Arsenal’s Jack Wilshere set the internet alight this week with his thoughts on who should be playing for England – namely that “the only people who should play for England are English people.” I am sympathetic to the player, as I’m sure he didn’t realise his comments would constitute such a reaction, but it’s brought up interesting conflictions on what it means to be English.
Now in some respects, I don’t disagree with his comments. I think there are way too few English players on the pitch (take the match recently between Manchester City and Newcastle United where there were but 2 Englishmen on the field for a Premier League game- and after Steven Taylor was sent off, the number was halved) and I think this does affect England at a national level as it narrows the selection pool we have for international games.
But these comments have ruffled my feathers because they bring up a lot of personal frustrations. I’m a casualty of a world of mixing nationalities. I was born in America to an English Dad and an American Mom. I lived in America for 17 years, and in England for 10, and I find myself in the annoying loop-hole of immigration that many people and footballers find themselves in.
I’m not English as I was not born in England, but I am genetically and legally British- I’ve had a British passport since I was a kid to prove it. But If I were a world-class football player, according to Wilshere’s logic, I shouldn’t and couldn’t play for England. I’d qualify to play for team Britain (if there were one) but technically not for England- frustrating as I grew up with England being my sporting education, this is my home, and I would want to represent England on national level.
So how would you define who is English? Can you play for England only if you were born there, or can you still play if you’ve earned a British passport through family or blood? Can you play for England if you’ve grown up here, or been educated here, even if you have no genetic claim to the country
With regards to Manchester United’s Adnan Januzaj, do I think he should attempt to qualify to play for England? No, I don’t. He’s lived here for what, 2 years? He has no English family, education, or claim to England as a homeland. So in that respect, I’d completely agree with Wilshere’s sentiment- except that he later brought his shovel back out and tweeted “I wasn’t referring to Janujaz” and clarified that he means “foreign players.”
But it’s the term ‘foreign’ that causes the problem. Who is foreign? What do you do with people like me? What do you do with players like our England U-21s- Raheem Sterling (born abroad), Wilfried Zaha (born abroad), and West Bromwich Albion’s Saido Berahino (who arrived in England at the 10 having fled his war-torn homeland – BBC.) Are they too foreign to play for England?
What about those players who adopt England as their homeland after fleeing a war-torn country? Some of them would remember or know no attachment to their homeland – for them, England is their homeland, and should they not have the right to play for their home, and give something back?
This was a big can of worms to open, because the question isn’t should foreign players play for England – it’s how do you decide what constitutes foreign today, and where and how you draw the line on who gets to be English. As this is something that is unclear in terms of immigration, it’s very hard to see how it could ever be clear in football.
What do you think- was Wilshere misquoted, or was he right? Should the England team and managerial job be limited entirely to people born in England? Where do you draw the line about who should be on the field for England?
I am sorry ,but to give credibility this player is beyond belief. He is from the Rooney school of excellence in terms of his education and is a little upstart who has a lot to prove in terms of his footballing ability . Perhaps he is worried , quite rightly , that some of these “foreigners ” are much better than him and might ( will ) take his place .
To be fair to Jack, I don’t think what he said was for self interest. He has plenty of self belief and I don’t think his place is at risk though others might well be.
Emily made a very good point by questioning what constitutes being English. For example my son was born in Scotland to an English family and we moved back to England 18 months later. He sees himself as wholly English and no one would seriously question this.
Arteta is Spanish but has been in England long enough to be able play for England – which I feel would be wrong. Jack said ‘To play for England you should be English’ which is correct. Alan Shearer then went further to say ‘To play for England you should be born in England’ which is a different argument and people are confusing with Jacks comment.
I think players who play for England should be English born otherwise where is the difference between club football and national football and why is wilshere making comments like that when two of his team mates that I no of (podolski) (ozil) both represent different contries in which they were born ?
I’m not sure how you qualify to be British but not English, but I suspect you are clearer on the technicalities.
Surely the one thing that sets us English apart from the rest of the world is how we get foreigners to fight our battles for us. First we beat the Welsh and Scots and then sent them to fight the Irish and then got all three to conquer the world on our behalf. As we took each nation we got their surviving troops to attack our next target, and took the goodies they had to offer.
A truly English team would therefore have no home born players whatsoever. 😀
rivieralet and essexhammer I find your (slightly different) responses interesting because they both contain different criticisms of Wilshere which back my view that so many football fans can be swept along and literally brainwashed into taking an outraged perspective because of the way the media have reported something.
We have seen headlines like “Wilshere wades into….” and “Wilshere slams the idea of foreigners playing for…”. The reality is that Wilshere was asked a direct question on the subject, in particular reference to a particular player, and gave an answer to the question by basically stating that he felt that the England team should be represented by English players.
As the author quite rightly points out this does not exactly quantify who should be considered English and where the line is drawn, and I am sure that Wilshere himself recognises that not everyone has to have been born here and have skin as white as snow to be able to represent England. The problem is no-one asked him to quantify it in a complete way, but the media have painted his response as a black and white one which I feel you both, and many others out there, have bought into. I am sure he actually recognises that there are a lot of grey areas on this topic and it is not his job to set the boundaries but boundaries do need to be set somewhere.
Someone who is genetically of non Anglo-saxon descent but is born and raised here is English. Someone who moves from an African country with their parents at say age 10, has British nationality and has been schooled and played football here through their key youth period will have an English manner, characteristic and nature and should be considered the same. Players brought up overseas that have an English parent and are likely fluently bilingual should IMO be considered English in national football terms if they feel drawn to that side of their heritage.
However, unless I am incorrect on the facts, I believe the person that was mainly being referred to when Wilshere was asked the question has no English parentage at all, and has not been schooled or brought up in this country from a younger age. They arrived at the age of 16, interestingly the same age as Fabregas. If you asked Wilshere should Fabregas have played for England then I think the answer would be no, even though they are friends. If you asked him about say Frimpong or the now unfortunately retired Muamba then he would have likely said yes due to how young they were when they arrived in England.
I think the author balanced the argument well. I feel comments like rivarlet’s calling Wilshere a little upstart are fuelled by the media representation of what he said rather than actually looking at what was asked of him, in what context, and what he really said, and then standing back and taking an independent view of it that is not biased by the media hype we are surrounded by. Essexhammer I can’t quite see your point regarding his 2 team-mates when one was actually born and brought up in Germany and the other moved there at age 2 and became a youth player at F.C Cologne at the age of 10. How do these 2 correlate with the question in person that Wilshere was asked about?
I thought ozil was born in Turkey and podolski born in Poland?
Wilshere is a kid and not qualified to make such judgements. However I do understand his point. Whereas birth in England should not be a prerequisite for being considered English, neither should 4 years of residency. Both are too extreme. … The arguments are more complicated and detailed than most people have the time for.
Maybe 10 years residency is more appropriate? Or maybe only 4 years residency but only if one of the parents was a citizen? Maybe your residency in your formative years – “7 up” and all that! ?
Who knows. I have lived 12 years in Italy and I’m not Italian! Not by any stretch of the imagination. I was born in Canada but I’m not Canada. … I grew up in England and my parents and generation after generation were considered English. My surname suggests several hundred years ago my family were Dutch trading immigrants. Perhaps there’s Saxon, perhaps there’s Roman. Who knows.
I can’t believe some of the comments on here.
We are talking about someone reresenting a country in a SPORTING context.
Who cares if they are “schooled” here or if they have an “English manner, characteristic and nature”? The only criteria should be are they good enough.
Did the British public cheer less when Mo Farrah was winning his golds because he’s not really British? Do the public turn their backs on Laura Robson because she’s Australian?
Was anyone really bothered when Tony Dorigo or John Barnes or Owen Hargreaves donned the “3 lions”? Does anyone think Terry Butcher shouldn’t have played for England because he was born in Singapore? If anyone did you really need to get a life.
All sport teams around the world are multi-national, except perhaps the likes of North Korea, is anyone seriously suggesting we follow their lead?
Johnsey, Laura Robson has been in England since age 6, Mo since age 8, John Barnes I believe was 12. I still believe there should be some criteria such as parentage, or the age at which you come to England. Just saying that it should just be about if you are good enough full stop doesn’t cut it for me. After a certain age, and with no prior feeling or understanding of what it is to be English or to live in the country, then I would suggest that person can never have a feeling of patriotism that you want to see from the sports stars representing the country.
If you fielded 11 players with no English parentage and who all arrived in the country after a certain age, lets say 16, then the identity of the national team is destroyed and with it the fans identity and relationship to the team. It would signify in essence the death of the England national football team. As I said there has to be some boundary.