Should Governments be allowed to interfere with soccer matches for there won political gain.?

Question

In the Oceania 2010 World Cup qualifying zone there has been a match postponed with an investigation launched by FIFA into the New Zealand vs Fiji match due to of been played in Albany, Auckland saturday 13th October. The New Zealand Government denied the Fijian goalkeeper a visa because of his partner has ties to the Fijian military who by way of an illegal coup de eta't have held power for some time now. The Fijian team rightly decided to boycott this match and now FIFA may award 3 vital points to Fiji. I have a serious problem with this. Firstly it is up to FIFA to decide the right to any team to play in WC qualifiers (or at least should be) and the NZ Govt has over ruled the judgement. Secondly we look stupid. Sure the situation in Fiji is illegal and bad, but we should of respected FIFA and the Oceania Football as well as the fans who will miss out. Thirdly the human rights in China are appalling, but no boycott of Beijing 2008. Fourthly it may cost us a playoff to get to the WC.

Meant to read own, not won by the way

Perhaps it was done with the current Government way behind in polls and likely on the outer. Thank you for reminding me it was Fiji who decided not to turn up not the NZ Government. The proof would be with the rugby sevens. The Fijian Sevens team has had members of the Fijian Army and Territorial Force. Would they be denied entry to the IRB Sevens circuit tournament here. Probably not as rugby is King and although Soccer is a superior game the NZ Govt would probably not have the guts to tell some players they are not welcome. It is pretty silly as the Goalkeepers partners father has connections with the Army. He is not even engaged to her. Maybe I am just annoyed at politics re-entering sports, we are very Politically Correct and I missed seeing my national team play a match here. (First international match in NZ in around 2 years!!)

Answer 1

The problem is that this situation falls into that grey area. A government should not interfere with a sporting event just to make a political point. However, the New Zealand government didn't decide to cancel the soccer game or boycott competitions with Fiji. What it did was apply its general visa standards to ban someone who would not have been eligible to travel to New Zealand on ordinary business or tourism.

Obviously, if New Zealand's laws preclude members of the Fiji team from traveling to New Zealand, FIFA, OFC, and the two associations will have to find a neutral site to play that game. While FIFA has the right to set the rules for the competition, they do not have the right to tell the government of New Zealand who New Zealand has to let into the country. FIFA insists that governments not interfere in the management of their national associations, but the street runs both ways. The national associations don't get to dictate government policies on visas either.

Answer 2

Ask yourself if you would have a problem with the New Zealand government using this reasoning to prevent a tourist or other visitor from entering the country.

If the reason for keeping him out meets current visa guidelines for the country in question, then I don't see why it makes a difference if they are a soccer player. If you disagree with the reason in principle, then follow whatever procedures your government has for initiating and campaigning for change.

As to the whole team boycotting the decision -- that is their choice. Players often miss games for a variety of reasons... medical, family, etc. But the team carries on. No one is preventing the team from playing except the team.

It may suck for the game, but unless you can prove to me that NO OTHER person with a similar relationship to someone with ties to the Fijian military has been prevented entry to New Zealand, then there's nothing to complain about -- every country has the right to establish guidelines as to who is allowed into their borders.

FIFA deals with the games... not with border security.