Jakarta Casual

Indonesian Super League

Persik v Bali United 3-2 (Jose Rodrigues 2, Adrian Retamar; Boris Kopitovic, Joao Silva) 2,772              

Persita v Persija 0-2 (Gustavo, Maxwell) 8,735

Malut United v Bhayangkara 1-2 (David da Silva; Moussa Sidibe, Moises Wolschick) 924

Persis v Persib 0-1 (Andrew Jung) 11,769

Madura United v PSBS 0-0 667

Borneo v PSIM 2-1 (Kaio Ferriera, Koldo Alberdi; Jose Valente) 5,544

Persebaya v Dewa United 1-1 Francisco Davalos; M Rizky) 23,431

Arema v Persijap 1-0 () 1,068

PSM v Semen Padang 0-0 1,035

Persekat v Persikad 0-0 508

Adhyaksa v Sriwijaya 15-0 (Makan Konate 3, Ramiro Fergonzi 3, Adilson Da Silva 6, Miftahul Hamdi 3) 1982

PSMS v Bekasi City 2-1 (Felipe Cadenza 2; Saldi Amiruddin) 1,348

Sumsel United v Garudayaksa 0-0 2,026

Persiraja v PSPS 4-2 (Connor Gillespie 2, Omid Popalzay, Jechson Tiwu; Asir 2) 3,792

Persiku v Persipura 1-2 (Caique Da Silva; Artur Vieira, Gunansar Mandowen) 3,020

PSIS v Kendal Tornado 0-3 (Gufroni, Akbar Firmansyah, Alhaitami) 3,122

Persipal v Persela 1-3 (Riku Ichimura; Herwin Saputa, Titan Agung 2) 

PSS v Barito Putera 0-0 12,967

Persiba v Deltras 1-2 9Takumu Nishihara; Neville Tengeg, Hamzah Rivaldi) 1,107

Lion City Sailors v Balestier Khalsa 5-1

BG Tampines Rovers v Tanjong Pagar 2-1

Hougang United v Young Lions 2-0

# posted by Me @ 7:42 PM 0 comments

The case of the seven footballers who obtained Malaysian citizenship with the apparent use of doctored Grandparental birth certificates – but who are constitutionally recognised as Malaysian citizens by the Malaysian Government – is rapidly reaching it’s (next) conclusion. 

Later this month (February), The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) based in Switzerland are to make a final ruling on their version of eligible citizenship in sporting matters. For now, they have suspended a 12-month ban FIFA imposed on the seven players. 

Immediately after the ban was suspended, many of “the Seven” – including the three who play as Johor Darul Ta’zim, suited up and started plying their trade again – listed as Malaysian on the ASEAN Club Championship line-up list.

It was either remarkable hutzpah from JDT, or an absolute belief that the players have a solid case with which to secure the eligibility of the players to play for club and country. 

The court of public opinion in Malaysia is firmly against “The seven”. But the law isn’t. And that is the crux of this remarkable drama in which I believe that the long-running role of FIFA as (authoritarian) arbiters of citizen eligibility is, at last, being called to issue. 

WHAT IS ELIGIBILITY, ACCORDING TO FIFA?

I have long been confused and perturbed by International football eligibility rules. Surely it should be straight-forward. You’re eligible to play for the country of which you are a citizen. 

If only things were so simple. 

Some Nations allow dual-Nationality; geographical borders are constantly changing and so does, consequently, player citizenship; Refugee status is sometimes made to citizen status; and many nations have (and are) keen to boost their international standing by naturalising players with no blood relationship to their nation of choice/convenience. 

Understandably, FIFA have tried to “solve” the issue. But their attempts to do so have muddied the waters, and they have made, to my mind, authoritarian and illogical decisions to approve who, in their eyes, can become a citizen of a nation. 

There’s a long history to this. As a young student of football, it baffled me to learn that:

• The Great Alfredo di Stefano played International football for Argentina, Colombia and Spain;
• It was only my interest in history and the post-World War II re-alignments that helped me comprehend how the most Magical of the magnificent Magyars, Ferenc Puskas, could later represent Spain,
• And how Barcelona great Laszlo Kabala could play for (as was) Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Spain.

 The imperfections of the football eligibility system remain though so that that:

• Of the Senegal squad that just won AFCON, 15 were born and brought up outside of Senegal, 8 of them in France.
• Of the Philippines women’s team that played in the 2023 Women’s World Cup, 18 of the 23 were born and brought up in the United States.

Five sets of brothers have played for different Nations at the World Cup

• Jerome (Germany) and Kevin-Prince (Ghana) Boateng;
• Inaki (Ghana) and Nico (Spain) Williams;
• Thiago (Spain) and Rafinha (Brazil) Alcantara;
• Christian (Italy) and Massimiliano (Australia) Vieri;
• John (Scotland) and Harry (Australia) Souttar

FIFA have tried to keep up with the changes that have been going on in the world. In 1962, they first got involved with the FIFA Congress ruling that a player could only represent one national team in their lifetime. This "singular football nationality" was tied strictly to citizenship, and “Citizenship” was tied to Parents and Grandparents 

Of course, British peculiarities had a part to play in the confusion – as did other Nations who had colonial empires. Get yourself born in Liverpool (like me) with some Welsh and Irish grandparental blood and, if I was good enough, I’m eligible for England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland. 

Hence, Jack Charlton’s Republic of Ireland team with scouser John Aldridge, Glaswegian Ray Houghton, Welsh-born Kevin Sheedy, Cornish-born Chris Morris and several London-born-and bred players took the Irish to number 6 in the FIFA rankings in 1993. 

In an ever-changing political environment, other nations also took advantage of historic colonial ties to bolster their squads. Of the France “Rainbow Squad’ that won the 1998 World Cup, Patrick Vieira, Marcel Desailly, Lilian Thuram and Christian Karembeu were born and brought up outside of France, but were French citizens. 

And compare the German team that won the 1990 World Cup with a squad of players born within the confines of West Germany, to the one that lost the 2002 Final in Japan 12-years later that included 10 players born outside of the “old” West Germany” with seven hailing from the former GDR. 

FIFA interjected again in 2004 when, in response to nations naturalising players with no ties, they required a "clear connection" so that “the player, a parent, or a grandparent must be born in the territory, or the player must have lived there for 2 years.” 

I note that this is FIFA, not the Governments of the affected nations, deciding who is, or isn’t, eligible for citizenship. 

Locally, Singapore took advantage of the 2-year ruling (and their own Foreign-Talent Scheme) and naturalised the likes of Agu Casmir, Itimi Dickson and Daniel Bennett to help them win the 2004 Tiger Cup; Mustafic Fahrudin, Shi Jiayi and Precious Emujuraie, John Wilkinson, Qiu Li and record-breaker Aleksandar Duric were later ‘naturalised’ and helped Singapore win 3 more ASEAN Cups up until 2012. 

FIFA increased the residency “rule” in 2008 from 2 years to 5 years. But also allowed for young players to switch national allegiance before they had played a senior competitive match. 

And then this received another “upgrade’ in 2021 when the 70th FIFA Congress allows players to switch if they earned no more than three senior caps before age 21, provided those appearances were not in a World Cup or continental final. 

FIFA’s current ruling as per Article 7: is that:

“Any player who (wants to) assume a new nationality and who has not played international football [in a match (either in full or in part) in an official competition of any category or any type of football] 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.

HAVE FIFA OVERSTEPPED THEIR JURISDICTION?

FIFA have, with the best of motives, restricted or interfered in a State Government's ability to grant citizenship. That, I would argue, is not their role. 

The revelation (as unearthed by FIFA) of the falsified documents may yet mean that “The Seven” players’ citizenship is ultimately revoked, and may also result in a change in the process of granting citizenship in Malaysia. But as it stands, “the seven” are all legitimate Malaysian citizens. 

And the emergence of the falsified documents itself is a strange one. How did FIFA access the “real” documents? Aren’t there privacy laws that should restrict “strangers” from accessing personal documentation? 

THE FALL-OUT

The fall-out has been spectacular. Suspicions raised when “the seven” were unearthed (at different times, but all available for a 4-0 mauling of Vietnam in an Asia Cup Qualification match); many journalists request for “transparency” seemingly ignored; a mysterious complaint followed by a FIFA ban for “the seven” and fine for the Football of Association of Malysia (FAM), followed by their detailed revelations for the ban; the suspension of the FAM General Secretary and now the resignation of the whole FAM Executive Board. 

And now the “stay of execution” from CAS regarding the ban; the instant selection of the players by JDT and now we await the final CAS verdict. 

If only the laws on player eligibility were simple. 

FIFA have seemingly complicated something that "should" be relatively straightforward. If the rule was eligibility only for citizens, as approved by a Government approval process, and not some spurious and changing FIFA “5-year” rule can play for a country. 

I understand why the CAS issued a “stay of execution”. It’s a test of the strength of FIFA versus the law of Malaysia. I suspect this may have a verdict not too many are expecting. 

This has been a confrontation waiting to happen (and not only in football, but in other sports as well).

GUEST ARTICLE - Dez Corkhill

# posted by Me @ 6:59 PM 0 comments