New Zealand U-23s - Quali Whites

That circular reads to me as a clarification of what constitutes the level of citizenship required to play for a country, but does not state that simply having citizenship means that you can play for a country no matter what. It basically clarified the points in what was article 15 (now 5), and only proves that Wynne has the citizenship required to play for NZ, nothing else.

Hasn't there already been a precedent to this case somewhere in the world?

I'd be surprised if we were the first country to be affected.

Yes. BTW I am in no way ever implying that 5.1 is the end of story. Just interested in the forum's opinions, now, on the answer to the question 'Is Deklan a person holding a permanent nationality that is not dependant on residence in a certain country?'  Yes or No? I mean the clause is there. It needs a yes or no. As per my recent posts. I (and AMac) thinks Yes.

God. Yes, you would think. It's all very bizarre indeed. Seems like this has been lurking around in vagueness for a few years. I'm surprised because FIFA is usually pretty tidy and clear with regs. and admin. Think whoever drafted this one had been out on a bender in Lucerne or somewhere the previous night.

I don't think anyone would argue that he doesn't meet 5. As far as I am aware, there is no form of NZ citizenship that requires you to stay in the country after receiving it, so any NZ citizen is eligible under 5.1.

lol plenty on here have argued just that

I believe I saw people questioning what 5.1 meant and worrying that having to be resident to get his citizenship meant he didn't meet it, but whatever.

Here's something to ponder:

Wynne was playing for New Zealand in November 2014 against China.

He received his passport in January 2015 - http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c...

How did that happen?

Top work from all involved at NZF. You've really outdone yourselves with this one. 

As for bringing in other articles, as I said in my post in my view Article 5 is there as a guiding principle for most cases - players who have only ever had citizenship which allows them to play for one FIFA member only. However, in more complicated cases the other articles supersede 5. Therefore it's impossible to talk about Article 5 without bringing in the other articles in this case, because as I see it the other articles supersede 5 so whether Wynne meets 5.1 is only part of the question.

I've also said all along that I don't think that Wynne's NZ citizenship is dependent on residence in the sense that is intended there. So for me there was never a question of him being ineligible under 5.1 anyway.

Yep. They were fielding a player who shouldn't have been there. This is more like the difference between murder and manslaughter. At the end of it the person is dead and you are going to prison. A more deliberate malicious attempt to gain advantage is more cheating than just fudging up and breaking the rules, but tripping someone in the box is a pen if you were genuinely trying to play the ball or not. There is no intent factored in.

NZF has been winning no friends in the islands that is for sure. 

at the risk public ridicule and of rehashing something that may have been mentioned in the last 10 pages I haven't read:

lets say that in section 5 'permanent nationality that is not dependent on residence in a certain Country' does not include Declan as his passport / NZ nationality was based on residence in this country.

lets get urgent legislation passed to say that Declan Wynne has an NZ passport / is an NZ national 4 life (i.e. not dependent on residence). lets make that retrospective to say, when he was born.  therefore section 6 applies and he meets the 2 years?

your welcome NZ.

Paladini =============> NZF

already good at claiming credit. must be worth a shot. Could be worse?

That isn't the case here.

Someone said about nine pages ago something about "FIFA should have done a better job of drafting these rules, and defined the terms."

I'd just like to point out that while that may be true lots of terms in lots of legislation/regulation/rules are not defined. That's what Courts are for: to bring Parliament's intent to real life situations. 

Similarly, FIFA release periodical regulation updates (circulars) and decisions of various judicial bodies to clarify the rules. 

For all we know, there could be greater clarity about these terms than it would seem from a basic reading of the rules.

That's exactly right Smithy. Which is why I've been trying to explain that context, intent in creating the statute, the statute's application and publically available precedents all form an important part of the picture, but that's obviously too wordy for some to understand.

To go back to 5.1 - the question is whether, in FIFA's eyes, Deklan Wynn's has permanent nationality that entitles to play for NZ on the basis of that section alone. The answer is he doesn't, because of the mere existence of Article 7 which clarifies section 5.1 for people in Deklan's situation. This is how FIFA has interpreted and applied the statute since it's been passed, and NZF has abided by it before (for example, in Daniel's and Durante's cases).

So what I'm taking from all of this:

1. OFC are in no mood to change their mind on this thing (as evidenced by hiring Mai Chen) and there's nothing really conclusive enough to force them too anyway. i.e. it would have to be a fairly obvious misinterpretation for them to stick their hands up and say "oops!"
2. FIFA don't want a bar of it
3. We may have a chance of taking this to CAS, and win on an interpretation of eligibility or process, but that is likely to take lots of time and $$$ and most probably won't come in time to fix this before Rio anyway. So it would be a bit of a "moral victory" with the added side affect of rubbing OFC's noses in it. Ref: CAS usually takes 6-12 months, and that's not counting the appeal to OFC, playing a qualifier vs Fiji, and getting the boys prepared for Rio.
4. We are public enemy #1 in OFC right now, and not making friends anytime soon. But to leave we need their permission which they obviously won't want as it would probably collapse the confederation.
5. We can expect the next OFC qualifier for anything to be in the hottest and most inaccessible island they can find?

Or to put it another way, we're pretty much screwed on all counts?

Yep and the arse covering over a deliberate breaking of the rules is just making it worse.

Naive question - probably covered in another thread many years back, but if there is an Oceania team present in a FIFA tournament (WC, WWC, Olympics?, U20WC) does any FIFA moolah go to the OFC (to develop the sort in the federation/assist with admin)?

Luke Adams, born in Oz 08/05/94 to English parents. ?? Another one to sweat over.

If he was messi or ronaldo, i'd vote for that. he's not though, is he? I can't believe that NZF took the risk. Surely there are others who could have done an equally good job with no such risk. Corey Brown?

I would like to say that one good thing to come out of this will be that NZF will pour over eligibility criteria for any prospective player in painstaking detail from now on, but suspect not.

But not Luke Adams. See above post.

Sort of ironic that NZF didn't want Olympic qualifiers to be part of Pacific Games but now one of their legal arguments is: "FIFA rules??? Oh no no no, we were just here to play Pacific Games and just looked at those rules".

Why would the OFC be that vindictive?

We are their largest member.

We are their only member with a semblance of credibility (only a semblance mind).

They are based within our country.

Seems to me their should be a supportive relationship, kind of actually reminds me of the relationship between NZ Football and the Phoenix. The reasonable person would say that NZF needs the Phoenix, the Phoenix are only viable if they have pathways to develop and sell talent and are also succesfull,  therefore NZF should be supportive of them rather than going to war against them with academies, etc.

It's a case of certain people putting their own self interests in front of the good of the organisation and the game in our part of the world.

Yep. There are plenty of them.

I thought that too. And it seems the article had been pulled. Though here is a sneak peak if you missed it. Couldn't find the whole thing obviously. 

Midweek Fixture with Kris Shannon: Herbert's master plan w/Photo

17 hrs ago | The New Zealand Herald

Welcome to Midweek Fixture and, with Dylan Cleaver taking a few days off to fully appreciate Major League Baseball's All-Star festivities, Kris Shannon is filling his considerable boots. Would he coach Papua New Guinea's under-23 team at the Pacific Games? He tried to play it cool but the voice in his head screamed two words: At last! His joy was hardly a result of the job offer itself - he was Ricki 'Undefeated' Herbert, after all, and Papua New Guinea were lucky to have him.

That's not true. You have to have lived continuously in the country for 5 years but you don't have to be a citizen for that whole 5 years. You just have to have a passport at the time of application. For example, Durante wasn't a NZ citizen for 5 years but he lived in NZ for 5 years, at which time he became eligible for a NZ passport and also became eligible for the All Whites.

Because we broke rank with them by voting against Uncle Sepp? Because Hudson publicly blasted the location/format of the qualifiers? Here's another article detailing how we're seen by at least one of the other member nations. "It is believed that New Zealand football have raised issues to suit their own needs in the Pacific but cared less about Island countries needs when it comes to tournaments. Island countries just turn up to play in whatever conditions provided." And that's just in the last couple of months... 

Oh, and I think that under previous administrations the NZF/Phoenix relationship was actually an example of when people don't buy into the supportive relationship thing, with NZF doing as little as possible to help the Nix out, though admittedly that seems to have improved recently.

Ive had a good chance to go over this thread and this is IMHO (I've had some dealings with immigration and the FIFA statutes) excuse the grammar, spelling and paraphrasing

I've got a few bullet points to add to the mix.

5. is for players who are born in that country or have familial ties his nationality was gained(dependant on) by residence.  If not Qatar etc would be shipping in boat loads of 14 year old Brazilians and the like in to academy's like aspire and fielding them in their youth teams.

6. is for countries who have dual nationalities since he is not from the Cook Islands or Niue N/A

7. is relevant because he has acquired a new Nationality so must use the 18+3 e.g. Ryan DeVries, Dura...

To me NZF was well aware of the situation to even discuss that going for an exemption would be risky and you only get one chance so instead of asking the took the risk,  this is apparently the way of things at NZF as no one challenges at youth level so you just need the passport.

FIFA do not check on eligibility.  As in the Dura case we had to play him an official match (non friendly) for which the outcome didn't matter and then ask the Solomon's to challenge his eligibility to get them to rule on it Dura Challenge.  NZF were unlikely to ask someone to challenge Wynne in the 20's or 23's because they knew they were on shaky ground and both competitions really mattered.

Does any one know what kind of Visa He and his family entered NZ on in 2010 as it is quite a process to gain citizenship and unlikely that it was done in exactly 5 years. One question the Media should be asking is did NZF support fast tracking his citizenship?  If so it lends more weight to the argument that it was a calculated risk rather than a mistake.

Edit also this:

"Wynne first represented New Zealand at senior level, his international debut came against China in November 2014 having been called up due to injuries to Louis Fenton, and Tom Doyle. Wynne provided the assist for Chris Wood to equalize at 1–1.[3] He made further international appearances against Thailand four days later, and in March 2015, he played against South Korea."

So played 2 full international Friendlies before he got his NZ Citizenship and Passport.

I'm not buying this he is no special player argument and that he is just a run of the mill kid wanting to represent his country.  While he is no Messi he is an incumbent All White (eligibility aside) making him a valuable player and if he was not the best (in the coaches opinion) available in his position then he would not have been selected.

I think NZF have done Wynne the 23's and football stakeholders a complete disservice.  Appealing just an exercise to deflect the fact they got caught taking a calculated risk.

You're talking about NZ requirements to gain citizenship, not FIFA requirements to be eligible to play for said country. In effect they're almost the same thing but FIFA doesn't tell nations how to run their immigration policies. In Daniel's case, his citizenship was fast-tracked as they thought he would be eligible to play for NZ but if I recall rightly the FIFA rules were changed at the same time.