South Pacific Mini Games 2017

Information and news on Oceanian football

South Pacific Mini Games 2017

nico1.roonba.fr
Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 16:19

09 Feb 2011, 18:46 #1

I know it is early... real early to talk about the SPG Mini Games in 2017 but I just discovered the news that the CNMI are planning to organise football at the games they try to host. The decision which country will host the event is not yet made.
The CNMI plans to have 11 events for the 2017 Pacific Mini Games.
Northern Marianas Amateur Sports Association president Michael White during the NMASA meeting last week said that in a draft of bid papers he is preparing, he included athletics, soccer, golf, swimming, tennis, canoe racing, beach and indoor volleyball, baseball, sailing, and triathlon in the proposed events for the quadrennial meet the CNMI is hoping to host five years from now.
The bid papers for the 2017 Pacific Mini Games must be completed by the end of this month, as it will be submitted to the Pacific Games Council next month.
With the deadline for the submission of bid papers fast approaching, NMASA is seeking the assistance of local sports federations to make sure all the necessary documentations are complete and will back up the CNMI's bid.
White asked local federations for a letter attesting that concerned sports groups have the capability to host their respective competitions. The NMASA head also requested that each local sports group list the international federations they are affiliated with.
White added the CNMI are required to list international sporting events, which the Commonwealth has hosted within the past 10 years. The list should include the name of the event, the year it was hosted, and number of participating countries or individuals/teams.
White said these and other valuable information might help show that the CNMI is capable of hosting the Pacific Mini Games.
Nine of the 11 sports listed above were played during the 2006 Micronesian Games, which Saipan hosted. Soccer/football was not on the list, but the CNMI had hosted a couple of regional events in the past 10 years, including the East Asian Football Confederation qualifying match. Sailing was also excluded in the 2006 Micro Games, but the Commonwealth had held races in the past decade.
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

01 Mar 2012, 12:59 #2

http://www.sportingpulse.com/assoc_page ... 3844&pID=2
Vanuatu will host the 2017 Pacific Mini Games - and good news - football will be included. I hope to see some of the smaller islands sending football teams. Would be nice to see Niue, Palau, etc.
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

12 Sep 2012, 12:27 #3

http://www.saipantribune.com/newsstory. ... 1661&cat=2
Possible bad news for football in the South Pacific - football has been demoted from a compulsory to an optional sport on the Pacific Games program (this will come into effect for the 2019 Pacific Games and 2021 Pacific Mini Games). So, the next 2 editions (Papua New Guinea 2015 and Vanuatu Mini-Games 2017) should still have football on the schedule.
It's a shame that there will be no football at the 2013 Mini-Games in Wallis & Futuna. It's probably the only chance we would get to see Wallis & Futuna playing for the foreseeable future (unless FFF decides to invite them to the Coupe de l'Outre Mer in future editions).
Reply

nico1.roonba.fr
Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 16:19

12 Sep 2012, 15:41 #4

Another step back for football in the Pacific and OFC doesn´t seem to care or even to know. I recently saw the presentations of Tonga and French Polynesia for the 2019 Pacific Games. Tonga had football as fixed sport and French Polynesia as optional. I believe both countries will stage football events for both men and women if they win. The Pacific Games will have football in general I think. The Mini Games on the other side are staged by the smaller economies of the Pacific where team sports are just to expensive to exercise. Of course rugby and basketball are the exceptions.
Reply

Tanaka
Joined: 15 Nov 2006, 03:20

13 Sep 2012, 05:48 #5

Solomon Islands, Vanuatu are bigger nations in South Pacific
They never won bids for Pacific Games... Will they keep on......?
Football is their national sport.
Reply

nico1.roonba.fr
Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 16:19

13 Sep 2012, 15:55 #6

Like you said in Vanuatu and the Solomons it´s the national sport.
The don´t have the opportunity to play games on a regular base so they will field teams for the Pacific Games.
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

23 Mar 2015, 21:45 #7

http://www.insidethegames.biz/anoc/756- ... mini-games

And senior national team football in the Pacific is now officially dead.

Football at the Pacific Games is now Under-23, and there will be no football at the 2021 Pacific Mini Games in NMI (what did they expect when they demoted football from a compulsory sport?)

So, the 2017 Pacific Mini Games in Vanuatu will be the next (and last?) time the Pacific countries will play with their senior national teams.

OFC should be ashamed of themselves for letting this happen.
Reply

nfm24
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 16:28

23 Mar 2015, 22:17 #8

Given recent events in Vanuatu, 2017 might struggle also.
Reply

pieter
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 16:49

24 Jul 2016, 09:29 #9

in 2005 on RSSSF Markus Kobler posted the "results" of the SP Mini Games in 1985 and 1989 (in Cook and Tonga)....They disappeared from RSSSF and there seems not have been an football tournament in those two years.... What is the history behind this ? Was it fantasy of 1 person?  
Reply

Sensini
Joined: 25 May 2010, 20:50

24 Jul 2016, 10:32 #10

pieter wrote:
in 2005 on RSSSF Markus Kobler posted the "results" of the SP Mini Games in 1985 and 1989 (in Cook and Tonga)....They disappeared from RSSSF and there seems not have been an football tournament in those two years.... What is the history behind this ? Was it fantasy of 1 person?  
They did not dissapear, but are not linked from the overview page anymore. The pages themselves are still online, with a note: "NB: no football tournament was held at the South Pacific Mini Games 1985/1989; the results reported below are either fictional or belong to some other tournament not part of these Games."
http://www.rsssf.com/tabless/southpacmini85.html
http://www.rsssf.com/tabless/southpacmini89.html
____________________________
http://www.voetbalkroniek.nl
Reply

nfm24
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 16:28

24 Jul 2016, 11:45 #11

They were total nonsense invented by Kobler.
Reply

pieter
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 16:49

24 Jul 2016, 12:37 #12

I understand but I do not understand why someone does a thing like this...his name is no longer on RSSSF list

anyway thanks
Reply

nfm24
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 16:28

24 Jul 2016, 21:54 #13

It is just the same as people who invent nonsense on WIkipedia.

The problem is that, while it is easy for vandals to invent nonsense, it is often much harder for the genuine historians/researchers to *disprove* such nonsense.

It cost myself and Mark much effort and time (and expense) to establish the truth beyond doubt.
Reply

pieter
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 16:49

27 Jul 2016, 18:00 #14

right: it is scientifically impossible to prove things are not true, we can only prove facts, nonsense are hard to fight....
Reply

pieter
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 16:49

14 Apr 2017, 19:07 #15

Wallis et Futuna will not have a football team at the SPMG 2017....it is a pity...will we ever see them again?
Reply

Eagles
Joined: 28 Dec 2009, 15:38

24 Apr 2017, 14:52 #16

Do we know who actually is participating in this tournament?
Reply

Eagles
Joined: 28 Dec 2009, 15:38

26 Jul 2017, 14:15 #17

According to the official website, 10 teams will be participating. However, the website doesn't list the nations that are going to play. Assuming it'll be the FIFA members only.
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

03 Nov 2017, 19:36 #18

Papua New Guinea will NOT participate, neither will Kiribati.  Tahiti have just announced they will boycott the entire games because of a disagreement over the boxing competition - so it seems as though there will be just 9 teams.

Fiji, New Caledonia, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu will definitely compete.

I would guess the other 5 may be Guam, Cook Islands, Tonga, Samoa and American Samoa.
Reply

nfm24
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 16:28

04 Nov 2017, 21:49 #19

Are these going to be senior national teams?
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

05 Nov 2017, 00:26 #20

Apparently so - the friendly matches of Fiji, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and New Caledonia national teams have been mentioned as preparation for the Pacific Mini Games.  I guess with no Olympics to muck up the tournament, countries are free to select who they like.
Reply

Kirill
Joined: 07 Jun 2007, 12:58

11 Nov 2017, 18:21 #21

Fiji, New Caledonia, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu

http://www.van2017.com/schedule/
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

12 Nov 2017, 17:00 #22

Strange: notice that this is on the page for the overall sports schedule.  There are 14 sports at the games - and it doesn't mention football at all on this schedule...

But yes, it seems it is the football schedule: Just 6 teams for men, and 4 for women...

http://www.van2017.com/football-matches ... ini-games/
Reply

pieter
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 16:49

17 Nov 2017, 10:26 #23

why is there nothing about this tournament on the websites or Facebook of the 6 teams that will participate......?  12.12 seems to be Vanuatu-Tuvalu
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

17 Nov 2017, 11:49 #24

Schedule seems to have disappeared now from the site - only Vanuatu's is there..


This is the schedule:
MEN

2.12  09:00 Fiji v Tuvalu Port Vila Stadium
2.12  12:00 Tonga v Solomon Islands Port Vila Stadium
2.12  15:00 New Caledonia v Vanuatu Port Vila Stadium
5.12  19:00 Tuvalu v New Caledonia Korman Stadium
6.12  16:00 Solomon Islands v Fiji Korman Stadium
6.12  19:00 Vanuatu v Tonga Korman Stadium
9.12  09:00 Tonga v New Caledonia Port Vila Stadium
9.12  12:00 Vanuatu v Fiji Port Vila Stadium
9.12  15:00 Solomon Islands v Tuvalu Port Vila Stadium
12.12 12:00 Fiji v Tonga Port Vila Stadium
12.12 15:00 Tuvalu v Vanuatu Port Vila Stadium
12.12 19:00 New Caledonia v Solomon Islands Korman Stadium
15.12 09:00 Tuvalu v Tonga Port Vila Stadium
15.12 12:00 Fiji v New Caledonia Port Vila Stadium
15.12 15:00 Solomon Islands v Vanuatu Port Vila Stadium

WOMEN
 4.12 09:00 Fiji v Tonga Port Vila Stadium
 4.12 12:00 Vanuatu v Solomon Islands Port Vila Stadium
 7.12 16:00 Solomon Islands v Tonga Korman Stadium
 7.12 19:00 Vanuatu v Fiji Korman Stadium
11.12 12:00 Solomon Islands v Fiji Port Vila Stadium
11.12 19:00 Tonga v Vanuatu Korman Stadium
14.12 12:00 3rd v 4th Port Vila Stadium
14.12 19:00 1st v 2nd Korman Stadium
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

05 Dec 2017, 10:54 #25

Everything seemed to be going to plan:
Fiji 8-0 Tuvalu
Solomon Islands 8-0 Tonga
Vanuatu 2-1 New Caledonia

Then:
Tuvalu 2-1 New Caledonia

In European terms, this is probably like San Marino beating Latvia.
New Caledonia has recent draws with Estonia and New Zealand, and beat Tuvalu 8-0 last time out (2011).

However, Tuvalu had run New Caledonia close before (0-1 in 2007), when they also managed a draw with Tahiti - and have shown they are better than the likes of Tonga/Cook Islands/Samoa at matching up to the bigger teams in OFC.

I think this result will do their application to FIFA no harm (if they can fill it in properly).
Reply

pieter
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 16:49

05 Dec 2017, 10:59 #26

TheRoonBa wrote: Everything seemed to be going to plan:
Fiji 8-0 Tuvalu
Solomon Islands 8-0 Tonga
Vanuatu 2-1 New Caledonia

Then:
Tuvalu 2-1 New Caledonia

In European terms, this is probably like San Marino beating Latvia.
New Caledonia has recent draws with Estonia and New Zealand, and beat Tuvalu 8-0 last time out (2011).

However, Tuvalu had run New Caledonia close before (0-1 in 2007), when they also managed a draw with Tahiti - and have shown they are better than the likes of Tonga/Cook Islands/Samoa at matching up to the bigger teams in OFC.

I think this result will do their application to FIFA no harm (if they can fill it in properly).
very good result even against a -21 team from N.Caledonia....
Reply

Eagles19
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 13:43

05 Dec 2017, 12:50 #27

pieter wrote:
TheRoonBa wrote: Everything seemed to be going to plan:
Fiji 8-0 Tuvalu
Solomon Islands 8-0 Tonga
Vanuatu 2-1 New Caledonia

Then:
Tuvalu 2-1 New Caledonia

In European terms, this is probably like San Marino beating Latvia.
New Caledonia has recent draws with Estonia and New Zealand, and beat Tuvalu 8-0 last time out (2011).

However, Tuvalu had run New Caledonia close before (0-1 in 2007), when they also managed a draw with Tahiti - and have shown they are better than the likes of Tonga/Cook Islands/Samoa at matching up to the bigger teams in OFC.

I think this result will do their application to FIFA no harm (if they can fill it in properly).
very good result even against a -21 team from N.Caledonia....
Agree with you...but that -21 team just tied Estonia...
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

05 Dec 2017, 13:03 #28

I've decided to change the status of these matches on my site.  I won't count the NC matches as A matches.

The NC team v Estonia was composed of "mostly" U-21 players, but was labelled the A team by the FA.

This team is clearly the U-21 team, and should be treated as such, I think...
Reply

Eagles19
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 13:43

05 Dec 2017, 13:08 #29

TheRoonBa wrote: I've decided to change the status of these matches on my site.  I won't count the NC matches as A matches.

The NC team v Estonia was composed of "mostly" U-21 players, but was labelled the A team by the FA.

This team is clearly the U-21 team, and should be treated as such, I think...
Did NC federation come out and say that they are their U-21? I agree they should be treated as such as no one is under 21
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

05 Dec 2017, 14:09 #30

Yes, on their website, it is clearly marked (before the tournament) as the U-21 selection.  I think they added a few senior players for the Estonia match.

However, it looks like their matches will count as official for FIFA anyway, as it seems FIFA were only made aware by the organisers, who wouldn't have mentioned that New Caledonia sent their U-21 team.
Reply

nfm24
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 16:28

05 Dec 2017, 20:59 #31

And from FIFA's point of view it doesn't matter which players are actually chosen, it's just the label the FAs put on the match.
Reply

pieter
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 16:49

05 Dec 2017, 21:39 #32

nfm24 wrote: And from FIFA's point of view it doesn't matter which players are actually chosen, it's just the label the FAs put on the match.
I fully agree with the FIFA point of vue (on this matter)
Reply

mattsanger92
Joined: 04 Jul 2011, 10:46

05 Dec 2017, 22:17 #33

pieter wrote:I fully agree with the FIFA point of vue (on this matter)
Me too, if an FA's considering their team the full side, or haven't disputed the interpretation/implication that they are, only after that should the match status be up for question.

Of course if all else fails they can just put on the (n+1)th sub... although in the case of 🇳🇨 v [redactedTUV?] the former won't see any impact on their rankings for it.
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

07 Dec 2017, 14:14 #34

But in this case, the New Caledonia FA itself has labelled it the U-21 team.  In this case, it is foolish to agree with FIFA, no?  Just because countries are not aware of the official protocol of reporting matches to FIFA, it doesn't mean we should be limited by their failings...  This is the New Caledonia U-21 team.  It makes no sense to count them as the New Caledonia national team, as the NC FA made a conscious decision to send a youth team to Vanuatu, and was quite transparent about it.  Why ignore the evidence simply to satisfy a FIFA whim?

The people requesting authorisation of the tournament (probably from the hosts Vanuatu) may have simply not mentioned that New Caledonia were sending their U-21 team.  The New Caledonia FA may not even have been consulted.  In multi-sport games like this, there is usually no "label" attached to teams who do not send their full squads, as they are competing for medals for the nation.  For example, in the last Pacific Games, there was no official label attached to the teams (for example Vanuatu 46-0 Micronesia was widely reported, without U-23 after the names).  Also in the former CEMAC Cup, there was no official label attached to Cameroon, but they were the Cameroon Amateur team.
Reply

pieter
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 16:49

07 Dec 2017, 14:19 #35

but the N.Caledonia FA has the right to consider this selection as a full national sides....And this competition is for A-teams not for junior teams....wa all will have to decide how we deal with this facts.... 
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

07 Dec 2017, 14:57 #36

I know that - of course they have the right.  But they don't consider it the full national side.  That is the whole point of my disagreement.  The team is the Under-21 team, and they have also sent the coach of the U-20 team, not the coach of the A team.  Also, this competition is not for A-teams.  It is one sport in a multi-sport event, and there are no regulations that say you must use your A team.
Reply

nfm24
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 16:28

08 Dec 2017, 22:18 #37

Maybe a simple question/answer format would summarise this sort of thing.

Was the NC team actually U21?   Yes.
Does the NC FA call it U21?   Yes.
Did the hosts tell FIFA that any of the entrants were not "A" teams?  No   (was it their job?)
Did the NC FA tell FIFA it was U21 ?   No  (is it their job?)
Reply

Kirill
Joined: 07 Jun 2007, 12:58

08 Dec 2017, 23:36 #38

nfm24 wrote:Was the NC team actually U21?   Yes.
Does the NC FA call it U21?   Yes.
Did the hosts tell FIFA that any of the entrants were not "A" teams?  No   (was it their job?)
Did the NC FA tell FIFA it was U21 ?   No  (is it their job?)
If they didn't it's probably because this is a major regional tournament for unrestricted national teams. A country or FA is free to send a U-21 or a U-12 or a O-90 team.

The prank only cost NC 60 Elo points so far. Looks like they are going to do OK against Tonga, but in the last two matches more suffering is likely.
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

09 Dec 2017, 17:08 #39

I don't think this is a major tournament in terms of football (as evidenced by the lack of entries).  The Pacific Games and Pacific Mini Games are clearly held in different regard by countries in the region.

It is indeed a tournament for unrestricted teams - but New Caledonia chose to send a restricted team...  I agree that they are free to send whatever team they wish - but if we already know that they have sent a team with a recognised label, why ignore this information?

And yes - 60 Elo points is quite a lot to lose (and it makes the eloratings less accurate).  Also, the elo points loss is amplified due to the fact this tournament has a K factor of 40 (instead of 20 for friendly matches).

When doing a ranking in particular, I think special attention needs to be paid to cases like this.  New Caledonia national team is the team that you are ranking, not New Caledonia U-21.  What is more important in this case - the accuracy of your ranking, or the freedom of the FA to pick a youth team to represent them?
Reply

nfm24
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 16:28

09 Dec 2017, 17:10 #40

Whether or not it is a "major" tournament doesn't matter.   Youth teams have been sent to continental championships in the past.
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

09 Dec 2017, 17:17 #41

Personally, I tend to include the World Cup and the Continental Championships as being A team tournaments (even if youth teams are sent - for example, Egypt at AFCON), with a few exceptions (like Mexico sending a youth team to the Copa América while their A team was at the Gold Cup).  Everything else I leave open to interpretation.  Especially with multi-sport games (including Asian Games, Pacific Games, even the Island Games), the level of teams sent can be quite variable.

I think here the term restrictive is interesting.

Restrictions in tournament regulations? No
Restrictions in FA selection criteria?  Yes

So, which one takes precedence?  I prefer to see it as a Logic NAND case (2 Nos = A team, everything else is not A team).
Reply

nfm24
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 16:28

09 Dec 2017, 17:26 #42

I think it is inconsistent to apply different standards for different tournaments.

No-one is disputing the right of an FA to pick 11 youth players, or 11 bus drivers, and call it the national "A" team, if they want to do that.  In such cases, the matches have to be listed, preferably with footnotes and caveats explaining the actual situation. 

However this case is different, because the NC FA clearly labelled its own team as not "A".   So it isn't A, and FIFA are just wrong to count it as such.
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

09 Dec 2017, 19:06 #43

Yes, I think this case is different simply because the New Caledonia FA "didn't want it to count as their A team" (for what that's worth - though they possibly didn't go to any great lengths to make this known to FIFA/the organisers, and were content with just labelling it as U-21 on their website).

But previously, FIFA has ignored cases where African FAs have 2 different sections on their websites, and clearly do not equate the CHAN team to the A team.  Again, possibly because the FA is not proactive in notifying FIFA (perhaps they don't care if the matches count as A matches or not).  Though I guarantee they would suddenly start caring if, for example, counting a CHAN match would result in them being in a different seeding group. 
Reply

Kirill
Joined: 07 Jun 2007, 12:58

09 Dec 2017, 21:56 #44

If a match wasn't organized as a full international, and at kick-off time both teams and FAs involved knew that what was about to go on wasn't a full international, then I would be able to agree with the two of you. But in this tournament that doesn't appear to be the case.

Accuracy of the ratings is a valid concern of course, but for all I know it may actually be improved by this. I have no way of knowing if in the next tournament New Caledonia will play this same team or a different one. All I know is that as of December 2017 this team happens to be the New Caledonia national team.
Reply

nfm24
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 16:28

09 Dec 2017, 22:29 #45

Kirill wrote:If a match wasn't organized as a full international, and at kick-off time both teams and FAs involved knew that what was about to go on wasn't a full international, then I would be able to agree with the two of you. But in this tournament that doesn't appear to be the case.
This sounds like the argument used to declassify Olympic matches en masse.

In other words, you're essentially saying that, by showing up to this event, NC forfeited its right to any authority over its team status.  Or that its authority is superseded by that of the tournament organisers.
Reply

TheRoonBa
Joined: 31 Oct 2006, 22:16

09 Dec 2017, 22:54 #46

The match wasn't organised as a full international in the first instance - it was organised as a football match at the Pacific Mini Games.

There is no stipulation in the regulations that states that the matches played in this tournament must be considered FIFA A matches.  Only that they must be played under the laws of FIFA.  The only reason they are considered international A matches is that the organisers remembered to send FIFA an e-mail.  In fact, they completely forgot to send FIFA an e-mail about the women's tournament, and so all the matches in that are not A internationals as a result.  This shows why we should not rely on any "official" designation of "A" matches.  

Many tournament organisers in the past have labelled all the teams in their tournaments as national teams, when they have in fact been club teams, Olympic teams, or youth teams.  I guess it's more prestigious to say India v Brazil than India v São Paulo State U-17.

And the New Caledonia FA is well aware that these were not regular international matches, as in every report about the team (back to November, before the Games), they consistently refer to it as the U-21 national team.

But being aware of the status of their own team does not constitute being willing (or able) to write to FIFA and tell them, or in fact, being aware that they can do so.
Reply

Kirill
Joined: 07 Jun 2007, 12:58

Yesterday, 00:10 #47

nfm24 wrote:This sounds like the argument used to declassify Olympic matches en masse.
I did not imply that the reverse of what I said is also true as a rule.

nfm24 wrote:In other words, you're essentially saying that, by showing up to this event, NC forfeited its right to any authority over its team status.  Or that its authority is superseded by that of the tournament organisers.
Assuming it's the organisers who make the final decision about the status, NC would have had to communicate with them in advance about it. If they cared that is, which I don't know if they did.

If the organisers then refused to change the status, then the only way to avoid the matches being classified as "A" is not to play I suppose, or somehow break the rules to make a match not count.
Reply

nfm24
Joined: 07 Apr 2007, 16:28

Yesterday, 02:13 #48

Kirill wrote: If the organisers then refused to change the status, then the only way to avoid the matches being classified as "A" is not to play I suppose, or somehow break the rules to make a match not count.
Let's consider the reverse.  Suppose NC showed up to a U21 tournament with their "A" team, including older players.    Would you say that the matches must be classified as U21, because the organisers planned it that way ?

(obviously, in this hypothetical example, it is a friendly U21 tournament without serious checking of actual ages)


It basically comes down to whether to allow revisionism or to forbid it.  Either way, it doesn't make sense to pick and choose when revisionism is to be permitted.   Besides, whatever any of us decide now will be irrelevant as there will be revisionist versions of us in the future :-)
Reply