New Zealand U-23s - Quali Whites

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/football-soccer/news/art...

The decision reveals Vanuatu also protested Sam Burfoot's eligibility. He didn't take the field, so committee could not deal with the matter

— Andrew Gourdie (@Andrew_Gourdie) July 19, 2015

The 19 page document detailing the decision can be found here: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2168275/written-decision-of-the-ofc-disciplinary-committee.pdf

In short, NZF are fudged.

Vanuatu didn't spell Wynne's name correctly in their complaint. There's hope for us yet! #technicality

But this makes it clear, does it not, that the issue is a deep one about how NZF as a whole has been playing fast and loose with eligibility rules, rather than an individual whucking up on Declan Wynne in particular. One sacking isn't enough.

Sack everyone.

The "people in charge" have displayed levels of ineptitude well beyond what most of us would deem to be acceptable - even FIFA... sure, nobody is perfect and we all make mistakes. In saying that, most of us have a level of accountability also. This should also apply to NZF and their leadership.

For Andy Martin to sit there and admit that NZF didn't seek FIFA dispensation for Wynne (and others), because they were worried that FIFA would say no is absolutely beyond my comprehension. To jeopardise a whole campaign and "likely" appearance at an Olympic Games on that logic is inexcusable. Not to mention the impact on WC qualification losing those games and that 'contact time" will have on our squad.

Yes, processes clearly must change but there must also be accountability. That doesn't mean sacking someone to appease the maddening hordes (here or elsewhere), but acknowledging that someone clearly is not up to performing that aspect of their role, and make changes and provide support. That may mean removing someone, that may mean changes to who does what, or how, or when, etc etc.  

Acceptance of mediocrity and acquiescing to incompetence merely serves to underline the lack of professionalism and accountability within an organisation. As I'm sure many of us have witnessed first hand in other organisations.

When they asked FIFA for clarification the OFC also said it was the Soloman Islands vs NZL.

He said the initial feedback they have gotten from the Lawyers is that if they ask for permission and its declined then thats that. I took it as saying that they have been told retrospectively and since this issue not that they had seeked advice on it beforehand.

Bring back Ricki.

I absolutely just cannot fathom how such an elementary and vital aspect of administration has been fudgeed up so badly. 

I personally think the buck stops with the CEO - in a relatively small organisation like NZF he's got be accountable for significant regulatory compliance issues. M

This.

So you wait until he's 23.  Is Wynne really worth fudgeing ourselves over just to get him in the side?  Burfoot? No.

The implication of the post was that they recieved this information from thier lawyers before the competition, which means they inquired about it, and were given advice that they chose to ignore.

Whereas what I took from it was that they got this advice after they were disqualified and therefore they were just incompetent.

Risk v Reward... as much as DW (and SB, and goodness knows who else) are great prospects - they're not Messi, Ronaldo, Reid, or even Tuiloma... for the sake of our qualifying for Rio and following into WC - surely logic dictates it's a risk you don't take ESPECIALLY if your lawyer types are telling you exactly that.

My mind is boggled.

If I didn't know anything about this I'd be shocked.  But thanks to 69 pages on this thread and a podcast I'm just waiting to see what NZF can do to minimise damage to the game in the country and our tilt at the real WC.

I think it's got to the stage where NZF just have to cut their losses, get on with it, and make sure this never, ever, happens again.

...and someone goes.  I NEED A SCAPEGOAT! (No, not you Vinnie Lia)

I don't think needing a scapegoat is unreasonable. I'm surprised half the people involved in this are able to feed themselves and breathe... The whole we didn't want to risk Wynne not being able to play again as their excuse, what do they take us for.

It's funny, eh - it seems like NZF is an actual embodiment of a vicious cycle of incompetence. Doesn't matter who you put in there, it all comes out fudgeed up and shark.

Surely there are 11 good enough football players born in NZ, or that have parents or even grandparents born here. Enough of this desperate co-opting of players who sort of, only just, often don't qualify to play for New Zealand. I would rather have a representative team which is a bit crap than a representative team which doesn't particularly represent us.

One of the quite staggering things about the Wynn situation is that he seemingly got called up to play for the All Whites without having a NZ passport - and this didn't ring any alarm bells at NZF?

That's pretty harsh on the Wynne's of this world who just want the chance to play for their new country. Especially considering that for the effort of submitting a piece of paper (exemption request) he most probably would be perfectly eligible.

I always laugh at other nations when they have passport-player debacles, now it is us.

You would think Wynn is our Rinaldo and NZF truly believe that without him we have no chance of qualifying for the world cup or Olympics. I wouldn't have lost sleep if he couldn't play. Such a poor poor excuse from NZF, astonishing.

Solomon Islands are mentioned, a mistake instead of Vanuatu?

Pg 9. 21

No, just noted the footnote, which explains it as an error.

Looking more likely now that NZF would need Houdini to get out of this, not a team of lawyers...

I would do it on contract for a 12 pack of beer and a pack of rothmans - and I am only half joking.

One avenue to pursue to get out of this mess must be on the process that the rules were adjudicated and then enforced. 

Firstly, objections to a player's eligibility usually have to be lodged before the start of the tournament 

Secondly, NZF allegedly unaware of the OFC hearing before the game 

" NZF chief executive Andy Martin said in a statement late on Sunday that the national body had been working with its lawyers throughout the day to challenge the OFC decision, as well as the process followed.Martin said NZF was unaware of the OFC hearing early on Sunday morning, having previously been told Vanuatu's protest would be referred to world governing body FIFA.Representations have been made to OFC, FIFA and the Pacific Games Council, with the support of the New Zealand Olympic Committee and Sport New Zealand" .

http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=209738

The "how representative" question. Unless you have a recruitment strategy based on a 'home-grown' philosophy like Bilbao, or Guadalajara, this line of thinking leads to a dead end, and/or stand-off; particularly for a football country with our unique characteristics. Far better to meet FIFA representation standards to qualify. None are more "worthy" than others.

I love that OFC have hired Mai Chen while NZF persist in using what is essentially a small conveyancing outfit (Shieff Angland). Shieff are the same lawyers who are responsible for the lamentably poor governing rules of NZF which OFC/FIFA have repeatedly ruled do not satisfy FIFA's governance requirements and which have consequently led to a rapid re-structing of NZF's governence over the last 18 months.

They have zero competence in any of this stuff.

You know a lawyer is out of their comfort zone when they start throwing around phrases like "patently incorrect": 

Shelly Eden, solicitor acting for NZF, then said the Vanuatu protest was "patently incorrect, and therefore not suitable to refer to Fifa".

From: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c...

I can't wait to see the movie.

Edit:  don't worry, copy found here

That's because NZF is based in Auckland, and they pose around like only Jaffas do. The time is now right to move NZF elsewhere.