Growth of Indian football stunted by government interference in player eligibility
The eligibility of sports people born in one country to represent another country or national team has been a contentious issue across the vast majority of sports for time immemorial. In modern times this has perhaps been most notable in cricket and rugby union.
To continue reading or watching login or register here
Already a member? Sign in
Get access to all of the expert analysis and commentary at LawInSport including articles, webinars, conference videos and podcast transcripts. Find out more here.
Related Articles
- Contractual relations in the NFL, Premier League & MLS: a comparison – Part 1
- Contractual relations in the NFL, Premier League & MLS: a comparison – Part 2
- Czech court confirms that footballers can be engaged as contractors or employees
- The rights ‘revolution’ for pro sports stars in Japan – Part 1
- The enforceability of pre-contracts in football
Written by
Kevin Carpenter
Kevin is a advisor and member of the editorial board for LawInSport, having previously acted as editor. In his day-to-day work he has two roles: as the Principal for his own consultancy business Captivate Legal & Sports Solutions, and Special Counsel for Sports Integrity at leading global sports technology and data company Genius Sports.
Mediating Football Disputes: The New FIFA Mediation Guidelines
James Kitching
(short version posted to Twitter)
Sorry Kevin, your interpretation is incorrect.
Article 6 of the FIFA Regulations Governing the Application of Statutes only applies to those who hold a passport which entitles them to play for more than one football 'nation' - eg a British passport entitling a player to play for the four 'home nations' and some Caribbean nations, or an American passport entitling a player to play for the USA, Guam, Puerto Rico (etc).
The correct Article you want is Article 7, if a player is not entitled to a passport at birth. If they are, then Article 5 is applicable.
Furthermore, you seem to have overlooked the residency requirements (2 years for Article 6, 5 years for Article 7) and the 'change of nationality' requirements (Article 8), which are strictly enforced by FIFA and the Confederations (especially for senior level players). Without knowing the full facts, Chopra may not even be eligible to switch to India having played for England youth teams at official tournaments, given their passport laws and when one 'acquires' Indian nationality.
reply
James Kitching
sorry, re-read article and saw you mention Chopra has Indian parentage. regardless, you want either Article 5 (dual national at birth) or Article 7 (acquire nationality).
reply
Kevin Carpenter
Hi James
Thanks for your comments clarifying the interplay between different Articles within Regulation 3, it is now very clear (unlike the Regulations themselves).
I was using Chopra as a generic example but there are instances of other players who satisfy FIFA's criteria to play for India, including residency, and have been wrongly denied the right to play.
reply