From: Bob on 15 May 2010 02:58
Bruce D. Scott wrote:
> Bob (Bob(a)Bob.com) wrote:
>> that is quite aggravating to see a developing football nation have
>> its talent poached by other countries, or at least a lot more so
>> than when a not quite first team Brazilian goes abroad to play
>> international football.
> [replying also to Thach a bit]
> Perhaps Germany never thought they had to (just as they're one of the
> few who never had a foreign trainer in the NT). But yes, there are
> Brasilians all over the place playing for others. Many lower-rate
> ones, just as you see mediocre American basketballers in every corner
> of the world. A US woman even got onto the Russian women's Olympic
> team, mostly because she didn't make ours. Her only connection to
> Russia is that she plays there.
> Every Olympics the press run stories about Americans competing for
> other countries. It is usually a bit over a dozen countries in the
> summer version. Usually some form of dual citizenship, even if a
> grandfather clause applied at the last minute.
> The saddest case was Sydney Maree, a world class miler from the years
> around 1980. A black from South Africa, he couldn't compete due to
> the Apartheid. He was fast tracked into the US because his 5 years
> was just too slow to make it for 1984. They pulled some
> extraordinary-case strings (I think there was a congressional hearing
> as in the recent case of the ice dancer from Canada), he got in, and
> then got injured right before the Games. In the end IIRC he never
> made it to the Olympics.
> Of course football is another story, as we are a developing country
> and not a supplier of talent.
Right, I was thinking what does all of this has to do with football.
From: MH on 15 May 2010 17:55
> MH wrote:
>> Abubakr wrote:
>>> Regulations need to come in to stop established professionals from
>>> changing nationalities. One way to do this would be to have any player
>>> registering a professional contract nominate his/her nationality and
>>> that nationality stays with the player for life and cannot be changed.
>> That is a little draconian, as they are signing professional contracts
>> at 17 or 18, and have no idea at that point how their careers,
>> marriages, etc. are going to develop.
>>> This still allows juniors to choose between countries that they would
>>> like to represent in international football but it stops third rate
>>> (and at time even first and second rate) Brazilians and the odd
>>> Argentine from playing for the likes of Croatia, Portugal, Germany,
>>> Italy etc...
>> How is this a problem? It doesn't weaken Brazil or Argentina
>> substantially, and only strengthens the other teams a tiny amount.
> For now. It might grow in the future. We might get to see, I don't
> know, Scotland's brazilians beating Poland's argentinians at WCup
> 2018. True we're not there yet.
>> I would be more concerned (as Bruce points out in another post) about
>> the potential for developing football countries losing potential star
>> players, who end up sitting on the bench for one of the bigger teams.
>> There must be dozens of players with only a handful of caps for France,
>> the Netherlands, or England, for example, that could have made a real
>> impact with Senegal, Jamaica, Surinam, Trinidad, Ivory coast, Morocco,
>> etc. etc.
> But according to the OP this is desirable, since they represent the
> footballing culture of the country they play in.
> (BTW, this means Messi is in fact wrong choosing to play for
> Argentina, since he practically has no professional ties with them.
> He's almost 100% a product of spanish football. Somehow I don't agree
> with this and think Messi is right.)
> Anyway, IMO it is a problem that somebody (a brazilian) gets to play
> for a country he's not related to (such as Deco). It's not right.
> (Even if Portugal once was the colonial motherland of Brazil.)
> As for lesser countries loosing talent to bigger ones, it's ambiguous.
> Sure, you got to admire Giggs for being loyal to Wales, but thinking
> that he had no chance whatsoever of getting some level of NT success
> matching his skills (except if Wales take in a couple of brazilians
> themselves) this doesn't seem 100% right either. I couldn't hold it
> against him if he had chosen England, especially since he's played
> practically all his life at ManU.
Giggs was NEVER eligible to play for England - look it up !
He did play for England school boys but the eligibility rules are quite
different for that.
> I think it ought to be limited to countries the player has ties with.
> Such as: the one he's spent most of his life before turning 20, or the
> one either one of his parents has spent most of their life before
> having him. That would stop the brazilian exodus, but would also deny
> the next Giggs the chance to play for England (if he doesn't have
> english ties that is). Not perfect of course but I could live with it.
> But then of course it won't happen, mainly because the european
> countries want to be able to benefit from foreign-born talent,
> brazilian or otherwise.
From: Jim Goloboy on 15 May 2010 18:43
On May 15, 2:36 am, Jesper Lauridsen <rorsc...(a)sorrystofanet.dk>
> On Fri, 14 May 2010 10:07:48 -0700 (PDT), Jim Goloboy <jim.golo...(a)gmail.com>
> >On May 14, 9:52 am, b...(a)ipp-garching.mpg.de (Bruce D. Scott) wrote:
> >> Rossi, Subotic, and Ibisevic are just three of the guys who spent most
> >> of their development in the US but play for a "blood-tie" country.
> >Ibisevic never had citizenship and only lived here a couple years, I
> >don't think you can say he spent most of his development here. Subotic
> >(discovered by USA U-17 coaches in a park) is much worse.
> According to wikipedia, Subotic seems to have only lived 7 of his 21 years in
> the US, with the U-17 incident being just 2 years. He has lived longer than that
> in Germany.
Yes, but those were the key years in his development, given that the
US coaches discovered him training with his father in a park, brought
him into the U-17 program, turned him into a central defender, and
brought him to the U-17 World Cup. If those things don't happen where
do you think he is playing now?
Surely that is much worse than Rossi or Ibisevic who never played for
any US teams and never had any resources invested in them by the USSF.
From: FF on 15 May 2010 22:40
> FF wrote:
> > Anyway, IMO it is a problem that somebody (a brazilian) gets to play
> > for a country he's not related to (such as Deco). It's not right.
> > (Even if Portugal once was the colonial motherland of Brazil.)
> > As for lesser countries loosing talent to bigger ones, it's ambiguous.
> > Sure, you got to admire Giggs for being loyal to Wales, but thinking
> > that he had no chance whatsoever of getting some level of NT success
> > matching his skills (except if Wales take in a couple of brazilians
> > themselves) this doesn't seem 100% right either. I couldn't hold it
> > against him if he had chosen England, especially since he's played
> > practically all his life at ManU.
> Giggs was NEVER eligible to play for England - look it up !
> He did play for England school boys but the eligibility rules are quite
> different for that.
Looks like you're right, it's a common misconception so I must have
heard or read it somewhere. Anyway, even so my point is still valid.
As I understand, the rules have changed now so now he could play for
England if he wanted to ? If he was a young player with no previous
international matches that is. Just to avoid further mistakes.
From: Jussi Uosukainen on 16 May 2010 05:24
Mark V. <markvanderv1(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 13, 8:57�pm, Abubakr <deltara...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Regulations need to come in to stop established professionals from
>> changing nationalities. One way to do this would be to have any player
>> registering a professional contract nominate his/her nationality and
>> that nationality stays with the player for life and cannot be changed.
>> This still allows juniors to choose between countries that they would
>> like to represent in international football but it stops third rate
>> (and at time even first and second rate) Brazilians and the odd
>> Argentine from playing for the likes of Croatia, Portugal, Germany,
>> Italy etc...
> Here's my idea. When a player suits up for the first time for a
> national team for an official match, he must have been a citizen (born
> or naturalized) of that nation for at least four years. This would
> prevent last-minute naturalizations for the World Cup or Euros, but
> would also be accepting of immigrants who have become somewhat
> assimilated in the their new countries. If someone really feels a
> sense of loyalty or identity with the country to which they've
> immigrated, that is fine, but they must show it by sitting out a full
> World Cup cycle.
Actually I find this the best suggestion so far. It gives solutions to
those who really identify with their new homeland, but makes it quite
difficult to buy players for the WC.
I would add somekind of playing/living clause to make it less easy to
get players with money (I can see some of the Gulf states "buying"
players and getting them nationalities well in advance, but I do not see
players in their prime playing and living there for long periods....)
If you never tell a lie to her,
You don't have to remember anything.
* The Streets