Nation-shopping for glory?

southsiderosie

The ongoing kerfluffle in France over citizenship and the national football team raises an interesting question: should there be limits on "switching states" when trying to qualify for the national team of a given sport?

Weirdly, two sports where this is a real issue are distance running and ping-pong. If you are a Kenyan long distance runner or a Chinese ping-pong player, you face long odds of ever getting to represent your country because the talent pool is so deep (plus in China, it's huge). But even the twentieth-ranked player in China would probably qualify for the national team in, say, Peru. So it seems quite rational for athletes from countries that are sports powerhouses to try and gain residency/citizenship in countries that are weakly represented in their given sport. But critics argue that this defeats the purpose of international competition and makes a mockery of the concept of a 'national' team; for example, something like 17 of the teams in the last ping-pong world championships fielded Chinese-born players, including the Congo.

Maybe a way of getting around this is for international federations to require that the athlete in question has been a legal resident of the country they represent for at least 15 years (or ten years if they are 20 or younger). This would prevent 'country shopping', but would also allow for the fact that sometimes families move when children are young, and they shouldn't be penalized for that. Residency rather than citizenship seems like it is the key factor here, especially in a world where so many people hold dual citizenship.

Or maybe not. What do other people think?

kfallon

We didn't complain in Euro '88, Italia '90, USA '94 or Japan/South Korea '02!

Guill

southsiderosie wrote: »

Or maybe not. What do other people think?

My Granny is from Peru, My grandad is from china, i'm gonna be Ping Pong champion of the world!!!
Sweet........:D

FatherLen

ha kerfluffle

southsiderosie

kfallon wrote: »

We didn't complain in Euro '88, Italia '90 or Japan/South Korea '02!

What are you referring to? I don't really know much about soccer, I just thought the question of nation-shopping was interesting.

IvyTheTerrible

southsiderosie wrote: »

The ongoing kerfluffle in France over citizenship and the national football team raises an interesting question: should there be limits on "switching states" when trying to qualify for the national team of a given sport?

The issue in France isn't about "switching states". It's about someone saying that there should be fewer black players. These black players ARE French, there is no "granny" rule issue. It's pure racism.

RichieC

southsiderosie wrote: »

What are you referring to? I don't really know much about soccer, I just thought the question of nation-shopping was interesting.

Cascarino.

Guill

southsiderosie wrote: »

What are you referring to? I don't really know much about soccer, I just thought the question of nation-shopping was interesting.

Well lets just say the Irish dressing rooms were full of English accents and dubious birth certs.

InTheTrees

As long as they satisfy the citizenship requirement's that apply to ordinary people in the country concerned we can hardly complain.

If they're being fast tracked into citizenship specifically to compete then it should come to the attention of the governing body of whatever sport it is. And it cant be within many rules.

kfallon

RichieC wrote: »

Cascarino.

Et al! Tho it was always refreshing that the best players in the team were actually Irish, McGrath, Moran, O'Leary, Brady, Whelan, Keane, Quinn etc but the most famous goals were scored by 2 plastics, Houghton in '88 and '94 and Sheedy in '90

ejmaztec

RichieC wrote: »

Cascarino.

O'Cascarino to you.

southsiderosie

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

The issue in France isn't about "switching states". It's about someone saying that there should be fewer black players. These black players ARE French, there is no "granny" rule issue. It's pure racism.

That's part of it. But there is also an issue that the kids who go through the elite state-sponsored grooming programs as under-20s, but then don't make the cut for the adult national team then go to play for Tunisia or Morocco because they have dual citizenship - even though they may never have lived in those countries. Given that in most countries it is the national governments who pay for the youth development programs, from their position why should they spend resources on kids who will go and play for rival teams as adults? Arguably these other smaller countries are free-riding on the big states, rather than developing their own talent.

Specific to the French case, if country hopping wasn't an option, then the state wouldn't have an excuse to limit the number of junior players with dual citizenship. That said, I think the way that the French have racialized the national team is a disgrace, but that is another issue altogether.

IvyTheTerrible

southsiderosie wrote: »

That's part of it. But there is also an issue that the kids who go through the elite state-sponsored grooming programs as under-20s, but then don't make the cut for the adult national team then go to play for Tunisia or Morocco because they have dual citizenship - even though they may never have lived in those countries. Given that in most countries it is the national governments who pay for the youth development programs, from their position why should they spend resources on kids who will go and play for rival teams as adults? Arguably these other smaller countries are free-riding on the big states, rather than developing their own talent.

Specific to the French case, if country hopping wasn't an option, then the state wouldn't have an excuse to limit the number of junior players with dual citizenship. That said, I think the way that the French have racialized the national team is a disgrace, but that is another issue altogether.

But if the guys who are in the academies don't make the cut for the national team, why can't they go to play for another country if they are entitled to?

InTheTrees

This thread made me think of the Jamacian Bobsleigh team. Or Eddie The Eagle.

There was Zola Budd, the south african (barefoot) runner who converted to british so she could compete in the Olympics (in the 70's? South Africa was banned because of apartheid). There was a fair amount of uproar at the time but it was all legal.

(She ended up bumping into and knocking down the US favourite in the race she was in.)

southsiderosie

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

But if the guys who are in the academies don't make the cut for the national team, why can't they go to play for another country if they are entitled to?

Well to look at it from a different perspective, why should a kid who grew up in Morocco get bumped by someone parachuting in from France? If the team is supposed to represent the country, then why wouldn't you have to live in the country (or have long-term residency there) in order to represent them in international competitions? And why should France pay for the training and development of kids who are going to go off and play for someone else?

To go back to the ping-pong example, country shopping is so rampant, that at the higher levels it's basically a bunch of Chinese players, some of whom grew up in the same training system, who are all playing each other now, even though it is ostensibly an international competition. If it is just about who is the best, then it should be an open qualifier, rather than nationally based - i.e. the same system that professional leagues use.

Mind, this doesn't rule out playing in a professional league; it's just an issue for being on the national team.

OPENROAD

I have heard they are considering changing the rules whereby if you are living in a country for three years you can represent that country, it is currently five years.

Like a lot of things though, I think people here would have a problem if an Irish person declared for say Wales or England under such rules but would have no problem if we benefit. Personally I would not be against the three year rule if they implement it.

SharpshooterTom

The world will be mixed raced at some point, and then nationality will not be necessary anymore.

dpe

World Cup Final 2022, Qatar v Brazil. 22 guys from Rio De Janiero and Sao Paulo on the field. Mark my words.

southsiderosie

Gnobe wrote: »

The world will be mixed raced at some point, and then nationality will not be necessary anymore.

Race and nationality are not the same thing. And as long as there are international competitions based on national qualifiers, this question is not going to go away anytime soon.

pickarooney

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

The issue in France isn't about "switching states". It's about someone saying that there should be fewer black players. These black players ARE French, there is no "granny" rule issue. It's pure racism.

Is it? Did you read the actual quotes which specifically adressed a perceived problem (one, for the record, I don't think is a real problem at all) with young players being trained up to u21 level in France and then declaring for other countries? The whole story is very dodgy, but reductive posts like this are a bit mauvaise foi, don't you think?