NI boss Michael O'Neill: I did not attack FAI over player eligibility

In a recent newspaper interview, O'Neill expressed his unhappiness that younger, potential full Northern Ireland internationals who come from nationalist backgrounds are being approached by the FAI.

The rules governing international football allow anyone eligible to represent one country to play for the other, provided they have not been capped at senior level.

And on the day that he announced Northern Ireland's 24-man squad for this month's friendly against South Korea, O'Neill issued the following statement.

Here's Michael O'Neill's statement in full

During a recent interview I was questioned about the issue of eligibility. Contrary to how it has been reported, I did not attack the FAI I merely responded to the questions I was asked.

For me, eligibility is not, and should not, be a political issue. Nor should it be a religious issue.

For me, eligibility is a football issue.

Recent media reports have sparked much opinion, particularly around the rights of players born in Northern Ireland to be free to choose for whom they wish to play. I have never disputed that right, nor have I ever been critical of a player for exercising that right.

The FAI correctly states it has broken no rules in approaching young Northern Ireland players requesting they switch allegiance to the Republic of Ireland.

My concerns lie specifically with players aged 17-21 in the underage set-ups.

I've seen a heavy price paid by too many talented young players; players who have transferred their allegiance to a country that ultimately doesn't rate them, nor play them - creating an international vacuum for the player that signals a wholly different outcome to the career that they may have had.

My request therefore, to the FAI and to any other association, is this: that if a young player has chosen to represent Northern Ireland at U17, U19 or U21 level, that he is allowed to develop in these crucial formative years without the responsibility of having to make a decision regarding his international allegiance that is binding for the rest of his career.

My request extends to any country, not just the Republic of Ireland.

Where I am critical of the FAI is the way in which it currently communicates with the IFA over a player who potentially wishes to make a transfer. There is no dialogue with our coaches from their respective counterparts at the FAI besides an email from the FAI's licensing department requesting information on the player.

The Irish FA invests thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of pounds in players in our Club NI programme. While it is a player's right to choose to play for the Republic of Ireland at underage level, such a decision means that another young player has missed out on the opportunity to be part of our elite performance pathway and another player in the FAI system will miss out on selection.

I have been asking my counterpart at the FAI for a meeting to discuss these issues for more than eight months. I am pleased that he indicated last week that he is now willing to take me up on that. It is clear to me that given the examples that Martin used in his press conference that he misunderstood the issues that I wish to address. I am not talking about senior players but those aged 17-21 born in Northern Ireland.

To reiterate, eligibility is a football issue. We and the FAI have a responsibility to invest in and nurture talent on both sides of the border. With that comes a duty and an obligation to protect those young talents in their most formative and vulnerable years.

We appeal for transparency and fairness at underage level.

We respect that young players, who represent Northern Ireland at underage level have the right to choose to play for the Republic of Ireland. What we are asking for is that such a significant decision - one that could affect their entire career - is neither influenced nor made until that player reaches senior age and is made at a time which is in the player's best interest.