I don't necessarily agree with napierphoenix but feel the need to support him somewhat - everyone's jumping all over him but i think his original argument stands. Citing speed limits misses his point - his argument to me is that essentially the speed limit signs here are not clear, can be interpreted different ways, and despite what some are claiming, there doesn't appear to be any kind of documentation or official process around what happens after you apply for an exemption. He is right when he says an FAQ sheet is not sufficient. I mean seriously. That is not any kind of 'evidence' proving him wrong at all, the fact that one is required only serves to support his argument.
Terminator-x has argued something similar in the thread, but appears to have worded it slight better, in a less aggressive manner, and people are not taking him to task at all.
Midfielder misses the point as well when he says "the rules have been there for a long time now and on what evidence we have when they have been challenged or amendments sought they have been lost..."
"and on what evidence we have" are the key words there - that process should not be a grey area.
Yes NZF have been very silly with what they've done, and apparently out of synch with what other national football bodies have been doing, but that doesn't make the process any more legitimate.
Yes FIFA, ban us, cool, but for the love of god clean up the eligibility rules and document the exemption process at the same time.