[fred]

jallerton, on 2010-December-19, 17:45, said:

As a matter of interest, what about other sports? When Canada played against USA at Ice Hockey in the Winter Olympics earlier this year, which team did you support?

Good question! I have to admit I was hoping that Canada would win and I was thrilled when they actually did.

I also have to admit that I was puzzled and amused by my own reaction. I don't know how much of it had to do with the fact that it was hockey - the one and only sport that could be said to be "in my blood". Also, had Canada been a massive favorite, I could imagine supporting the USA on the basis of it being fun to cheer for Cinderella. Whether or not I would have actually felt as I am imagining in that hypothetical scenario, I have no idea.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Fluffy]

It is very hard to find info about that norwegian incident involving Helgemo, from my searchs it seems like he was involved on some form of collusion between oppossing teams, but it is not clear if the collusion actually damaged a third team or not.

[Gerardo]

Cyberyeti, on 2010-December-19, 11:23, said:

I explained in my post why Senna moved. It made life a lot easier for his club, meaning they could play another South American, and he had not previously played for Brazil. It also took him 4 years to make the switch. Playing for Spain was a side effect, not the purpose of the move (I don't think people thought he was that good at the start of the process).

I'm a Brit, and I found the whole Zola Budd thing really distasteful (when she moved from being South African to British in no time flat, and when she retired rapidly became South African again), however I have nothing but respect for people like Graeme Hick who spent 7 years living here becoming British qualified.

People will always move around, but I feel moving around PURELY to represent another country that is not your own for money is distasteful.

If you have represented your country of birth at a sport, call me old fashioned, but that is your country, and barring really strange circumstances (political upheaval leaving you exiled for example) you should not be able to represent another.

On her defense, she could not represent South Africa at the time (SA bring banned because of apartheid), was not (just?) a money issue..

[Gerardo]

NickRW, on 2010-December-19, 19:01, said:

I disagree. I think it has been pretty strongly implied. Look back at the previous posts.




Well, as I understand it, quite a lot of the people living in Monaco live there precisely because it is a tax haven. Certainly quite a few Grand Prix drivers, for example, chose to live there (and not actually be in the country for a lot of the time). I guess the true Monacoan (if that is the word, and if indeed there are many such people given the country's small size) is quite used to seeing a succession of 'foreigners' as residents of their country.




OK, so there are not, as far as I can see, any Italians posting here. There does seem to be a flavour of indignance in writings elsewhere though from Italians - or an expectation that the people reading what is written will/should feel that way.

Anyway, the thing that narks me big time about this is that the US is only too happy for people like Fred and Zia to be playing for them - nobody is moaning about that - yet we get posts moaning about a Norwegian not being coshe in Monaco. That smacks of a two faced attitude.

Or perhaps I should be saying to the Scot, the German, the Swede and the half Irish/half Lithuanian people that play in my club that they can't represent our club in team matches because they are not English enough?!? Perhaps I should not play for the club either because I've only lived in this town for 10 years??? I find that ridiculous - and so do you I would guess.

People should discuss changing the rules if they don't like it - not retrospectively either - or put up with it because it is within the rules - hard luck that you don't like it.

Nick

The Italians had just imported an Argentinian, so can't really complain. They may lure Fantunes back if they wish, though.

[the hog]

I totally disagree. If you have skill at a game/sport, presumably you have spent a lot of time and investment in getting to the top. You should be allowed to pursue the maximum return for your efforts. By the way, a citizen of Monaco is called a Monegasque.

[the hog]

TimG, on 2010-December-19, 15:22, said:

Some will be of the opinion that this move to Monaco is damaging to their images.

And most won't - so what?

[mfa1010]

Fluffy, on 2010-December-19, 21:02, said:

It is very hard to find info about that norwegian incident involving Helgemo, from my searchs it seems like he was involved on some form of collusion between oppossing teams, but it is not clear if the collusion actually damaged a third team or not.

As I understood it, it was an early stage knockout match where some lucky losers would be advancing also. Those who have lost with the smallest imp-margin. It happened to be very inconvenient for the two teams to find a playing date, so instead they made up a close result without playing the match at all and both teams consequently advanced to the next round. It must have been on the expense of some third team.

[TimG]

Aberlour10, on 2010-December-19, 15:16, said:

Last notice.. 8 years period of restriction would make the move for the professionals impossible, to resign of playing in the main international championships for so long time could partialy damage their image and careers.

TimG, on 2010-December-19, 15:22, said:

Some will be of the opinion that this move to Monaco is damaging to their images.

the hog, on 2010-December-20, 01:21, said:

And most won't - so what?

You removed the part to which I was responding. The point was, as you well know, that their image could take a hit either way.

[Hanoi5]

I think one poster before nailed it: At the present time the laws of bridge events allow this situation to happen, if you don't like it, propose a change in the laws.

[Gerben42]

Hanoi5, on 2010-December-20, 22:33, said:

I think one poster before nailed it: At the present time the laws of bridge events allow this situation to happen, if you don't like it, propose a change in the laws.

Sure, true. There's no point shouting at Fantunes or Helgeness, they followed the rules. Still I can understand if people want to root for their national team and Monaco just isn't it.

The current rules make this coup very easy, it wouldn't hurt to raise the bar to 5 years of not playing for your country. Especially this would avoid someone playing consecutive Olympiads for different countries.

[wank]

as a professional myself (including having won my country's trials as part of a pro team), I feel entitled to say F*** the pros. playing for one's country isn't supposed to be about collecting a wage - it's supposed to be about national pride. imo the rules should be manipulated enough to make it harder for sponsored teams to win the right to be a representative team in any case, not just extreme examples like this.

at least i'm not a hypocrite - i'm happy to admit i've got no interest in playing international bridge. my only interest is the money. as such i'm not worthy of being picked.

[jallerton]

****, on 2010-December-27, 03:11, said:

at least i'm not a hypocrite - i'm happy to admit i've got no interest in playing international bridge. my only interest is the money. as such i'm not worthy of being picked.

So if you were offered sufficient money, would you (attempt to) represent your country at bridge?
If you were offered even more money, would you (attempt to) represent another country at bridge?

[han]

The sentences

wank, on 2010-December-27, 03:11, said:

(including having won my country's trials as part of a pro team)

i'm happy to admit i've got no interest in playing international bridge. my only interest is the money.

Seem to contradict

Quote

playing for one's country isn't supposed to be about collecting a wage - it's supposed to be about national pride.

Unless this post was meant as self-critique.