New Zealand U-23s - Quali Whites

I guess what I would like to see is NZF open up and be transparent (assuming they have made the mistake) and publicly define how the different departments within NZF work and who is generally responsible for what. 

Happy for some heads to roll but I would also like them to put in some kind of plan or strategy which meant this kind of thing couldn't happen again.

At the end of the day if NZF have made a mistake it's the U23's team and all the NZ public who are support football who have been let down and they are responsible to us as administrators and fans of the game to run our game efficiently and accurately.

I guess at the end of the day I want to see some accountability not a fall guy.

Now that we all know the 5 year rule from 18, I guess Reira and Ifill are about to take Wynne's place in the team

- better check they have passports I guess - but - whose job is that? 

I don't know, but someone in the office will do it before 2018. Right?

I'll be accused of having my head in the sand but I still do not see [on what has been provided] that we have definitely been at fault here. I can finally make a final assessment when I find out why NZF believes us to be right. At the moment they are telling us that they can't comment because they are involved in the legal process. That is a valid response and we need to respect that. I still smell a rat here and would not be surprised that there is OFC based skullduggery at foot here. We are basing a view on nothing very explicit from OFC [they have supplied just as much information as NZF in that regard] some bush lawyer analysis of FIFA regulations, a level of historical  disgruntleness of NZF. This either needs to be played out in the Courtroom or one side or the other to come clean and admit fault before I will attribute final blame.

I like what someone said earlier re: Vanuatu could have worked that out themselves, however I can't help but feeling that someone spilled the beans there.

Let's face it, is it what teams who are underdogs in big games do regularly, to check the opposition squad for possible breaches of FIFA regulations? And if Vanuatu had done just that, how could they know that we hadn't received clearance for the player to compete in the U20 World Cup? At the end of the day, he only played for the U20 less than a month ago - you would expect everything to be jolly good on the eligibility front.

If you're an outsider doing your work on Wikipedia or Transfermarkt you could find out that he was born in SA, but you wouldn't necessarily know everything else, would you? What if he was a refugee?

I love a good conspiracy theory and the more I read and think about this, the more I think (and quite frankly, hope) that someone has fudged us from the inside. Don't believe OFC did that on purpose or anything, but given our comments on the tournament and its set-up, they probably enjoyed the opportunity to stick a finger up there where the sun don't shine.

We should never let a fax get in the way of a good story.

Vanuatu could have known that Wynne wasn't eligible under the rules just by a quick google search. What google could not have told them is whether or not he was given clearance by FIFA. If I saw Wynne's information I would have just assumed that NZF had gotten clearance and had sorted everything out. Maybe Vanuatu asked OFC to do some background on players like Wynne and Roux. However, only OFC and FIFA would have known that he hadn't recieved clearance. It doesn't even need to be a conspiracy. Maybe someone at FIFA was doing their job sometime last week and found out that Wynne wasn't eligible. I can't imagine Vanuatu had much to do with the decision.

As things stand at the moment, I have to agree with this from Ben Strang on stuff.co.nz

"So, simple question, did NZ Football get an exception from Fifa to allow Wynne to play?

It's another yes-no answer.

If Wynne isn't eligible, and given the way things have gone these past three days it would appear he isn't, then why the appeal?

The rules are clear. Field an ineligible player and forfeit the match and get knocked out of Olympic contention.

New Zealand Football know if Wynne is eligible, and if they know he isn't then this whole appeal process is a complete waste of time, money and an awful lot of hope.

Why drag it on knowing the kid isn't eligible?"

NZF need to publicly state whether there was a FIFA exception. 

Not much more can be said or done until then. Everything else is just conjecture.

Yep, it could be as simple as someone from Vanuatu ringing up FIFA and asking 'is there an exemption certificate for such and such' and go from there.

However, given that Deklan had played in the U20s, you wonder how likely is that to have happened. I think chances of some kind of tip-off are quite high.

I personally don't hold anything against Vanuatu. Yes it would have been better if they had protested before the game, but if its an admin issue at NZF then its completely our own fault. They were playing by the rules, we were not.

I'm still hopefull that FIFA issued a waver for Wynne and we just haven't been told about it because of the no comment policy, he's played two friendlies for the national team and in a world cup ffs! It's not like this is some obscure rule as has been suggested, this is something that countries (including presumably us with Roux, etc) seem to have to deal with fairly regularly.

There's unlikely to be a public sacking here.

Apart from the fact that NZF and accountability hardly go hand in hand, the people at fault are all employees. There would have to be a discliplinary process, and you'd have to demonstrate some sort of gross misconduct, if you wanted to "sack" someone (like FDJ for example).

I can't really see how this could chin the bar of summary dismissal. I fudge things up in my day job all the time and they haven't been able to sack me yet :)

At least Hudson is sticking with NZ and being positive:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/football/nz-teams/70206538/deklan-wynne-i-love-playing-for-new-Zealand

"We got the news bit by bit and we got the final decision and we were in shock really," Hudson said.

"When it happened, the staff and players, we were all very disappointed. This is all our dreams … to go to the Olympics and play big tournaments like this.

"Those are natural emotions. But we had a really good meeting before we left the hotel [on Monday]. Although the players are disappointed, they have spent four weeks with the head coach of the national team. I know them and they know me now. We strengthened our resolve as a team..

"As a coach when this happens, you have to be there for the players and support the team and that's what this has been like.

"The players have been incredibly professional before, during and after this event.

"This will prove to be a really, really huge moment for us in terms of strengthening our team and resolve and spirit."

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So, next stop OFC Nations Cup May 28 next year - doubles as Confeds Cup qualifier and second round of OFC World Cup qualification.

It would be good if we end up hosting it. (Bidding and host not decided yet).

To me, most of the Olympic u-23 squad are not ready for the senior All Whites anyway.

Who should make it from that group?

To me, of outfield players, only the already full internationals Tuiloma, Roux and Fenton you would definitely want in an All Whites squad.

Plus Crocombe or Tzanev as reserve goalies.(Outside the u-23's, Marinovic did enough against Korea in March to demand a place)

Guys like Clayton Lewis, Stevens, Wynne, Rufer and Patterson would be fringe players at best.

I don't think missing out on the Olympics will harm our OFC Nations Cup / World Cup qualifying very much.

Some of those u-23 players that Hudson seems to like (especially Moses Dyer) should be kept far away from the All Whites anyway. 

If the non-qualification for Rio keeps unsuitable players like Dyer out of the picture for the All Whites, all the better. 

I'm still gutted that it seems we won't have team at Rio, but only because the Olympic football is its own thing and I would have enjoyed watching our side. Not because it will impede the All Whites' World Cup qualification.

Agree with Smithy - in NZ you just can't fire people as they do in other countries. 

However, to me what happens next should depend on:

A) who fudged up (e.g. admin employee vs high level manager)

B) what NZF actually want to do about this

You could still performance manage the culprit out of NZF if you really wanted to.

The real question here is, how do we get our act together so that we act like a decent Football Association and stop making such costly mistakes (the infamous Glen Moss fax incident...)?

Remember the overage players rule, if you have a team in the olympics which include Tuiloma, Roux, Fenton, Thomas,  Wood, Reid, and Smith then you've got more than half a starting all whites 11 playing together at a high level and in a high pressure environment.

Well any firing would I'm sure be accompanied by a golden handshake. Otherwise its paid gardening leave.

NZF knew about the rule because Ryan De Vries (born 14 September 1991 in Cape Town, no nz lineage) came to this country, waited 5 years from 2009 - 2014 and was called into the All Whites at the age of 23 to play Korea in March.....

somewhere, somehow, someone knew that rule existed and must have seen Wynne was in the same boat.

No FIFA exemption = NZF fudged

Was there going to be another press conference today?

http://www.3news.co.nz/video/livestream-nz-footbal...

On now, just a bunch of crap

Heard that NZF have faxed the appeal but it's illegible.

Here come the violins...

In the press conference they said that he hasn't asked to change countries, they think he is eligible on other criterea outside of statuate 7.

They're idiots if they're saying that, because section 7 explicitly deals with the situations that Deklan's in, he can't be eligible on other criteria.

What did they say Anthony has had to swallow?

They also are saying they are worried about eligibility of other players if their interpretations of the Fifa rules are incorrect.

"We've followed the rules... he's been here 5 years"

Need article 6. Stat.

"We didn't apply for an exemption"

Okay. This is done. Wrap it up.

5 Principle
1.
Any person holding a permanent nationality that is not dependent on
residence in a certain Country is eligible to play for the representative teams of
the Association of that Country.
2.
With the exception of the conditions specified in article 8 below, any Player
who has already participated in a match (either in full or in part) in an Official
Competition of any category or any type of football for one Association
may not play an international match for a representative team of another
Association.

6 Nationality entitling Players to represent more than
one Association
1.
A Player who, under the terms of art. 5, is eligible to represent more than
one Association on account of his nationality, may play in an international
match for one of these Associations only if, in addition to having the relevant
nationality, he fulfils at least one of the following conditions:
a) He was born on the territory of the relevant Association;
b) His biological mother or biological father was born on the territory of the
relevant Association;
c) His grandmother or grandfather was born on the territory of the relevant
Association;
d) He has lived continuously on the territory of the relevant Association for at
least two years.
64 III. Eligibility to play for representative teams
2.
Regardless of par. 1 above, Associations sharing a common nationality may
make an agreement under which item (d) of par. 1 of this article is deleted
completely or amended to specify a longer time limit. Such agreements shall
be lodged with and approved by the Executive Committee.

7 Acquisition of a new nationality
Any Player who refers to art. 5 par. 1 to assume a new nationality and who
has not played international football in accordance with art. 5 par. 2 shall be
eligible to play for the new representative team only if he fulfils one of the
following conditions:
a) He was born on the territory of the relevant Association;
b) His biological mother or biological father was born on the territory of the
relevant Association;
c) His grandmother or grandfather was born on the territory of the relevant
Association;
d) He has lived continuously for at least five years after reaching the age of 18
on the territory of the relevant Association.
III. Eligibility to play for representative teams 65

8 Change of Association
1.
If a Player has more than one nationality, or if a Player acquires a new
nationality, or if a Player is eligible to play for several representative teams
due to nationality, he may, only once, request to change the Association for
which he is eligible to play international matches to the Association of another
Country of which he holds nationality, subject to the following conditions:
a) He has not played a match (either in full or in part) in an Official
Competition at “A” international level for his current Association, and at
the time of his first full or partial appearance in an international match
in an Official Competition for his current Association, he already had the
nationality of the representative team for which he wishes to play.
b) He is not permitted to play for his new Association in any competition in
which he has already played for his previous Association.
2.
If a Player who has been fielded by his Association in an international match in
accordance with art. 5 par. 2 permanently loses the nationality of that Country
without his consent or against his will due to a decision by a government
authority, he may request permission to play for another Association whose
nationality he already has or has acquired.
3.
Any Player who has the right to change Associations in accordance with par. 1
and 2 above shall submit a written, substantiated request to the FIFA general
secretariat. The Players’ Status Committee shall decide on the request. The
procedure will be in accordance with the Rules Governing the Procedures of
the Players’ Status Committee and the Dispute Resolution Chamber. Once the
Player has filed his request, he is not eligible to play for any representative
team until his request has been processed.

Says they didn't know if FIFA would give him an exemption. Their lawyer told them that if they apply and it's declined that's it and he can never play, so they decided not to apply and just decided themselves he was eligible and to play him.

Any apologies to the OFC on this forum due? 

This was NZF and no one else. 

Repeatedly saying that they aren't really sure how to interpret the rules but they think he's eligible.

Well they said that they asked repeatedly for clarity and were told that the rules that they are running under were the pacific game rules and have paperwork to this affect.

They are approaching this from two directions, firstly which rules they were playing under (and they say they have documentation which said that they were playing under pacific games rules) and secondly FIFA eligibility, they have two groups of lawyers approaching each issue seperately.

Pretty much says their hope is on Article 5 makes him eligible. Laughs when asked to clarify what 'permanent nationality that is not dependent on residence' means.

WTF? That is some dumb shark. Heads have to roll for this. I would have been more understanding if someone just forgot to ask for an exemption. We just decided to ignore the rules and take a "she'll be right" attitude. What a joke.

I don't see how they could believe this.

6 d is interesting. ,Although that would depend on the interpretation of 5.

Apparently they were told this from the OFC and have the paperwork to prove it.

If that is correct, then whomever made the final call on this needs to go. Gambling qualification for an international tournament for one player at the potential expense of an entire team... dumb!