| Revision as of 21:04, 13 September 2006 editDjln (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users279,350 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:39, 14 September 2006 edit undoRobdurbar (talk | contribs)11,477 edits yeah, but its still true#Next edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| With or without FIFA recognition this is still a very dubious claim. | With or without FIFA recognition this is still a very dubious claim. | ||
| ] --] 21:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC) | ] --] 21:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :Yes, but the articles stated 'is recognsied by FIFA as the sucessor'. This is a cold hard fact. Your, or mine, or anyone else's, opinion on this is irrelevant until we are given the role of organising world football. --] 06:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:39, 14 September 2006
How can Northern Ireland claim to be the successor team ? They make up less than a third of the territory this team represented. It is a bit like Ukraine claiming to be the successor of the USSR. Djln --Djln 16:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- Not quite. The team is controlled by the same football association. And, most importantly, they are recognsied as such by FIFA --Robdurbar 17:43, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
With or without FIFA recognition this is still a very dubious claim. Djln --Djln 21:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, but the articles stated 'is recognsied by FIFA as the sucessor'. This is a cold hard fact. Your, or mine, or anyone else's, opinion on this is irrelevant until we are given the role of organising world football. --Robdurbar 06:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)