Nationality in Sport: Birthplace, Blood or Residence?

Over the past couple of weeks, a storm has brewed up in the sporting world. A storm which threatens the very core of our existence and could lead to the damnation of national identity.

The catalyst for the storm is one Adnan Januzaj, the boy wonder who has burst onto the scene at Manchester United, scoring an emphatic brace against Sunderland. Immediately his face filled the back pages; then a further story emerged. Januzaj, born in Belgium, can potentially play for most of Europe’s national teams – including England.

Somali-born Mo Farah would have been ineligible to represent Team GB at the 2012 Olympics if Jack Wilshere’s comments were taken to their logical conclusion. Photo credits: Jon Connell (via Flickr)

This is because the sport’s governing body FIFA states a player is eligible if “he has lived continuously [in the country] for at least five years after reaching the age of 18.” Currently the teenager has been residing in Blighty for two years; a further three and he can pull on the Three Lions.

But will he wear it with pride? Will his heart bleed England? Surely not. In the wake of this story, Jack Wilshere, England midfielder, tweeted: “If you live in England for five years it doesn’t make you English.” If we follow Wilshere’s theory, only those born in England can play for the national side.

Here we come up against a stumbling block. The assertions of the new FA Chairman, Greg Dyke, that England can win the World Cup in 2022 are based upon the youth talent we currently have. Two names included here are Wilfred Zaha and Raheem Sterling. Zaha was born in the Ivory Coast, Sterling in Jamaica.

Were Wilshere chairman, these players would not be playing for England – thus we could potentially lose valuable resources. Yet they are undeniably more English than Januzaj, having lived here from a younger age. The inclusion of Januzaj would arguably be akin to losing our national heritage.

Once more the path twists and turns though, for what is our national heritage? As a country, England is a melting pot of ethnicity and identity. Our ancestors are probably French for goodness sake! Everywhere you turn, globalisation rears its head. We claim Fish and Chips as our national meal, yet a Lamb Bhuna is equally popular.

Why then can our so called ‘national’ team not represent the reality of everyday life? Look at the dominance of our cricket team. Next month in Brisbane, Kevin Pietersen will make his 100^th test appearance for England, more than such greats of English cricket as Len Hutton, Wally Hammond and Ken Barrington.

Olympic Gold medallist and Tour de France winner Bradley Wiggins was born in Belgium. Photo credits: Brendan Ryan (via Flickr)

He has scored more international runs than any other Englishmen; who can forget his Ashes saving 150 against the Aussies at the Oval in 2005. But wait – was he born in rural Yorkshire or the wilderness of Northumbria? No he was born in South Africa, living there until he was 20!

Were I to move to South Africa on my twentieth birthday, I would still count myself English, love the Queen and whip out my penny farthing to peddle on. Yet when Pietersen retires from the game, he will be remembered as a great ‘English’ player, not somebody who jumped ship from his native country.

Were we to state that only sport stars born in England could play for the national team, then a whole plethora of talent would vanish. This applies to London 2012 heroes Farah, Rutherford and Wiggins; Rugby stars Hartley, Tuilagi and Barrett; Laura Robson, Justin Rose, Chris Froome and most of the England cricket team!

As a result, England would be atrocious at almost everything. Yet maybe this is what we need, for the grass roots of English sport would improve immensely. Suddenly all the emphasis would be on development from a young age, bringing players in through academies, benefiting the national team enormously.

I am however a realist. In a world governed by money, there is no way that authorities, in particular FIFA, would bring this into law. Plus, there would be arguments stating its impeachment on the rights of individuals; who are we to declare your national identity?

Celebrated England cricketer Kevin Pietersen was born in South Africa. Photo credits: Nic Redhead (via Flickr)

However, with the case of Januzaj and others I feel we can declare which country you play for. It is very simple. If you have a parent who is English (or indeed British for some sports), then you have a clear link with the country thus can represent them provided you have resided for at least five years in the country.

If you migrate to a country, as with Pietersen etc. then you must have lived there since the start of primary school. That way, the individual has grown up and been immersed in the culture, society and way of living.

Perhaps this is controversial. Yet if sport, and in particular football, carries on in the same vein, then we may as well have World XI’s, for nationality would merely be a line on a passport – and not what it means to the heart.

Alex Whitington, Sports Team

What do you think? Should national representation in sport be dependent on birthplace or are residence, blood or mere free choice equally valid reasons? Have your say in the below poll.

[poll id=”47″]

Tour of Britain rides through Exeter

Bradley Wiggins, sporting the leader’s jersey. Photo: Niklas Rahmel

The Tour of Britain passed through Exeter on Friday, in the 137km sixth stage won by 21 year old Simon Yates, riding for the Great Britain academy team. Yates raced clear of David Lopez and Martin Elmiger to take victory in the first ever summit finish of the Tour in Haytor.

Home favourite Bradley Wiggins took charge at the front of the peloton in the closing kilometres, after a breakaway had been caught with 5.6km to go, to see off threats from 2013 Tour de France runner-up Nairo Quintana. Wiggins finished safely in seventh place, retaining his overall lead of 32 seconds on Elmiger. Yates joined Wiggins in the podium positions by moving up to third place, 1 minute and 6 seconds behind Wiggins.

Mark Cavendish (in white), the 2011 World Champion. Photo: Niklas Rahmel

The stage started in Sidmouth at a frantic pace, and a five man breakaway group of riders soon formed, comprised of Angel Madrazo, Kristian House, Liam Holohan, Martin Velits and Ian Wilkinson. The group took on the day’s first climb in Exeter, the Category 2 Pennsylvania Road climb, where King of the Mountains points were at stake.

Madrazo tops the King of the Mountain chart and it was no surprise to see him come first on Pennsylvania Road. The riders advanced towards Exeter high street, where an intermediate sprint was to take place. Wilkinson crossed the line ahead of Madrazo, who also leads the Sprint Jersey Classification overall.

Large crowds gathered throughout Exeter, with several primary schools taking their children out to support the British riders. Many University students halted their journey to campus by catching the action on Pennsylvania Road. The cyclists descended the hill at a frightening pace, but it was possible to catch a glimpse of star names including Wiggins and Mark Cavendish.

Matt Bugler, Online Sport Editor

Tour of Britain to come through Exeter

Bradley Wiggins. Photo: Wikipedia Commons

The Tour of Britain will pass through Exeter this Friday the 20th, returning to the city centre after also passing through in 2011. The stage will be the sixth of this year’s tour, and encompasses a large circuit of Devon, starting in Sidmouth and finishing with a King of the Mountains Climb in Dartmoor, the first ever summit finish of the tour.

The stage starts at 11am and the riders are estimated to come through Pennsylvania Road in Exeter at 12.40 before arriving in the high street at 12.44. The Pennsylvania Road section is a Category 2 King of the Mountains section, with points up for grabs for the climbing experts; while the sprinters will jostle for position and points in Exeter high street.

There are expected to be thousands of spectators lining the streets, and with road closures it is advised to travel early to get a good viewing spot. The cycling event is set to boost tourism revenue and improve on last year’s total Devon audience of 220 000.

This popularity reflects the stratospheric raise of interest in cycling across the nation, with the event being broadcast on ITV4 and receiving far more publicity in the wake of recent British success. Last year featured the first British winner, Devon-born Jonathan Tiernan-Locke, while there are plenty of big names around to fuel local interest.

2012 Tour de France winner and multiple Olympic Gold medallist Bradley Wiggins is making his return on the saddle for the first time since May, after a disappointing season hampered by injury and illness. Wiggins stormed into the overall race lead on Tuesday with a trademark display of concentrated power on the time trial stage, and he currently holds a 37 second advantage on compatriot and Team Sky teammate Ian Stannard. Wiggins is expected to be challenged on the hills by Columbian sensation Nairo Quintana, runner-up in this year’s Tour de France.

Spectators lining the high street will also hope to catch a glimpse of Mark Cavendish, the 2011 World Champion who was voted by the French sports newspaper L’Equipe as the greatest sprinter of all time. Cavendish sprinted to victory in stage five and will hope to make an impression on the intermediate sprint through Exeter.

The high-profile names and growth in popularity of cycling in the UK, as seen in the large crowds for the Olympic road race and the RideLondon Event this summer, means that Friday’s stage promises to be an entertaining spectacle not to be missed.

Matt Bugler, Online Sport Editor

Gearing up or slowing down? The perks and pitfalls of cycling in the UK

British cycling successes have motivated even more people to take to their bikes. Picture: tejvanphotos

Despite its recent resurgence in popularity with Wiggins at the vanguard, cycling in the UK still faces many challenges, something that road cyclist and University Cycling Club member Arthur der Weduwen knows all too well.

Cycling is currently experiencing a renaissance in England. Increased environmental and health awareness, coupled with the strains of the global economic crisis, has turned many to the bike – be it for commutes, exercise, or sport. The efforts of British Cycling have also shone through on a professional level. British cyclists are now among the best in the world, from success on the track to success on the road, which culminated in Bradley Wiggins’ Tour de France victory last year. This rise has motivated even more people to take up cycling as an alternative mode of sport and transport, with cycling stores citing greater sales than ever.

However, this renaissance, like any other, shakes the foundations of the old order and creates new problems. Whereas cyclists in England used to be represented by few, they have become a distinct physical presence. This has caused considerable friction on the narrow roads of England, both in urban and rural areas. Subsequently, cyclists are the ones who have lost the wrestle. According to the Times, the year 2012 saw a record number of cyclist deaths in the UK (122). The Guardian has voiced similar concern, stating that accidents involving cyclists have risen sharply over the last five years. These accidents are mainly with cars and around 90% of the accidents are quoted as not being the fault of the cyclist.

On 8 November, Bradley Wiggins was hit by a van on a training ride. The next morning, Shane Sutton, the head coach of British Cycling, was also

Bradley Wiggins: an inspiration to cycling Brits. Picture: robkingcameraman

hit by a car, similarly landing in the hospital. Whereas a ‘regular’ cyclist would not receive much media attention if he/she was hit, Wiggins’ and Sutton’s accidents raised immediate concern. However, next to the voices raising the question of safety and calling for more protection on the roads, others rose up saying the contrary: the blame lay with cycling as an institution and its crazy, lycra-clad adherents. The Guardian quoted one person who stated that “one thing that really annoys me is when cyclists use the road when my hard earned taxes have gone into providing cycle paths”.

Similarly, if you enter the words “cycling” and “hate” together into Google, you will stumble upon Twitter feeds, blogs, and websites dedicated to complaining about and wishing death to cyclists.

Of course, road rage incidents driven by hate remain relatively rare. Most accidents are caused by the state of England’s infrastructure. English roads are narrow, designed purely for two, if not one, cars moving in opposite directions. Because cycling has suddenly surged in attention and popularity, cyclists have flooded the roads, becoming a permanent presence whilst a lot of drivers aren’t used to them. They are simply not looking out for cyclists and have no idea how to drive around, and with them.

In Amsterdam, bikes dominate the streets. Picture: I_am_Allan

The problem of infrastructure has added a constant stream of abuse and frustration to any cyclist’s ride. Whenever I go on a 40-mile club ride with the University cycling team, we get on average three or four drivers almost slamming into us, and many more shouting, swearing, and honking aggressively. As a Dutchman from Amsterdam, a city where bikes dominate the road, this seems ridiculous. It is common that countries which spawn many successful professional cyclists have a respectful attitude towards cyclists on the road. In Spain, cars will wait minutes behind a cyclist going uphill at ten miles per hour, without honking or swearing. In England, they won’t wait a second, even if the country is currently producing some of the best professionals around.

On the other hand, it should be noted that most drivers would never think of doing something hateful towards cyclists. Nor are cyclists angels on the road: they can ride recklessly as well and are a part of the problem. However, in the end, the cyclist is not usually the instigator of accidents, because he/she has no reason to do so. The cyclist is exposed, fragile, and goes fast enough to land in the hospital.

In the end, what does all this say about the future of cycling in England? Olympic and professional success has created a new culture of cycling, but will this culture last? Is it viable to exist in a country which has no infrastructure designed for cycling and no great history of the sport?

It is a dilemma. Cycling will either weather the storm and integrate, or it will die as soon as the professional achievements disappear.

I hope for the former. If England wants to be healthier, more environmentally-friendly, and most of all, safer, then the protection of cyclists through infrastructural reforms is essential. If everyone is praising Bradley Wiggins and going wild for the Olympics, then they should also have more concern for the average cyclist out there. Wiggins too was one of those once.

What is left for the future of cycling in Britain? Picture:tejvanphotos

SPOTY 2012: Wiggins backed by bookies to triumph

The BBC SPOTY trophy – photo credits to Wikimedia Commons

2012 Tour de France victor Bradley Wiggins is the overwhelming favourite to land this weekend’s coveted BBC Sports Personality of the Year award.

With multiple bookmakers offering odds as short as 1/3, Wiggins – who combined his historic Tour win with a fourth career Olympic Gold in the men’s road time trial – is widely expected to follow in the footsteps of fellow cycling star and Team Sky teammate Mark Cavendish and scoop the coveted award in a field dominated by medallists from the London Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Of the other gold medallists in this year’s twelve-strong shortlist for the award, Heptathlon champion Jessica Ennis is the most fancied, with odds of 6/1 to become the first female SPOTY winner since Zara Phillips in 2006. Behind Ennis, many bookies are offering 7/1 for 5,000 and 10,000 metres gold medallist Mo Farah to scoop the prize, with Paralympics stars Ellie Simmonds and David Weir looking like outside bets at around 50/1.

2008 SPOTY winner Chris Hoy meanwhile has been given rather long odds of around 125/1, with Ben Ainslie – the most decorated sailor in Olympic history – looking an even less likely prospect at 200/1. Nicola Adams, who made made history by becoming the first woman to take an Olympic boxing title, and double gold-winning rower Katherine Grainger are both given odds of 250/1, whilst Paralympic cyclist Sarah Storey is considered the least likely recipient of the award with odds of 300/1.

In an ordinary year, the incredible success of Andy Murray, the highlight of which was becoming the first British Grand Slam champion for 76 years at this year’s US Open, would surely merit closer odds than the 12/1 that most bookies are offering; in spite of having also won two Olympic medals, it seems the relatively low profile of tennis within the Olympics has taken its toll on the Scot’s chances. Rory McIlroy, the only candidate in the shortlist not to feature in either the Olympics or Paralympics, is another rank outsider at 100/1 despite becoming the youngest golfer to win two majors since the late Seve Ballesteros this year.

Information provided to Exeposé Online by Prompt Communications reveals a somewhat different picture. In an analysis of nearly 10,000 Facebook and Twitter posts from November 20 to December 13, Weir was the favourite to win with the backing of 36% of social media users, giving the Paralympic wheelchair athlete a five percent advantage over bookies’ favourite Wiggins. Paralympic swimmer Simmonds was third favourite with a reported 20% share of popular support, ahead of Farah on 18%, Grainger on 17%, Murray on 14% and Ennis on 13%.

It is of course the public who will be voting for the winner of the SPOTY award, the recipient of which will be announced on Sunday evening. Who do you think is in with the best chance of scooping honours? Will you be voting for any of the twelve contenders? Are there any athletes absent from the shortlist who you believe warranted inclusion? Leave your answers in the comments box below.

Jamie Klein – additional reporting by Matt Bugler and Lucy Gibson

Armstrong scandal leaves cycling world to pick up the pieces

Photo thanks to Oddne Rasmussen

Lance Armstrong, seven time winner of the Tour de France. No longer will these words be uttered about the man who overcame testicular cancer to win the world’s toughest and most prestigious sporting event.

In the words of the US Anti-Doping Agency, Armstrong was the leader of “the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful” doping program in the history of sport. It is human nature to idealise those who perform better than mere mortals, those who cycle faster, endure longer, who feel no pain. Armstrong was a hero to inspire not just cyclists but action against cancer, with his hugely successful charity Livestrong still receiving support despite the revelations about his career.

It is clear now that Armstrong was no hero on the saddle. Even if he didn’t legally dominate his sport, he was certainly superior to all his rivals when it came to outwitting the doping testers and general public. The problem he faced was that however well he prepared himself against being caught, however much he bribed and threatened people in the know to keep quiet, there were simply too many people involved with guilty consciences for his secret not to come out. This includes Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton, both former members of Armstrong’s US Postal Service Team, who weren’t as elusive as their Texan leader around doping tests and would inevitably reveal the truth behind the operation.

After months of revelations and damming statistics since the news broke forth in August, the most disappointing thing is that Armstrong has still not admitted his guilt. He perpetuated the myth by protesting his innocence throughout his career, yet when the truth was revealed he fell back on these lies which once captured the hearts of a nation. In the height of his success in the early 2000s, how could a minority of journalists question his ability? He had passed over 500 drugs tests and was fully supported within the cycling world.

Faced with allegations for years, Armstrong vilified his opponents, thriving off the adversity as he had done his entire career. Knowing that this myth would eventually be destroyed, his final act was to withdraw from the USADA investigations before they could officially reveal the truth. For a day or so we believed him, he was subjected to an unfair “witch hunt” disrupting the family life of a retired middle-aged man. If this tactical move was shrewd at the time, it is now hurtful and alienating. His refusal to confess leaves the tiniest shred of doubt over his career, which can only torment his loyal believers and render a forgiveness process unattainable.

Furthermore, this proud stance has shifted the emphasis away from Armstrong and onto the current generation of cyclists. Armstrong belonged to a black era of cycling; in the seven Tours he won from 1999 to 2005, only one rider on the podium was not later convicted of doping. The International Cycling Union had no choice but to write off any winners in that period, as a reminder of the corruption that marred the sport.

The problem faced by many teams now is whether to remove all contacts with riders and staff members who had a history of doping or whether to forgive them and move on to make the sport clean. For Dave Brailsford’s Team Sky, anyone with a history of doping must leave the team to preserve its reputation, and three staff members have already left. This zero tolerance approach may ultimately weaken the team that dominated this year’s Tour, and the current generation of clean riders will be made to suffer for their predecessors’ actions.

Perhaps the best method of burying the Armstrong era is to continue the work of the last few years before the allegations re-emerged: to produce successful, clean riders. It is tragic how this scandal broke out just a month after Bradley Wiggins became the first British winner of the Tour, when cycling was bathing in optimism. The dark days of a previous generation do not represent the present, clean cycling world, and Wiggins speaks in his autobiography of the anger he feels at having his own wins questioned: “they’ve trashed the office and left, we’re the ones trying to tidy it all up”. With Armstrong in exile, the only hope for cycling is that the good of the present and future will, in time, purge the evils of the past.

Matt Bugler