnshaw or Raheem Sterling (or Mako Vunipola or Taulupe Faletau) then nobody is telling you you can't represent the country you've grown up in and that you feel is home. 

 

Maybe you could adjust that slightly so that if you've started gaining eligibility before 21 you're allowed to finish? Idk. But you've got to draw a line somewhere. 

 

Grown adults, professional sports people, moving to a new country for no reason other than their career have no business changing allegiance to represent a new national team in my eyes. Brazilians that moved to some Eastern European country for strictly professional reasons aged 23, 24, rocking out for their national sides later on in the peak of their career? Or 24 year old Kiwis giving up on their dreams of playing for the All Blacks so heading north to become Northern Hemisphere qualified just so they can play international rugby? Give me a break. 

 

Edited 19 October 2023 by Finnegan

[LCFCJohn]

49 minutes ago, Sampson said:

They're only allowed to give 2 places to host nations, it would be a bit much with 5 tbf, so all 5 nations have to qualify, but the 2 best performing nations in the qualifiers who don't qualify will also be given a spot.

Ok, interesting thank you.

 

So if England, Scotland and Wales for example, qualified in their own right and the 2 Irish sides didn’t, they’d qualify anyway and all 5 would be in.

 

Id imagine maybe 4 of the 5 possible end up qualifying overall then would be my guess. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

54 minutes ago, Sampson said:

They're only allowed to give 2 places to host nations, it would be a bit much with 5 tbf, so all 5 nations have to qualify, but the 2 best performing nations in the qualifiers who don't qualify will also be given a spot.

So Wales won't be there then?

[Finnegan]

5 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

So Wales won't be there then?

 

 

 

[Sampson]

19 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

Ok, interesting thank you.

 

So if England, Scotland and Wales for example, qualified in their own right and the 2 Irish sides didn’t, they’d qualify anyway and all 5 would be in.

 

Id imagine maybe 4 of the 5 possible end up qualifying overall then would be my guess. 

Yeah, that's it exactly. I also think there's a good chance all 5 nations will qualify at any rate.

 

35 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I've thought about this a lot. Mostly in the context of rugby because, like I say, the rules are absolutely terrible in rugby and the sport is rife with project mercenaries that defeat the point of international sport imo. 

 

Best solution I've thought of, personally, is that players just simply can't "gain" nationality throughout their careers. 

 

The teams you're eligible for when you hit 21 are the teams you're eligible for for your career. That way if you're Robert Earnshaw or Raheem Sterling (or Mako Vunipola or Taulupe Faletau) then nobody is telling you you can't represent the country you've grown up in and that you feel is home. 

 

Maybe you could adjust that slightly so that if you've started gaining eligibility before 21 you're allowed to finish? Idk. But you've got to draw a line somewhere. 

 

Grown adults, professional sports people, moving to a new country for no reason other than their career have no business changing allegiance to represent a new national team in my eyes. Brazilians that moved to some Eastern European country for strictly professional reasons aged 23, 24, rocking out for their national sides later on in the peak of their career? Or 24 year old Kiwis giving up on their dreams of playing for the All Blacks so heading north to become Northern Hemisphere qualified just so they can play international rugby? Give me a break. 

 

This just doesn't sit right with me at all though. It feels like a very old fashioned and outdated view of nationality and it is creating two tiers of citizenship and literally telling people they're second class citizens, and while, sure, why there are people who might exploit the system, these rules will inherently rule out people who move country because they fell in love with a person from another country or were forced to leave their homeland for whatever reason or because they moved there for work or studies and ended up feeling at home there. Ultimately, I'd much rather the rules lead far more towards openness and integration than to exclusivity and creating an idea that you have to be "a certain type of citizen" to represent your country.

There's nothing to say that if they've lived in that country for several years they don't feel at home there anyway, regardless of what the original intention was. And there's nothing to say that just because someone was born and brought up in a country they genuinely feel a great pride it in either. I can't say I particularly feel anything towards the UK in comparison to other countries, it's just a set of imaginary lines my parents were living in when I was born, can't say I had any choice in the matter. The idea you have the "identify with" or "feel" a certain nationality to represent it in a career move just strikes me as a bit weird and uncomfortable in 2023.

Edited 19 October 2023 by Sampson

[Finnegan]

2 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Yeah, that's it exactly. I also think there's a good chance all 5 nations will qualify at any rate.

 

This just doesn't sit right with me at all though. It feels like a very old fashioned and outdated view of nationality and it is creating two tiers of citizenship and literally telling people they're second class citizens, and while, sure, why there are people who might exploit the system, these rules will inherently rule out people who move country because they fell in love with a person from another country or were forced to leave their homeland for whatever reason or because they moved there for work or studies and ended up feeling at home there. Ultimately, I'd much rather the rules lead far more towards openness and integration than to exclusivity and creating an idea that you have to be "a certain type of citizen" to represent your country.

There's nothing to say that if they've lived in that country for several years they don't feel at home there anyway, regardless of what the original intention was.

 

I get that. I know it's definitely one of those moments where my views in a strictly sporting sense are completely contradictory to my general world views (tear down the borders, love everyone, etc.)

 

I just think you can exist in a space where its perfectly okay to take pride in culture and heritage and celebrate those things without prejudice, hate and a superiority complex and I think that's the realm international sporting competition sits in for me. 

 

And the cynic in me thinks that my version of the rules probably excludes more sporting mercenaries who don't attach any sentiment to international sport than it would exclude genuine migrants. 

 

Obviously "my rule" absolutely shouldn't ever apply to actually gaining citizenship. In the "real world" I'd completely agree with you and everything you've written but we're talking about professional sportsmen, 99.9% of them are moving purely for their careers, it isn't for love or for family or for any other "human" reasons. They're just moving to the most competitive / prestigious league and / or the highest wage. 

 

[RonnieTodger]

How dare a lad with a an Irish name like McAteer play for Ireland?! 

[OntarioFox]

On 18/10/2023 at 17:23, Frances Dempsey said:

Well your very nieve if you believe that!! Never set foot in the country before. Wonder how long it takes him to learn the national anthem 😂😂

It's spelt Niamh, actually.

[Jimmy]

5 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

I've thought about this a lot. Mostly in the context of rugby because, like I say, the rules are absolutely terrible in rugby and the sport is rife with project mercenaries that defeat the point of international sport imo. 

 

Best solution I've thought of, personally, is that players just simply can't "gain" nationality throughout their careers. 

 

The teams you're eligible for when you hit 21 are the teams you're eligible for for your career. That way if you're Robert Earnshaw or Raheem Sterling (or Mako Vunipola or Taulupe Faletau) then nobody is telling you you can't represent the country you've grown up in and that you feel is home. 

 

Maybe you could adjust that slightly so that if you've started gaining eligibility before 21 you're allowed to finish? Idk. But you've got to draw a line somewhere. 

 

Grown adults, professional sports people, moving to a new country for no reason other than their career have no business changing allegiance to represent a new national team in my eyes. Brazilians that moved to some Eastern European country for strictly professional reasons aged 23, 24, rocking out for their national sides later on in the peak of their career? Or 24 year old Kiwis giving up on their dreams of playing for the All Blacks so heading north to become Northern Hemisphere qualified just so they can play international rugby? Give me a break. 

 

just look at the Japanese Rugby side for that sort of thing

[Finnegan]

1 hour ago, Jimmy said:

just look at the Japanese Rugby side for that sort of thing

 

Or Ireland 

[Jabfox]

16 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

Or Ireland 

Good old Bundee Aki 

[Spudulike]

Zola Budd must've been one of the first to switch allegencies to further a sporting career. 

[Matt]

I’d have bought him on and quite early too.

[StanSP]

1 minute ago, Matt said:

I’d have bought him on and quite early too.

Same. Was clear we needed some fresh legs up top or on the wing and some impetus of some kind. Ran out of ideas and he'd have been a good option. 

[tom27111]

On 20/10/2023 at 12:26, Spudulike said:

Zola Budd must've been one of the first to switch allegencies to further a sporting career. 

 

Never! Footballers in the fifties were doing it.

 

Di Stefano and Puskas, just off the top of my head.

 

Must have been happening way before that.

 

Actually, the only time cricket was in the Olympics, the French side were ex-pats from England 

[tom27111]

2 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Same. Was clear we needed some fresh legs up top or on the wing and some impetus of some kind. Ran out of ideas and he'd have been a good option. 

 

Coming back from injury though...

 

It was an intense game.

 

The season won't be defined by playing the 'better' teams.

 

Although we lost and needed something different, it could turn out to be good management. 

[Tuna]

Also confused why he didn't come on!

[Ian Nacho]

Should’ve come on. It was clear that they’d worked Fatawu out. 

[Clever Fox]

On 20/10/2023 at 12:26, Spudulike said:

Zola Budd must've been one of the first to switch allegencies to further a sporting career. 

Mo Farah also.

[coolhandfox]

Rodgers use to run players into the ground playing them half fit and bring them back to early.  

 

It's a marathon not a sprint, rather have a fit and firing Macteer for after the international break then rush him back.

 

We are already missing Ndidi, Yunus and Praet.

[Jimmy]

putting Ricardo to the 8 instead of bringing on McAteer was bizarre, 3 wingers and a striker on the bench, 1 winger on the pitch was out of gas and the other couldn't get in the game and we only made 2 subs, a rare bad night from Enzo