Is Jack Wilshere racist?

rjsterry

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Jack Wilshere seems to be getting a bit of stick for what seems to be a perfectly reasonable position.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... gland.html

So do you think his comments are racist?

Or are people reading his comments and overlaying them with their own left wing liberal views to infer a racism that just isn't there?

“The only people who should play for England are English people,’’ he said after training at St George’s Park in preparation for Friday’s World Cup qualifier with Montenegro.

“If you live in England for five years it doesn’t make you English. You shouldn’t play. It doesn’t mean you can play for a country. If I went to Spain and lived there for five years I’m not going to play for Spain.’’

This sort of attitude would upset some former All Blacks, and some almost-All Blacks...

If you take any national side, the clue's in the name. The typical statement is "representing your country". It's hardly a radical view to say that someone who represents a country in the national side should be, errr, a national of that country.

His objection as I see it is to the rules around truncated periods of residence being enough to qualify for a national side. I would have thought that if you emigrate to a country - settle there permanently and leave behind your original country of nationality - you should be eligible to play for the national side of your adopted nation as soon as the emigration process is complete and your acquire your new nationality (even if, for whatever reason, you retain your old nationality at the same time). The period of residence i the new country isn't relevant.

The idea that you can move to another country for what's really a job (eg performing a contract to play for Real Madrid for five years) and thereby acquire the right to play for the national side of your new residence seems pretty odd to me. Your expectation would be, I'd have thought, that the move is always temporary and that you'll be returning to wherever home is at the end of the assignment.

The bottom line in my view is that there are two routes to acquiring nationality - birth, which you can't do a lot about, and acquisition, which is a formal legal consensual process. Working in a country, without more, is neither of these things, no matter how long you do it for.

All of which is fine where a nation is just one country, but we have a nation (GB) made up of three countries, and a governing body for cricket that represents two of them (E&W). There is no such thing as English nationality (still less English-and-Welsh nationality), so how can nationality be used to define eligibility for an English team?

Two step solution.

Step 1: abolish Wales.
Step 2: abolish Scotland.

Step 1 was achieved centuries ago, at least in legal terms - Henry VIII and the Laws in Wales Acts 1535-1542. Salmond et al seem to be trying to complete Step 2.

greg66_tri_v2.0

I was thinking of a simpler solution.

Take an eraser, a marker pen and a map. Rub out the borders between England and Wales, and England and Scotland. Cross through "Wales" and replace with "England As Well". Cross through "Scotland" and replace with "A Bit More England Further Up North".

rjsterry

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

I was thinking of a simpler solution.

Take an eraser, a marker pen and a map. Rub out the borders between England and Wales, and England and Scotland. Cross through "Wales" and replace with "England As Well". Cross through "Scotland" and replace with "A Bit More England Further Up North".

That's not going to get you anywhere in a pub quiz :roll:

Interesting that between the conquest of Wales and the passing of those Acts, the whole of Wales was private estate split between the Prince of Wales and the Earl of March.

Anyway, why would you want to do this?

rubertoe

I would just scrap international sport.... I hate international football, with a passion (I love club football though and Jacks one of my guy's).

problem solved.

veronese68

Croptonboy wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

My Dad, English born of English parents, had a blood transfusion whilst in Italy so he has Italian blood in him. Would this make him eligible to play for Italy?

Depends how much pasta he eats

Loads, my Mother is Italian.
Getting back to the subject in hand, I don't see that saying people playing for a national squad should be of that nationality can be considered racist.
I think it's too easy for a country to effectively buy in competitors. Difficult to say what the criteria should be, a passport is the easiest. Trouble is the country can then fiddle the rules to get an individual a passport more easily. So a country that has a strict immigration policy could then bend the rules when it feels the need. Birth and heritage should have some bearing, but where to draw the line?
Using me as an example: My mother is Italian, father English, I was born in Italy, but have lived here from the age of two. So I really am both, although I am more English in that my schooling and most of my life has been spent here. I don't look very Italian though so maybe that should rule them out. Were I to play for either of those countries should be considered fair, but if I ask to play for France because it's in the middle that would be ridiculous.

nicklouse

Veronese68 wrote:

Trouble is the country can then fiddle the rules to get an individual a passport more easily.

remember Zola Budd.

daviesee

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

I was thinking of a simpler solution.

Take an eraser, a marker pen and a map. Rub out the borders between England and Wales, and England and Scotland. Cross through "Wales" and replace with "England As Well". Cross through "Scotland" and replace with "A Bit More England Further Up North".

Hate to disappoint you by not biting.

International competition is intrinsically racist to start with anyway.
One Country (race) against another. What do you expect to come from it?

veronese68

nicklouse wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Trouble is the country can then fiddle the rules to get an individual a passport more easily.

remember Zola Budd.

Oh yes, that's a good example. Mainly remember that and running barefoot.

CiB

Question from hardened wizened journo to young footballer who's found it's Muggin's turn to face the press today after training finishes:
"Do you think this Belgian youth who knocked a couple in on Saturday against the might of the Sunderland defence should be seen as the saviour of English football and it's 50 years of being left behind in the coaching stakes by being fast-tracked through the system under the guise of 5 year's residency?"

Young footballer like a rabbit in the headlights:
"No. You should be English to play football for England"

In what possible way is it racist to prefer the English football team to be made up of players who at least have some English background? If we want the useless bunch of wasters currently representing us [when their clubs can be forced to admit that the broken leg that'll probably heal given 10 days rest over the international break might not be that serious after all] to be called The England Football team, I'd have thought a good start would be to pick players who were born or at least brought up in this country or to have ideally at least one English parent. We used to point & laugh at Ireland when Charlton J picked anyone who'd drank Guinness. Let's not go down that path.

Wilshere wasn't being racist IMO, he was responding to a specific question re a specific player playing for the national team. Too many people keen to be offended and to run their right-on credentials up the BR flag pole if you ask me. Carry on.

tailwindhome

CiB wrote:

Wilshere wasn't being racist IMO, he was responding to a specific question re a specific player playing for the national team.

He's claiming now that he wasn't talking about any specific player.

CiB wrote:

In what possible way is it racist to prefer the English football team to be made up of players who at least have some English background?

The inference is that by his comments he was somehow denigrating the 'Englishness' of those of immigrant decent and therefore racist.

It's bollix, but that's how some think.

stu-bim

CiB wrote:

We used to point & laugh at Ireland when Charlton J picked anyone who'd drank Guinness. Let's not go down that path.

Well you did with cricket. In the 20/20 world cup final in 2010 only one batsmen who played for England was English, one was a paddy and three Saffa's.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/world-twenty20-2010/engine/current/match/412703.html

bigmat

CiB wrote:

Question from hardened wizened journo to young footballer who's found it's Muggin's turn to face the press today after training finishes:
"Do you think this Belgian youth who knocked a couple in on Saturday against the might of the Sunderland defence should be seen as the saviour of English football and it's 50 years of being left behind in the coaching stakes by being fast-tracked through the system under the guise of 5 year's residency?"

Young footballer like a rabbit in the headlights:
"No. You should be English to play football for England"

In what possible way is it racist to prefer the English football team to be made up of players who at least have some English background? If we want the useless bunch of wasters currently representing us [when their clubs can be forced to admit that the broken leg that'll probably heal given 10 days rest over the international break might not be that serious after all] to be called The England Football team, I'd have thought a good start would be to pick players who were born or at least brought up in this country or to have ideally at least one English parent. We used to point & laugh at Ireland when Charlton J picked anyone who'd drank Guinness. Let's not go down that path.

Wilshere wasn't being racist IMO, he was responding to a specific question re a specific player playing for the national team. Too many people keen to be offended and to run their right-on credentials up the BR flag pole if you ask me. Carry on.

For once, I couldn't agree more!

tailwindhome

From Wikipedia

Januzaj is eligible to represent Belgium through birth and passport, Albania through his parents and Serbia due to the disputed status of his parents' homeland of Kosovo. He is also eligible to represent Kosovo at international football although they do not have a FIFA-affiliated team but do have a FIFA-sanctioned youth teams which plays in non-FIFA and non-confederation tournaments and exhibition games against full FIFA members.

In June 2013, Marc Van Geersom, former coach of the Belgium U-18 and U-19, has declared that Januzaj has refused a call-up to the Belgian team a number of times, since he would prefer to play for Albania.[8][9]

Albania's coach, Gianni De Biasi declared on 12 August 2013 that Januzaj is a great talent, and that he and the Albanian federation are waiting for the right moment to talk to him and to call him up for the Albanian national side.[10]

The Football Federation of Kosovo have said that they respect Januzaj’s right to decide his international future and that it is not fair to expect a player to represent a nation that cannot play competitive football.[11]

Belgian coach Marc Wilmots has plans to speak to Januzaj about his international future. "I will soon do it and it is up to him to decide. Januzaj has never played for the Rode Duivels. Not even for the youth teams. He has always refused." He also insisted that he will not ask new teammate Marouane Fellaini to persuade him. "I do not ask Marouane to influence him," he added. "That is absolutely not his job."[12]

In October 2013 England manager Roy Hodgson stated that the Football Association were monitoring the player with a view to calling him up in the future.[13] However, despite widespread press coverage, the player would not meet the requirements to play for England under the unique rules set out in the Home nations agreement.[14] The Home nations agreement requires that players engage in a minimum of five years education under the age of 18 within the territory of the relevant association and do not offer national team eligibility through residency.[14][15]

daviesee

So thats the end of that debate then.
Sorted.

DonDaddyD

CIB, forgetting TWH's post, would in you mind am I English, should I play for the English national team?

What about my Dad who was born in Jamaica but came here as a 1yr old?

In your view is Mario Balotelli - the black fella who was born and lived in Italy all his life, but whose parents are Ghanaian - Italian?

tailwindhome

DonDaddyD wrote:

CIB, forgetting TWH's post, would in you mind am I English, should I play for the English national team?

What about my Dad who was born in Jamaica but came here as a 1yr old?

In your view is Mario Balotelli - the black fella who was born and lived in Italy all his life, but whose parents are Ghanaian - Italian?

You're English
Your dad is Jamaican
Balotelli is Italian

Your son is Irish

bigmat

DonDaddyD wrote:

CIB, forgetting TWH's post, would in you mind am I English, should I play for the English national team?

What about my Dad who was born in Jamaica but came here as a 1yr old?

In your view is Mario Balotelli - the black fella who was born and lived in Italy all his life, but whose parents are Ghanaian - Italian?

You get two bites of the cherry you lucky so and so. England if you're good enough, if not Jamaica. Same for Balotelli.

I don't have any issue with CiB's post. "Some English background" clearly covers being brought up in England, having an English parent / parents, being born in England. What it doesn't cover (in my opinion) is moving to the UK because you'll get paid more to play a sport and after hanging around for 5 years deciding its more convenient / lucrative to play for the country where you live than the country you actually come from (however you might choose to define that). I don't really think its right that a former Kiwi Rugby League player can turn out for England Rugby Union team against the All Blacks. It makes a mockery of international sport. Same as a cricketer not making the cut atnational leave so decamping to England in a strop and playing for them instead against his own country.

CiB

DonDaddyD wrote:

CIB, forgetting TWH's post, would in you mind am I English, should I play for the English national team?

What about my Dad who was born in Jamaica but came here as a 1yr old?

In your view is Mario Balotelli - the black fella who was born and lived in Italy all his life, but whose parents are Ghanaian - Italian?

Clue was in the words wot I wrote...

CiB wrote:

...a good start would be to pick players who were born or at least brought up in this country or to have ideally at least one English parent.

Note OR not AND. You'd qualify. Your old boy would too. So would Balotelli qualify for the Italians, having been brought up there.

ETA well said Matt. That's exactly what I was getting at, and so I suspect was our chum Mr Wilshere (Jack Wheelchair as Twitter's USASoccerGuy calls him - LOL out loud.)

DonDaddyD

You get two bites of the cherry you lucky so and so. England if you're good enough, if not Jamaica. Same for Balotelli.

Ballotelli is only eligible to play for Italy because he has been adopted by an Italian family... - I find this fascninating.

From Wiki
Balotelli was unable to answer call-ups to the Italian national under-15 and under-17 teams as he was still considered to be a Ghanaian immigrant.[100]

On 7 August 2007, five days before his seventeenth birthday, Balotelli received his first senior International call-up for Ghana from their coach Claude Le Roy for a friendly against Senegal at the New Den stadium in London, England, on 21 August 2007.[101] He declined the offer citing once again his willingness to play for Italy when he became eligible.[102] He also stated his willingness to represent Italy at international level once he acquired an Italian passport.[103]

Ballotelli was born in Palermo Italy. I think that's wrong Ballotelli is Italian. However, if his parents were ever deported during his youth, well damn.

I think if you are born in this Country then you are British unless your parents apply for citizenship of their Country of birth. I think if you are a migrant and 'have a right of permanent stay' (or whatever) then you should be allowed to represent the Country at a sporting level from the moment you are deemed a British citizen.

Interesting side question, two parents are migrants and they have a baby here. The baby has a British passport by way of being born here but the parents are eventually deported (make up your own reason) what happens to the baby who has a right to stay in the Country they are born in?

You're English
Your dad is Jamaican
Balotelli is Italian

Your son is Irish

My Dad was a international high jumper, he competed for England.

daviesee

Oh goodies! DDD is involved race debate.

There are 2 options.

1. You all either admit you are wrong and DDD is right. Do it now.
2. Get the popcorn out.

rubertoe

daviesee wrote:

Oh goodies! DDD is involved race debate.

There are 2 options.

1. You all either admit you are wrong and DDD is right. Do it now.
2. Get the popcorn out.

Get me the pop corn...

I have a Scottish mother and Irish father and a Welsh girlfriend yet was born and raised in England.

I'm confused.

rjsterry

Popcorn? I thought we'd agreed pretty unanimously this about nationality and nothing to do with race

mtb-idle

I have a lot of cousins, second cousins and cousins once removed who live in America.

This started when my mum's cousins, one now deceased and one in her 70's, moved out to America in the 1950's. They both had children but they and their children (my cousins, now in their late 40's) always felt English and kept their British passports.

A few years ago one of my cousins bought along her eldest daughter for a holiday. This was at the time when children could travel on their parents passport and the daughter travelled under her mum's British passport.

They came to London had a jolly time and then headed for home until US immigration denied the daughter entry as she was an alien and had no visa to get into the US.

But she was born in America to a British mum who had lived in America for 30 years, American dad, and the child had never left the U.S. of goddam A until that point. What nationality was she?

tailwindhome

MTB-Idle wrote:

What nationality was she?

Being born in the USA she would be a US citizen. Surely it was just a matter of proving this. No?

Read some interesting stuff on wiki regarding the Natural Born Citizen requirement for the US presidency.

rick_chasey

Depends what context he's using 'english' in.

Given we weren't there it's difficult to work that out.

Suffice to say if it was an edl member we'd understand 'English' would likely be inferring 'of white anglo saxon descent'

I would say that obviously everyone who plays for England is English, so you would infer that when he feels only 'English' people should play for England he means a narrower definition.

Gallywomack

I would say that obviously everyone who plays for England is English

Well, apart from those who aren't actually English, and have qualified to play by residency of course.

Can't think of any football examples, but in Rugby you have say Henry Paul and Riki Flutey, both of whom have played for England, and both of whom are unequivocally not English, being New Zealanders, born in New Zealand to New Zealandish parents, having grown up in New Zealand and having only moved to England in adulthood, in order to play professional sport, and in Paul's case, having represented (possibly even captained) New Zealand in Rugby League before making the switch to Union. Although I do think after being capped, Flutey may have claimed an English grandparent, possibly in jest, I don't remember, but if true would have meant he didn't need any residency qualification - he was selected after fulfilling the IRB 3-year residency requirement though.

So in Wilshere's case, I don't think it's particularly fair to infer anything about how narrow his definition of Englishness is. As others have pointed out, he is presumably saying these things in reference to the question of qualification via residency, so I'm happy to give him the benefit of the doubt.

However, wrt to this whole issue (and again, it's something we English Rugby fans have had to come to terms with to a certain degree), I think it's best to simply accept that there are regulations governing qualification, which include residency periods for non-nationals, and if a player fulfils them and is selected, that's all there is to it. Better to accept that than having to wrestle with this rather complicated and potentially unsavoury question of nationality & representative sport. In an age where professional players move about and may spend years plying their trades overseas, qualification based on residency is going to happen, perhaps increasingly often.

pblakeney

The FA want more English players in the EPL.

Are the FA racist?

Gallywomack

The FA can take an unambiguous definition of 'English' though, ie qualified to play for England under the relevant FIFA (presumably) regulation.

An individual giving his own opinion may be applying a different criterion, and may in fact be applying a racialist definition of 'English'. However, I don't believe Wilshere is in this instance.

pblakeney

Gallywomack wrote:

The FA can take an unambiguous definition of 'English' though, ie qualified to play for England under the relevant FIFA (presumably) regulation.

An individual giving his own opinion may be applying a different criterion, and may in fact be applying a racialist definition of 'English'. However, I don't believe Wilshere is in this instance.

The problem is that under EU employment regulations such a step would be illegal.

I agree about Wilshere. The player he was referring to isn't even eligible to play for England, as was stated quite a few posts ago.

walkingbootweather

Jesus was born in a stable. Does that mean he can run in the Derby?