Can't believe the 'Giggs could have played for England' myth still has legs. It was debunked at least 20 years ago!
To be fair, pretty sure he'd been living in England for at least 6 years when he made his debut so by today's rules he would've qualified to play for England, but the rules for qualifying for your national team (and receiving citizenship in general) were stricter in the early 90s. Pretty sure Sterling would not have qualified for England if the rules were the same now as they were back in 1991 either. It was Sven who said it from memory, not the media.
He didn’t qualify for England. He played for England schoolboys because he went to school for a period in England when his dad moved up North to play rugby league when he was 7. Any nationality can play for England schoolboys, the only qualification is you go to school in England. He explains it here: Giggs annoyed by England talk
I get why people get confused though. Sterling is Jamaican with Jamaican parents and grandparents but moved to England when he was 8 but qualifies. Laporte didn't live in Spain til he was about 16 and had no connection but still plays for the national team. I think when people say "he's Welsh but played for England schoolboys because he grew up in England" youre missing why people are confused. Because most people don't think of nationality as just the country you were born anymore and would ask the further question- but if he grew up in England surely he qualifies? The reason he didn't qualify for England is because peoples ideas on citizenship and national identity and immigration have come on a lot over the past 3 decades and were different to what they are today the rules about qualifying for the national team were very different and way harsher 30 years ago when Giggs made his debut for Wales, you basically had to be born in a country or have a parent born in that country (grandparents citizenship didn't even come in til the mid-90s iirc) back then to play for a team. Giggs would qualify for England if he was starting his career today, or even 10 years ago. Whereas someone like Raheem Sterling would only qualify for Jamaica playing in Giggs' day.
I don't think we were missing out on much with Giggs, good player but clearly had zero commitment towards international football. 64 caps over 16 years says it all.
I'm not sure you're right to be honest. I mean you are with regards to residency leading to citizenship, but I'm pretty sure that it's a grandparent rule regarding UK born players. For example, all of my grandparents were English. If I had lived in Wales for 5-6 years, it doesn't mean I could play for Wales. However, had I been French and become a UK citizen due to residency, then I could choose which of the 4 countries of the union I could play for - see Pat Van Den Hauwe - a Belgian who chose to play for Wales in the 80s.
That's how it used to be, but pretty sure it was changed about 10 years ago so the rules were the same within UK nations (as they're not actual countries like nost other FIFA affiliated countries) as any other FIFA country, so a Welsh person who lived in England for 5 years qualifies for England but not Scotland or NI. Or a Jamaican person who lives in England for 5 years only qualifies to play for England and not the other 3 British nations despite earning a British passport. Just as you would if you were French living in Spain for 5 years like Laporte. I remember because there was articles at the time saying that under these rules Giggs could've played for England at 17. Think if you're from the Channel Islands or Isle of Mann like Matt Le Tissier or Greame Le Saux you can still qualify for all 4 UK nations though.
OK and Cardiff would have won the First Division in 1924 if we applied today's goal difference rule. I think the question I tried to answer was whether he could have represented England or not. Not whether the rules are confusing, or have evolved since. I believe the answer is no based on what he said himself at the time.
I see what you mean - it's not just living in a territory for 5 years, it's having at least 5 years of education, under the age of 18, in a specific territory. I don't know how long Ryan Giggs was educated in England, but as Riverside says, it's irrelevant as that rule only came into force in 2010.
That isn't the rule. You can't qualify for another UK nation based on residency, and you can't qualify for any individual nation within the United Kingdom based on residency either. You have to have had five years educations in the country before the age of 18, to qualify for a different UK nation, that isn't the same thing as playing for a country just because you've lived their for five years. The only reason Ryan Giggs would have been eligible for England, would have been down to the education clause that was inserted in 2009, but quite simply Ryan Giggs only had the choice to play for two nations - Wales and Sierre Leonne. We were one game away from being the sole UK representatives in the 1994 World Cup with a team including Southall, Giggs, Speed, Rush, Saunders and Hughes. We were also one game away from reaching Euro 2004 with a team of Speed, Giggs, Simon Davies, Bellamy and Hartson. We certainly had a chance of reaching a major tournament, it's such that both generations failed to get there in big moments.
Tbf he turned up to qualifiers, but I imagine, as it didn't line his pockets, he avoided friendlies like the plague. He was probably the first player I remember doing that.
Ahh fair enough. That must have been the rule that changed in 2009. Didn't realise it was specifically about being in education. Seems the current football rules UK nations have are a bit old fashioned and backwards to me in that case then. If you can move to a country, get married to someone from there and have kids in that country and want to understand a country's history and culture and have an affinity for it, but you can't represent that country at football. I dunno. I'm sure loads will disagree, but I'm not sure excluding people from parts of society like that, especially when you're representing your society in such a way that brings millions together like football does, is how you build a healthy society. But I don't want to kick off that political debate haha.
Yeah, I'm not saying he was committed, he clearly wasn't fully. I just want to move away from the idea that he didn't reach a major tournament because he was Welsh, he didn't reach a major tournament because he was part of sides that failed to be counted for the biggest games and he made zero impact individually in those occasions. It'd be quite a major change though, think of the players who'd have been representing Wales - Leon Britton, Angel Rangel, Wayne Routledge, Garry Monk, Nathan Dyer, Matt Grimes from playing for the Swans alone. I'm not sure that'd have been particularly supported by the general public, as in 2012/13 the Welsh side would have been dominated by English born and bred players from that successful Swans side. I get that there's an argument in certain instances, and I can see how individuals have built up an affinity towards Wales with Welsh wives and children, but there's plenty of room for that to be exploited.
That's true. I guess having Cardiff and Swansea in the English league probably makes it a bit more difficult seeing as it's not like they're engaging with Welsh football culture as much. But take someone like Peter Whittingham for example? I think he genuinely loved Cardiff and had a Welsh wife and settled with his family there and stayed there after he retired. I don't think too many would have a problem with someone like that playing for Wales. I guess really it's about whether the player genuinely wants to represent thar country and the society he represents because he genuinely loves in its culture or values, or whether its just someone who wants to represent someone at international level so they can try and get to tournaments and suchlike which is probably a personal question. I totally get why Ireland fans got pissed off at Declan Rice as it totally looked like he was doing the latter for example.
