NationStates Jolt Archive

Fiji will be playing New Zealand in NZ for the football World Cup qualifiers. New Zealand has refused to grant a visa to the Fiji team's main goalkeeper:


The goalie for Fiji's national soccer team has been barred from entering New Zealand to play in a World Cup qualifier because of family links to his country's military.

New Zealand introduced travel bans on members of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) and their families following a coup in the Pacific nation last December.

A spokesman for New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters on Wednesday confirmed Fiji goalkeeper Simione Tamanisau was barred from entering New Zealand to play against the All Whites on Saturday because of the sanctions.

The match is a must-win if either side hopes to qualify for the 2010 FIFA World Cup, and will decide the Oceania Football Confederation Nations Cup.

Tamanisau has a father-in-law who is in the Fiji military.

[...] Fiji Football Association president Dr Sahu Khan told AAP the New Zealand decision was "grossly unfair" and his team would be play under protest.

"We are playing two teams now. The New Zealand soccer team and the New Zealand government," he said.

He said the NZ decision was compounded by the fact Fiji's number two goalkeeper was unable to play because he had been given a red card during a domestic match.

[...] "This is not a small game. It is for the World Cup and for the Confederation Cup for 2009 and 2010," he said.

Khan said he understood NZ banning a team physiotherapist who was also part of the army medical corps, but the military's link to Tamanisau was too slight to warrant his ban.


(link (http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=304299))

Thoughts? Is it justifiable for politics to disrupt a sport competition in this way?

This is a genius idea on the part of NZ. Don't give their strikers a visa either, then you're basically sorted.

They are following their laws. I sincerely doubt their sport played any part in the banning.

They are merely being consistent with their policy on not issuing visa's to those involved in the Fiji coup which the government doesn't recognise as legit.

They are merely being consistent with their policy on not issuing visa's to those involved in the Fiji coup which the government doesn't recognise as legit.

The point is, though, that NZ has an obligation to host the match, and basic principles of fair play would suggest that you don't ban your opponents' goalkeeper from taking part in a match that your side absolutely needs to win.

Especially when it's simply that Tamanisau's father-in-law is in the military. It's not as if Tamanisau himself played any part in the coup.

I hate any Pinochet style military Dictatorships, Juntas, etc.

but I would give the 3 points to Fiji.

Bar be it from me to agree with OD on something but in this case...NZ should be forced to forfeit this match and award all points to Fiji. This is abominable. Those of you supporting this barring are stupid for he himself was not involved in the coup right?

Shame on you NZ for putting politics above sports. I hope your team fails in the World Cup qualifying games. You do not deserve to be in it because of this stunt.

The point is, though, that NZ has an obligation to host the match, and basic principles of fair play would suggest that you don't ban your opponents' goalkeeper from taking part in a match that your side absolutely needs to win.

Especially when it's simply that Tamanisau's father-in-law is in the military. It's not as if Tamanisau himself played any part in the coup.

EXACTLY!!!

Especially when it's simply that Tamanisau's father-in-law is in the military. It's not as if Tamanisau himself played any part in the coup.We don't even know how important this father-in-law is. I think the coach is right, the link is far too tenuous.

Were he a General to something, then perhaps you could expect some nepotism to going on, but otherwise...

We don't even know how important this father-in-law is. I think the coach is right, the link is far too tenuous.

Were he a General to something, then perhaps you could expect some nepotism to going on, but otherwise...

But otherwise this goalie should be playing soccer in NZ and not watching at home when he has not done anything wrong.

We don't even know how important this father-in-law is. I think the coach is right, the link is far too tenuous.in my book® it doesn really matter how tenuous the link is.

He is the best goalie in Fiji. Period.
(Like I said I am for the Death penalty of Pinochet, Batista, Marcos, and all the other Bloody Military Junta men.. but this has nothing to do with a football game)

in my book® it doesn really matter how tenuous the link is.

He is the best goalie in Fiji. Period.
(Like I said I am for the Death penalty of Pinochet, Batista, Marcos, and all the other Bloody Military Junta men.. but this has nothing to do with a football game)Family members are often used by military regimes to act as informal extensions of the government. This usually includes securing shady foreign arms deals. Therefore there is a real reason for blocking family members of the Junta's personnel from entering the country. But from what I can garner, not in this case.

I'm forced to agree with Corny. The world is ending! :eek:

The goalie isn't directly involved with the military and unless NZ can come up with proof that he is/was, the barring is a farce against the rules of fair play.

I'm sure if they dug around enough, they could probably find some cousin a thousand times removed in the Fiji military who's related to New Zealand's prime minister.

I'm forced to agree with Corny. The world is ending! :eek:

AHHH!!!! *Builds underground bunker to withstand cataclismic earthquakes*

The goalie isn't directly involved with the military and unless NZ can come up with proof that he is/was, the barring is a farce against the rules of fair play.

hear Hear.

I'm sure if they dug around enough, they could probably find some cousin a thousand times removed in the Fiji military who's related to New Zealand's prime minister.

Now that would be funny.

The goalie isn't directly involved with the military and unless NZ can come up with proof that he is/was, the barring is a farce against the rules of fair play.

I'm sure if they dug around enough, they could probably find some cousin a thousand times removed in the Fiji military who's related to New Zealand's prime minister.Family members are often used by military regimes to act as informal extensions of the government. This usually includes securing shady foreign arms deals. Therefore there is a real reason for blocking family members of the Junta's personnel from entering the country.NZ can block anyone from entering their country, anytime they want. with or without reason.

But if they want to block a football player coming for a qualifier game, then -in my book- they automatically forfeit the 3 points.

BTW, I do think NZ going to issue the visa, all this bullshit could be about trying to play mind games, trying to put some stress on the Goalie, distract the Fiji team and give the peoples in the stadium reasons to scream names at the Goalie.

But its not going to work because.. Australia is going to win the group anyways. :D

Nobody would care in the slightest if he wasn't a good soccer player.

I hate any Pinochet style military Dictatorships, Juntas, etc.


Bainimarama really isn't Pinochet or Than Shwe.


but I would give the 3 points to Fiji.


Indeed. If NZ wants to prevent a fair match, NZ should be willing to forfeit.


But its not going to work because.. Australia is going to win the group anyways. :D

Can't. ;) Australia is no longer in Oceania. They've moved to Asia.

Latest news on this topic:

A livid Fijian football chief plans to take New Zealand's refusal to allow his side's goalkeeper into the country to the international Court of Arbitration for Sport.

[...] "I am sure they [the court] will nullify the game because this situation is grossly unfair," said Fiji Football Association president Dr Sahu Khan.

[...] Oceania Football Confederation general secretary Tai Nicholas said he had been surprised the goalkeeper's visa had been declined, especially as he was coming to compete in a World Cup game.

"We think that the decision for him to be refused a visa on the grounds that the father-in-law is in the Army is perhaps going a bit too far, because then how far do you go before you stop determining what is a relative in the Army?"

Mr Nicholas did not know if Fifa could take any action against New Zealand Football over Fiji being denied the right to field their strongest team.

"We would prefer that the New Zealand Government would allow him to come and not allow this unfortunate situation where politics has become involved with the game of football."


(link (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10469184))

Can't. ;) Australia is no longer in Oceania. They've moved to Asia.OHHH

Now this visa bullshit starts making sense.

I say Fiji should retaliate by arresting the best 5 players of NZ -just before the return game-.. on illegal substances charges.

GO FIJI !!!

Bainimarama really isn't Pinochet or ...irrelevant, I dont care if the Goalie is the second coming of GenghisKhan, all the political bullshit has to be settled on a War crimes court, not on the Football field.

He is the best Goalie in Fiji. Period.

Before I decide I think it's important to know how high the father-in-law was in the coup.

Sports court of Arbitration? Good move Fiji.

If it's their law, it's their law. I'm sure they didn't pass it in anticipation of this, and making an exception would be unfair.

Anyway, the principle is well established. (Rightly so, South Africa and all that).

Secondly, world cup.... Fiji..... New Zealand? Who cares. Neither country should get a place and the slot should go to a more deserving nation from a more competitive area that didn't qualify, like Scotland. Face it, neither of those two are going to amount to anything more than easy matches for their group. So it's all kind of pointless anyway.

Secondly, world cup.... Fiji..... New Zealand? Who cares. Neither country should get a place and the slot should go to a more deserving nation from a more competitive area that didn't qualify, like Scotland. Face it, neither of those two are going to amount to anything more than easy matches for their group. So it's all kind of pointless anyway.
I disagree. It's a World Cup, so everyone should get a chance at qualification. As for Scotland, well, the draw for the qualification groups hasn't been made yet, but our recent form should mean that we get a better seeding than in recent years so we should have a slightly easier group than is usual (and if we can't qualify from it, then we shouldn't be there. Period).

I think this could be solved if the match was played at a neutral venue... yes, it IS a disgrace!

What other shitty excuses can we make up to let people walk around laws? Not that it matters, NZ will win no competition. With Australia gone from Oceania there is no team thats of any quality in the region. Regardless, when New Zealand wins the group, they have to play the 5th placed South American, take a guess why Australia has only qualified twice.....

FIFA rules specifically ban government intervention on the matters of the respective football association.

Failing to do so can and will lead to a ban from international football.

See for example this:

http://sport.monstersandcritics.com/soccer/article_1177933.php/Greek_Football_Federation_attacks_government_for_FIFA_ban

According to the news report on TV right now, FIFA have accepted the decision of the government and the match will go on as scheduled. It may still effect NZ hosting the U17 women's world cup next here though apparently. I doubt the NZ government thought very hard when they decided to deny him a visa. No one here gives a shit about soccer, we're still trying to work out how to get anywhere in the Rugby world cup.

irrelevant, I dont care if the Goalie is the second coming of GenghisKhan, all the political bullshit has to be settled on a War crimes court, not on the Football field.

He is the best Goalie in Fiji. Period.

I agree. I wasn't disagreeing with you on that, I was responding to your apparent implication that Bainimarama can be compared to Pinochet or Than Shwe.

Click Stand;13124514']Before I decide I think it's important to know how high the father-in-law was in the coup.

One article says he's a "military policeman". NZ's policy is a total ban on all military personnel (whatever their rank), and their relatives.

If it's their law, it's their law. I'm sure they didn't pass it in anticipation of this, and making an exception would be unfair.


Nobody is saying NZ hasn't got the right to decide who enters the country. But if they want to ban their opponents' best goalie, they should be willing to either

a) ask for the match to be moved to a neutral venue, or
b) forfeit the match and hand 3 points over to Fiji.

To host the match while preventing one of the other team's key players from participating is blatantly unsportsmanlike and contravenes all the rules of fair play.


Anyway, the principle is well established. (Rightly so, South Africa and all that).

No, when it came to apartheid South Africa they would simply refuse to play. They didn't say: "We'll play you, but we won't let one of your best players take part."

Comparing Bainimarama's military government to apartheid South Africa is particularly ironic, since Bainimarama justified his coup on the grounds of putting an end to policies of racial discrimination in Fiji.


Secondly, world cup.... Fiji..... New Zealand? Who cares.


Fijians, New Zealanders and the rest of Oceania, at the very least. As well as anyone in the world who's concerned about fair play being upheld.

FIFA rules specifically ban government intervention on the matters of the respective football association.

Failing to do so can and will lead to a ban from international football.

See for example this:

http://sport.monstersandcritics.com/soccer/article_1177933.php/Greek_Football_Federation_attacks_government_for_FIFA_ban

Ah yes, I'd forgotten Greece's suspension. It seems Fiji is trying to get something done about it, anyway.

According to the news report on TV right now, FIFA have accepted the decision of the government

I have a nasty feeling that if it had been the other way round, FIFA would have come down hard on Fiji...

FIFA rules specifically ban government intervention on the matters of the respective football association.

Failing to do so can and will lead to a ban from international football.

See for example this:

http://sport.monstersandcritics.com/soccer/article_1177933.php/Greek_Football_Federation_attacks_government_for_FIFA_ban

According to the news report on TV right now, FIFA have accepted the decision of the government and the match will go on as scheduled. It may still effect NZ hosting the U17 women's world cup next here though apparently. I doubt the NZ government thought very hard when they decided to deny him a visa. No one here gives a shit about soccer, we're still trying to work out how to get anywhere in the Rugby world cup.

Is it just me or is this contradictory? They have a rule banning government intervention but when government intervenes, they say its ok?

FIFA ftl.

We're adults now, I think protesting against an illegal military coup is slightly more important than a game of football, I don't see what the fuss is all about

(assuming of course, that the goalkeeper is being treated like anyone else with the same connections)

We're adults now, I think protesting against an illegal military coup is slightly more important than a game of football, I don't see what the fuss is all about

(assuming of course, that the goalkeeper is being treated like anyone else with the same connections)

Protesting is cool but when one Goal keeper cannot go and another is barred from entering because they fool has a Father-in-law in the military, that's just flat at stupid.

We're adults now, I think protesting against an illegal military coup is slightly more important than a game of football, I don't see what the fuss is all about

(assuming of course, that the goalkeeper is being treated like anyone else with the same connections)

Well then, I suppose when America sends its teams to Beijing for the Olympics, I suppose they could also ban the entire team from showing up because of America's illegal war.

You start banning sports people for participating because of who their in-laws are (the ban doesn't count what you or whoever you're affiliated with have done, just who they're linked to), you might as well ban them for any reason you can dream up.

You start banning sports people for participating because of who their in-laws are (the ban doesn't count what you or whoever you're affiliated with have done, just who they're linked to), you might as well ban them for any reason you can dream up.

Protesting is cool but when one Goal keeper cannot go and another is barred from entering because they fool has a Father-in-law in the military, that's just flat at stupid.

Surely the problem here then, is the practise of banning anyone from the country for those sorts of reasons? (again, assuming that this goalkeeper isn't getting any "special treatment")

Surely the problem here then, is the practise of banning anyone from the country for those sorts of reasons? (again, assuming that this goalkeeper isn't getting any "special treatment")

Let me put it to you this way.

The goalkeeper is not related to the father-in-law except by marriage. Now if they stopped his wife from entering...

Let me put it to you this way.

The goalkeeper is not related to the father-in-law except by marriage. Now if they stopped his wife from entering...

Well, if they would have let him in if he wasn't a goalkeeper, then clearly this isn't right. But we don't know what New Zealand's policy on visitors from Fiji is though, do we? I mean, if this is just standard procedure, then complain about the standard procedure.

Well, if they would have let him in if he wasn't a goalkeeper, then clearly this isn't right. But we don't know what New Zealand's policy on visitors from Fiji is though, do we? I mean, if this is just standard procedure, then complain about the standard procedure.

Fiji is to the Sports Arbitration Court. This is highly illegal and violates FIFA rules.

Well, to be fair he was directly connected to a high ranking official in the racist military junta that shattered democracy in what was evidently an unpopular coup.

Protesting is cool but when one Goal keeper cannot go and another is barred from entering because they fool has a Father-in-law in the military, that's just flat at stupid.

No, that is international pressure. It's just a little reminder card that NZ doesn't like you.

Is it just me or is this contradictory? They have a rule banning government intervention but when government intervenes, they say its ok?

FIFA ftl.FIFA is a corrupted mafia, I wish their private jets get hit by a South Korean missile "by mistake".

Well then, I suppose when America sends its teams to Beijing for the Olympics, I suppose they could also ban the entire team from showing up because of America's illegal war.

You start banning sports people for participating because of who their in-laws are (the ban doesn't count what you or whoever you're affiliated with have done, just who they're linked to), you might as well ban them for any reason you can dream up.He married into the military aristocracy of an internationally deplored racist coup leadership. Plus, they are from Fiji, and nobody cares about Fiji. Not even Fijians.

Fiji is to the Sports Arbitration Court. This is highly illegal and violates FIFA rules.FIFA viceroys are violating the rules -of sportsmanship- all the time, they are just too powerful to have someone stand up to them.

Let me put it to you this way.

The goalkeeper is not related to the father-in-law except by marriage. Now if they stopped his wife from entering...

NZ has a very clear and pre-existing law which bans the provision of visa to those connected with the illegitimate regime of Fiji. This man who happens to be coming to NZ for a game of soccer meets the criteria of said law. He is refused a visa. This is a legitimate and straight-forward application of this law, which is entirely seperate to the insignificant game of soccer. FIFA has allowed it because the law was obviously not put in place to prevent said goalie from coming, but rather this was a consequence. FIFA did so because it understands and accepts that they have no place in telling governments which laws they may and may not have.

1- Well, the New Zealand players may well be innocent in this. They hold no sway with their government that we know of.

2- That said, it would show sportsmanship if they played with their third goalie or something.

3- The Fiji football association should file (and is filing) a complaint with FIFA and the international court of sports.

4- All of which matters somewhat little, as, even if the entirety of Oceania sans Australia formed a selection, they'd be no match even for a medium team like Japan (albeit by little, as the team seldom seems to win OR to lose by more than 2 goals, no matter the opponent).

5- It IS, however, unfair, and, if the game goes on this way, it should be annulled.

NZ has a very clear and pre-existing law which bans the provision of visa to those connected with the illegitimate regime of Fiji.

I just stopped reading right here. What has he done to precipitate this? All he did was marry a girl whom he loves. That is all. he should not be banned from playing in New Zealand. He himself has done absolutely nothing wrong.

Well, to be fair he was directly connected to a high ranking official in the racist military junta that shattered democracy in what was evidently an unpopular coup.

Eh... Racist military junta?? I think you've got your facts upside down. Seriously. Qarase, the elected Prime Minister who was deposed in the coup, has often been accused of being a racist. Heck, he barely denies it. To my knowledge, nobody has ever accused Bainimarama, the head of the military, the man who overthrew Qarase, of being a racist. Quite the reverse.

Bainimarama has always justified his coup by saying that Qarase was a racist (and a corrupt one at that).

I think you've got it the wrong way round. If you think Bainimarama is a racist, then whom is he a racist against? Indo-Fijians? He's repealing Qarase's discriminatory legislation against them! Indigenous Fijians? He's one himself!

NZ has a very clear and pre-existing law which bans the provision of visa to those connected with the illegitimate regime of Fiji. This man who happens to be coming to NZ for a game of soccer meets the criteria of said law. He is refused a visa. This is a legitimate and straight-forward application of this law, which is entirely seperate to the insignificant game of soccer.

That's not being disputed. But if New Zealnd is going to prevent Fiji's best goalkeeper from participating in the match in New Zealand, then NZ should either ask for it to be held at a neutral venue, or should forfeit the match in favour of Fiji. To hold the match in NZ under this conditions makes a mockery of the rules of fair play.

I just stopped reading right here. What has he done to precipitate this? All he did was marry a girl whom he loves. That is all. he should not be banned from playing in New Zealand. He himself has done absolutely nothing wrong.

Indeed. The policy is ridiculous.

And even leaving that aside, if New Zealand will not let him in (as NZ has the right to bar people from entry, even for ridiculous reasons), then NZ should not host the match.

Indeed. The policy is ridiculous.

And even leaving that aside, if New Zealand will not let him in (as NZ has the right to bar people from entry, even for ridiculous reasons), then NZ should not host the match.

I agree 100%

I just stopped reading right here. What has he done to precipitate this? All he did was marry a girl whom he loves. That is all. he should not be banned from playing in New Zealand. He himself has done absolutely nothing wrong.
He wasn't banned for marrying into the coup. He isn't even 'banned' per se. NZ doesn't give a fuck about this guy in particular. His particulars are such that it prevents him from being awarded a NZ visa. Immigration law sucks, thats life. He meets the criteria to be refused. If I married his wife, I would too.

Woah. Woah, woah, woah.












There was a coup in Fiji?

Eh... Racist military junta?? I think you've got your facts upside down. Seriously. Qarase, the elected Prime Minister who was deposed in the coup, has often been accused of being a racist. Heck, he barely denies it. To my knowledge, nobody has ever accused Bainimarama, the head of the military, the man who overthrew Qarase, of being a racist. Quite the reverse.

Bainimarama has always justified his coup by saying that Qarase was a racist (and a corrupt one at that).

I think you've got it the wrong way round. If you think Bainimarama is a racist, then whom is he a racist against? Indo-Fijians? He's repealing Qarase's discriminatory legislation against them! Indigenous Fijians? He's one himself! Sorry, I was thinking of the 2000 coup, the one where the indofijian Pm was ousted. Nevertheless, the point wasn't hinged on Bainimarama being a racist, so much as the leader of a military coup.

That's not being disputed. But if New Zealnd is going to prevent Fiji's best goalkeeper from participating in the match in New Zealand, then NZ should either ask for it to be held at a neutral venue, or should forfeit the match in favour of Fiji. To hold the match in NZ under this conditions makes a mockery of the rules of fair play.I don't think NZ controls where the match is to be held. I agree though, FIFA should take the initiative and relocate all fijian games out of NZ, to countries without legislation banning coup-related individuals from holding visas.

Woah. Woah, woah, woah.












There was a coup in Fiji?
2, actually, in recent times.

He wasn't banned for marrying into the coup. He isn't even 'banned' per se. NZ doesn't give a fuck about this guy in particular. His particulars are such that it prevents him from being awarded a NZ visa. Immigration law sucks, thats life. He meets the criteria to be refused. If I married his wife, I would too.

He does? WOW!! He's done nothing and yet he's barred. NZ can kiss my fat white ass.

2, actually, in recent times.

Well damn. Damn indeed. Shows how much the world cares about Fiji.

I think you've got it the wrong way round. If you think Bainimarama is a racist, then whom is he a racist against? Indo-Fijians? He's repealing Qarase's discriminatory legislation against them! Indigenous Fijians? He's one himself!this situation is ridicule, as a protest against NZ poor sportsmanship, I am going to change my sig to GO FIJI !!, ..

go Fiji !!!

Woah. Woah, woah, woah.

There was a coup in Fiji?

In 2000, Fiji elected its first Indo-Fijian (i.e., descended from Indian "immigrants" brought to Fiji in the late 19th century by the British to work in sugar plantations) Prime Minister, Mahendra Chaudhry. He was overthrown by indigenous Fijian nationalists, led by George Speight, who said they would not tolerate an "Indian" leading the country.

The situation was defused, new elections were held, and Laisenia Qarase, an indigenous nationalist himself, was elected, forming a coalition with a paty of Speight's supporters (the Conservative Alliance).

In 2006, Qarase was re-elected. His main policy hinged on a claim that "Indians" were privileged; he brought in "Affirmative Action" legislation that would assist indigenous people in a variety of ways, on the sole criterion of ethnicity. (The situation on that point is complex. It's true that on average indigenous Fijians are less well qualified, and less involved in successful busisness. But many Indo-Fijians are also poor, and were denied aid by Qarase on the basis of race.)

Commodore Bainimarama, head of the military, accused Qarase of being a racist, and of pursuing divise policies that were setting the two main ethnic communities up against one another. Qarase also wanted to introduce legislation that would grant amnesty to the coup-makers of 2000, under certain conditions; Bainimarama told him he would not tolerate such legislation. The situation escalated, and Bainimarama overthrew Qarase in December 2006.

I've done research on Fiji, so I'm fairly well informed on what's going on over there. ;) You can ask me if you want to know more.

In 2000, Fiji elected its first Indo-Fijian (i.e., descended from Indian "immigrants" brought to Fiji in the late 19th century by the British to work in sugar plantations) Prime Minister, Mahendra Chaudhry. He was overthrown by indigenous Fijian nationalists, led by George Speight, who said they would not tolerate an "Indian" leading the country.

The situation was defused, new elections were held, and Laisenia Qarase, an indigenous nationalist himself, was elected, forming a coalition with a paty of Speight's supporters (the Conservative Alliance).

In 2006, Qarase was re-elected. His main policy hinged on a claim that "Indians" were privileged; he brought in "Affirmative Action" legislation that would assist indigenous people in a variety of ways, on the sole criterion of ethnicity. (The situation on that point is complex. It's true that on average indigenous Fijians are less well qualified, and less involved in successful busisness. But many Indo-Fijians are also poor, and were denied aid by Qarase on the basis of race.)

Commodore Bainimarama, head of the military, accused Qarase of being a racist, and of pursuing divise policies that were setting the two main ethnic communities up against one another. Qarase also wanted to introduce legislation that would grant amnesty to the coup-makers of 2000, under certain conditions; Bainimarama told him he would not tolerate such legislation. The situation escalated, and Bainimarama overthrew Qarase in December 2006.

I've done research on Fiji, so I'm fairly well informed on what's going on over there. ;) You can ask me if you want to know more.What are the % of indigenous Fijians , Indo-Fijians , and others ?

What are the % of indigenous Fijians , Indo-Fijians , and others ?

At most recent count, 55.6% indigenous, 36% Indo-Fijians, and hence about 8% others ("Europeans", "Chinese", other Pacific Islanders...).

(This is Ariddia, btw, logged in with a puppet.)

Qarase also wanted to introduce legislation that would grant amnesty to the coup-makers of 2000..IMO -following a legal trial- all Pinochet style Coup-makers should be sent to the Gas Chamber.

Is it just me or is this contradictory? They have a rule banning government intervention but when government intervenes, they say its ok?

FIFA ftl.

Because the government doesn't intervene directly here. The policy has been laid down some time ago, so it's no surprise they say it's ok.


Also, the government that decides the immigration policy is connected to the sports team how? I mean, how is the New Zealand team displaying poor sportsmanship?

.. how is the New Zealand team displaying poor sportsmanship?The Country of NZ=poor sportsmanship

lame sportsmanship.

Fiji will be playing New Zealand in NZ for the football World Cup qualifiers. New Zealand has refused to grant a visa to the Fiji team's main goalkeeper:



(link (http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=304299))

Thoughts? Is it justifiable for politics to disrupt a sport competition in this way?

I don't think it has much to do with sports and more to do with the actual law. What good is a law when you are going to allow exemptions?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4235490a1823.html

Match called off.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4235490a1823.html

Match called off.

Match called off? Good!

Well, to be fair he was directly connected to a high ranking official in the racist military junta that shattered democracy in what was evidently an unpopular coup.

And you know his in law is a high ranking official how? The article didn't say.

Plus, they are [insert minority], and nobody cares about [insert minority]. Not even [insert minority].

Because you can do anything to a minority and get away with it.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4235490a1823.html

Match called off.good.

sometimes life is not unfair.

The match is likely to be rescheduled and played at a neutral venue.

Oceania Football Confederation general secretary Tai Nicholas said Fifa had expressed disappointment at New Zealand's decision to deny Tamanisau the right to be part of his national team.

Fifa considered this to be inconsistent with the worldwide practice of providing visas for visiting sides whose only objective was to play in World Cup qualifiers.

So looks like it will be played at a neutral venue. That is most definitely good news. I do love the statement that FIFA made. Hopefully New Zealand has been taught a lesson.

"In view of the refusal of the visa, Fifa wishes to confirm that it will not allow the match to take place in New Zealand without the said player being made available to participate."

I don't actually have a problem with NZ denying a sportsman entry, but it should be because of HIS actions, not those of his family. We are NOT our brother's keepers.

FIFA made the right call.

"Bar be it from me to agree with OD on something but in this case...NZ should be forced to forfeit this match and award all points to Fiji. This is abominable. Those of you supporting this barring are stupid for he himself was not involved in the coup right?

Shame on you NZ for putting politics above sports. I hope your team fails in the World Cup qualifying games. You do not deserve to be in it because of this stunt."

Yeah, right. The last time we were in the World Cup was in 1981. We have less chance of getting into the World Cup than Burundi.

Besides, you sound like one of those idiots who thought we should be complacent with apartheid back in '81. Should we be complacent with an illegal regime? I think not.

Besides, you sound like one of those idiots who thought we should be complacent with apartheid back in '81. Should we be complacent with an illegal regime? I think not.

Oh brother. I see that you have no idea what the previous regime was doing to the locals. I see you did not realize that the "PM" was passing racist laws against the local population. All this coup did was remove that asshole from power and now the person in charge is overturning those same racist laws. Maybe you should look at something before saying stuff.

Oh and why should this goalie be stopped from entering the country when he himself did not participate in the coup?

The Country of NZ=poor sportsmanship

lame sportsmanship.

How so?

I do love the statement that FIFA made.
I do love this statement:

No one had the right to a visa. Entry to another country was a privilege, and all countries retained the right to exclude individuals in accordance with their immigration policy.

Sporting bodies did not determine those policies, he said.

That said, I'm glad the match is called off, and do believe the best solution is to have the match in a neutral venue.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4235490a1823.html

Match called off.

Well done, FIFA. Good call.