Only 5 alerts from a single post works iirc, based on the time of the signing up, so most of those users haven't got one - if they haven't fixed that yet though.
What's the difference? Does the player have to live in the CONMEBOL/CONCACAF country for a certain amount of years, or do his parent/s have to come from that country also? Wouldn't a Swede who was randomly born in Mexico (Swedish parents on Holiday or something), be eligible for selection for the Mexican national team?
Maybe I'm missing something, but I too am unclear on the difference between the two.
No, he wouldn't - hence the caveat. The basic rule is that anyone born in a nation that is currently a CONMEBOL or CONCACAF member is eligible - but this obviously doesn't apply to (hypothetical) players who happen to be born, for whatever reason, in a country they have no ties to beyond being born there.
I think it means we go by NT representation and not place of birth.
That's not what he's saying.
So, you want to exclude some players with dual citizenship?
Yeah, that seems to make sense. Thanks.
I think this was worded incorrectly. He clarifies it as below...
Nope. As long as he has played for the NT of the Americas, he is OK despite any number of citizenships he may hold.
Well, that is the basic rule: Born in - or played for. Nothing complicated about that.
Zidane - Algerian citizen - in an Africa Draft: absurd or not?
That would, per that formulation, exclude uncapped players - which you don't want.
No he has divided that case into two :
Well, that depends on the exact nature of the draft, I suppose. But it would be somewhat absurd, yes. If the theme is regional you're obviously mainly interested in players who can be said to represent the region - as a football player.
Well, what about uncapped players? One in particular comes to mind.
Sure, sure.
Uncapped players go by the place of birth...
Exactly - caps can't be used as an absolute criterium. Uncapped players should be eligible.
Yes - but that isn't what you said:
Anyway, I don't think we actually disagree here - and as mentioned, I'll remove the potentially confusing caveats.
Just let it be as long as it fits the rule above. Not that it'd skew the pool or something.
What i said is that someone like Podolski isnt available for Poland draft because he played for another nation, didnt mention uncapped players because i assumed they go by the place of birth.
Yeah, we'll see - I doubt anyone will make such a pick, but if it does happen I presume the manager in question will present a case of sorts (as it would otherwise seem to go against the spirit of the draft, and can be dismissed on those grounds).
Yes, I understand that - I just commented on what you literally said in the part I quoted (which wouldn't work literally as a rule).
great
Can't do this one sorry bud.
Couldn't agree more with this. I like to keep my op down to the actual game with maybe a couple of lines on how his playing style fits. It gets lost in the massive OPs of others though and I always feel like I lose votes due to not matching sheer output.
Indeed. This is why I came up with the short template in the last one I ran.
I've often wondered about that: I suspect it could go both ways. Some may be impressed by the wealth of information (or the presentation of it, or both), whereas others may actually find it a turn-off.
I confirm some OPs were excessive
