Not quite. As I've said many times now, with the rules as they are, he will never be eligible for England, and there has been no indication that the rules will change. Is he even good enough to warrant this discussion, almost three years before he will even qualify for a British passport? This isn't Messi we're talking about. (And you don't agree that Hodgson thinks it's possible? Really?)
Just said on Sky that he is eligible to play for Belgium, Albania, Serbia, Turkey and Kosovo (if the latter gets recognition as a separate footballing nation). He has apparently said he will choose Kosovo if possible. Pretty sure he will choose one of those rather than wait until he has lived here for 5 years on the off chance he would be selected as he has no emotional ties to England.
It's not a rule exactly, it's an agreement between the Home Nations. There will be a process whereby England can "disagree" (for want of a better word) and change things if they want to. Just as they changed their mind about Team GB in the Olympics. The FA have admitted they looked into calling up the likes of Cudicini in the past so it's naive to think they wouldn't change the agreement in the right circumstances. Obviously I agree that Hodgson thinks it's possible. The reason he thinks that is because it IS possible. I disagree that what he said was foolish. I'm arguing against the "Hodgson is embarrassing" point of view, not anything to do with Januzaj. I've never argued that he WILL play for England - a former Belgium under 18 coach says he's turned down Belgium call ups in the past and his father has said he'd turn down Albania as well. Kosovo aren't an option (yet) so who knows what the player wants to do? I've also said that it's silly that one good game generates talk of an England call-up. That's FAR more embarrassing than the nationality stuff.
The fact that the FA have looked into calling up other players in the past (Almunia and Arteta as well, and Rangel for Wales, Novo for Scotland), and none of them have ever come to pass in fact demonstrates how very unlikely it is that this home nations agreement will ever change. It's clearly not in the FA's power to simply wave their hands and do away with it. Furthermore it would create a very undesirable situation where any British player could choose to play for any of the home nations, and that would probably lead to FIFA deciding that separate teams for each of the home nations are untenable. It will never happen.
Can anyone think of a French midfielder that could be good enough to play for England should he qualify?
He played competitive matches for the French U21s so will never be eligible even if mountains were moved to allow foreign players to play for England. Probably wouldn't stop Hodgson talking about calling him up though!
Which is what Hodgson said. It's possible but England wouldn't necessarily do it. It's a side issue but I'm not sure that in that situation any British player would then be able to play for any British team. I think the FIFA regulations use the word "territory" rather than "country" specifically to cover the Home Nations. I guess it could affect people like Almunia, Arteta or Cudicini but even then I'm not sure. I also think the SFA and FAW would be far more concerned about the British thing than the English FA. People said the same sort of things about abolishing separate British teams in regard to Team GB at the Olympics and it didn't stop the English FA organising a team despite the protests of the Welsh and Scottish. Of course by this time next year Scotland may have voted for independence which would simplify things.
I'm not sure how you've interpreted what I said that way. No, it isn't possible, and is very unlikely to ever be possible. The only thing stopping any British player playing for any British nation is this agreement. FIFA eligibility rules operate purely on the basis of citizenship. So if the agreement was ended, that is an inevitable consequence. Indeed the SFA and FAW (and the FIA/FAI, whichever is the Northern Irish one; though it would probably affect both due to their own player-swapping issues) would be more opposed to it than England, but you have to ask yourself whether the English FA would be happy to see the England B team representing Wales for example. I can't imagine they would be.
It's not impossible to end (or change) the agreement. It may not be likely to happen but that doesn't make it impossible.
Basically, we have an unusual arrangement where a single country (the UK) can enter 4 'countries' into competitions. This is basically because it's our game and we invented it dammit and the rest of you lot can lump it! FIFA and EUFA have accepted it with a few minor rumblings. Not in our interest to upset the apple cart.
Few things real quick. From what I've read, believe it was Manutd.com's interview of Adnan Januzaj, he hasn't picked a country he'd want to play for because he wants to cement his place at Man Utd first. His dad advised him to do the same thing when he was at Anderlecht. Someone had earlier mentioned Macheda, on his debut he scored a game winning goal in injury time, or the 89th minute of something against Villa. Scored the very next game to rescue a draw against Sunderland. His biggest issue was his work ethic and mentality. That early goal got to his head I think and he never really pushed himself. From what I've seen from Januzaj that won't be an issue. I agree with most of you that players should have a personal/emotional tie to the country they play for. As an American, I'm not a big fan of our German contingent that play for us because their fathers were American in the military. Most if not all were raised as Germans in Germany. That's not to say I don't support them when they're on the field representing my country, but I don't feel they play with the same amount of pride someone like Landon Donavon does.
It is the emotional tie that is the most important. That is why I have no problem with someone who arrives as a kid, especially as a refugee, who really wants to play for England. I suppose Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have got used to having players who choose them as second best (not all their players obviously) as otherwise they wouldn't raise a team. I admit to a certain amount of hypocrisy though as I have no such problem with cricket....football just feels a special case. I think it's the idea of actively seeking out a player whose reason for selecting England could only be mercenary. P.s. Since Januzaj will not choose to play for us, I am not suggesting that he is mercenary.
Which is where it all gets a bit fuzzy for me. Is living in a country for 5 (or 2, or 3, depending on the nation in question) years less likely to build a meaningful connection than the citizenship of one's parents or grandparents? Pretend that the agreement didn't exist...if Januzaj decided that spending his formative years in England was deeply affecting and he wanted to represent it internationally, would he be less English in character than someone like Owen Hargreaves, who debuted in the national squad without having lived a day in the country? That scenario is playing out at the moment here. There are a number of players who have gained permanent residency while playing for MLS teams, and a handful have expressed interest in representing Canada once they have citizenship. One of them, Gershon Koffie, has suggested that he'd turn down a call-up from Ghana (where he was born and raised until 18) to play for Canada; he has only been here for three years, but has stated that he feels strongly about representing the country because of the support he has received. Some of the others seeking citizenship may feel similarly, or they may simply want to turn out internationally but have little hope of doing so for their countries of birth...or conceivably the Canadian national team is better than that of their country of origin, which is a frightening thought. But there really is no easy means to legislate against those making the move for professional reasons without eliminating those who have developed a strong affinity for a nation to which they moved later in life.
