Alexikokopops Posted 13 January 2008 Posted 13 January 2008 YOU are the one who's playing the race card, saying a white sportsman who had NEVER lived in England should be able to play for us, while a non-white person who does live here should not.That's straying close to BNP territory. Back off. What the fook? You daft bastard. Hargreaves' parents are English, they migrated to Canada a year or two before he was born, which makes him a lot more English than Almunia and Vainikolo (who has played Rugby League for a different country). futter made absolutely no reference to race when he was actually arguing the point of who should be able to represent England. If you'll notice he didn't sit there and say "Lennox Lewis shouldn't represent us", he made the point for him. So shut up before you embarrass yourself further, it really is cringeworthy.
LeeCovFox Posted 13 January 2008 Posted 13 January 2008 I think the rules should be a lot stricter. In football at least, maybe its acceptable in some sports, where not so many nations compete. But in footballing terms, you should only be eligible for the nation in which you are born or in which you have been brought up for a long period of time. For me, the same goes for managers of national teams. Not because I don't rate Capello for example, I'm actually a huge fan and I also believe that Eriksson was a bloody good England manager, behind only Ramsey, Venables and Robson in this nation's footballing history. But because I think its cheating, and that it gives us an unfair advantage, potentially at least, over other smaller nations who can produce managers, but are not so good at producing players. In my opinion international football should be a competition to prove who can produce and manage the fooballing resoursec of their nation better than an other. And that, by the way, is coming from a staunch "lefty". I want the Euro and everything you know.
Webbo Posted 13 January 2008 Posted 13 January 2008 YOU are the one who's playing the race card, saying a white sportsman who had NEVER lived in England should be able to play for us, while a non-white person who does live here should not.That's straying close to BNP territory. Back off. You're really not worth arguing with, just grow up.
Webbo Posted 13 January 2008 Posted 13 January 2008 I think the rules should be a lot stricter. In football at least, maybe its acceptable in some sports, where not so many nations compete. But in footballing terms, you should only be eligible for the nation in which you are born or in which you have been brought up for a long period of time. For me, the same goes for managers of national teams. Not because I don't rate Capello for example, I'm actually a huge fan and I also believe that Eriksson was a bloody good England manager, behind only Ramsey, Venables and Robson in this nation's footballing history. But because I think its cheating, and that it gives us an unfair advantage, potentially at least, over other smaller nations who can produce managers, but are not so good at producing players. In my opinion international football should be a competition to prove who can produce and manage the fooballing resoursec of their nation better than an other. And that, by the way, is coming from a staunch "lefty". I want the Euro and everything you know. Totally agree.
LeeCovFox Posted 13 January 2008 Posted 13 January 2008 One thing I want to add to my earlier post, is that I don't believe that parentage should allow a player to be available for a particular nation. Hargreaves in my opinion, should be playing for Canada. Which in my view wouldn't be a great loss, as I think he is overhyped, and perhaps slightly better than Phil Neville. Who is underated. But anyway, thats beside the point. Parentage isn't good enough as far as I'm concerned. Which pretty much screws the Republic of Ireland. Or at least would have done in Big Jack's day.
Father Ted Posted 19 January 2008 Posted 19 January 2008 Was born in Tonga, has played Rugby League for New Zealand but is in the England 6 nations squad. Definitly, he's the next Jonah Lomu
purpleronnie Posted 19 January 2008 Posted 19 January 2008 Every other country does so why shouldn't we.
MPH Posted 19 January 2008 Posted 19 January 2008 the thing that bothers me is he has played international rugby for another nation. On that ground alone would i not want him to play for england. I dont give a monkeys testicle about the colour of his skin, i just believe when you have declaired to play for one nation, then that should be it. Its been happening for years and years in athletics, loads of kenyans running for denmark, i think even zola budd switched nations towards the end of her running career too... On a side note, at least half of the New zealand rugby team come from outside of New zealand. they have picked off the cream of the south sea islanders talent for many years, in my opinion, making themselves better than they really Are. Jonah Lomu is Tongan, for example. There are many examples of it happening in Rugby. Often too. But i come back to my original point - he has played international rugby League for a different nation and its that which irks me...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.