Should immigrant Britons be banned from representing GB in all sports?

[sp1814]

Someone recently asserted on AB that rather than hold athletes in high esteem who win for 'Team GB' but were born abroad, we should have them banned from representing Great Britain in all sporting events.

Is this a popularly held belief? In the US, you can only be elected President if you were born in America - should we introduce a similar ban on athletes, footballers, cricketers etc?

Or is this just the product of a particularly virulent form of right wing prejudice?

[Buenchico]

Well you've just ruined the England cricket squad, for a start:
Andrew Strauss (South Africa), Matt Prior (South Africa), Kevin Pietersen (South Africa), Craig Kieswetter (South Africa) and Eoin Morgan (Ireland) would all have to go!

There was a time when Yorkshire CC wouldn't accept any players who weren't born within the county but they eventually worked out that excluding people like Michael Vaughan (who, through attending school in Sheffield, had played for Sheffield Schools, South Yorkshire Schools and Yorkshire Schools) would be an act of folly. It would be equally ridiculous to exclude national team players who, through residential qualification, became able to represent the country where they now lived.

[jno]

certainly not (an immigrant writes). From a purely sporting point of view, the Aussies do hold state-of-origin football matches, which is a curious idea but quite popular. And they do try to select Australian-born players for national teams... except when better ones crop up, which is why they have a Pakistani in their cricket team and Pacific islanders in their rugby team.

But yes, it's next to suggesting foreigners shouldn't be allowed to work at all... which is next to suggesting they shouldn't be allowed in the country at all...

I wonder what country this person's own ancestors came from? Rome? Denmark? Germany?

[Answerprancer]

No.
"Or is this just the product of a particularly virulent form of right wing prejudice?"
It looks like it.

[boxtops]

What a dreadful idea - how far back do you go to establish immigration status? You can come to this country as an adult and become a British citizen, although not born abroad. My grandpa came from Ireland - guess that rules me out, then.

[emmie]

seeing how there are so many foreign players in the football premier league, wouldn't that rather decimate it. They may not represent Britain, as in Mo Farah, but certainly play for English clubs.

[Gromit]

// athletes ... born abroad should [ be ] banned from representing Great Britain in all sporting events. //

I did not see this suggested recently. Do you have a link so I can see the context? Was it suggested about a successful foreign born black athlete or was it in connection with England cheating at cricket by using foreign born white people?

If we are to discriminate then it would seem obvious to just ban the black ones because unless they speak, they white ones easily pass as being British.

[sp1814]

Gromit

Yes - it was suggested on the thread relating to Mo Farah yesterday:

joeluke
"Born in Somalia so why is he running for GB?"

20:14 Mon 05th Sep 2011

[sp1814]

That was prompted by me asking,

'Who else should be disallowed for competing for team GB?'

The answer given was:

"How about anyone else not born in GB

......and that also goes for footballers, cricketers etc"

[jake-the-peg]

So what's the criteria?

and what about football managers?

[mightyWBA]

It bothers me more that people keep calling our athletes "Team GB"

Stop it!

[mightyWBA]

Plus the fact plenty of other countries have people born elsewhere competing for them.
Another case of us beating ourselves up because one of our athletes born elsewhere has won something.
Mo is representing Great Britain and Northern Ireland because he wants to..That's all that matters.

[sp1814]

JTP

I suppose some people feel that you should only be allowed to represent Great Britain (mightyWBA -I concur with your feelings on 'Team GB' and shall not use the phrase again), if you're born here.

I think that's a mad idea....just wondered if it's a minority opinion. Seems it is.

Re: football managers...whoever can help bring home the silverwear gets my vote - if I cared about football...which I honestly don't.

[jno]

Chris missed out Jade Dernbach, who will probably be playing today, weather permitting.

In fairness, many cricket fans fret about the number of South Africans in the team. Not about the morality of it, just wondering why a country the size of England (& Wales) can't produce 11 good cricketers on its own.

There are different sorts of Saffers: some were born to Englishmen abroad and came back here as children (Strauss and Prior), others are professional cricketers who came to England as adults and have stayed. Some qualify through English parents (eg Pietersen), others through residence.

I am not sure joeluke is thinking of such people when he complains about foreigners, though.

[ichkeria]

"In the US, you can only be elected President if you were born in America - should we introduce a similar ban on athletes, footballers, cricketers etc? "

What has America's rule about Presidents got to do with it?

Anyway, the US of A is plainly less particular about its sporting representatives than about its presidents, as the runner-up to Mo Farah in the 5,000 was Kenyan Bernard Lagat, who I don't believe came to the USA as a refugee at the age of 8.

There is a difference between athletes who happen to have been born abroad and have long since emigrated and those who are "signed up" for convenience by a country, as Qatar notably started doing a few years ago with African runners.
Then these is the issue of that do you do about people who change nationality for genuine life reasons?

[Old_Geezer]

It not a case of banning, it a case of not allowing. The default is that you represent your country not any country you happen to like the look of, and who are happy to employ you are their representative. The question has not been put in a neutral fashion.

But I guess the comment on "virulent predudice" confirms this thread isn't a serious attempt at the question anyway.

[Old_Geezer]

And why all the supplementary questions to which the answer is obvious ? Yes if you are to represent YOUR country then it should apply to all sport, and managers not just athletics. Otherwise you are clearly not representing your country at all. And preferably the local football teams should be made up of local players and run by local managers. And the same logic applied to all sports.

[ichkeria]

"It not a case of banning, it a case of not allowing."

Not sure I see the difference(!) If you don't allow something it you are effectively banning it. It is a complicated issue: many people might be unhappy about Kevin Pieterson playing for England, but (I hope) few if any would mind Mo Farah running for Britain, for example

[sp1814]

Old_Geezer

What's the difference between 'banning' and 'not allowing'?

Don't they amount to the same thing?

[Old_Geezer]

The difference is in what is defined as the norm. If you ban something then the norm is to allow it and you are imposing a restriction. If, on the other hand you allow something then the norm is that it isn't normally allowed and you are giving a concession.

Whether folk mind, and whether it is right, are different issues. Some folk may opt not to care or realise the futility of hitting one's head against a wall trying to put things 'right'. So they opt not to stress themselves out and make a deliberate decision not to mind. But this thread explicitly asks for opinions on folk apparently representing their country when they are not doing any such thing; so the topic is discussed anyway.

[sp1814]

ichkeria

The rules governing who can and cannot be eligible for the US Presidency has nothing to do with whether one can represent Great Britain in sporting events - it's a device used as a comparison. That's all.