This week Gareth Bale and Aaron Ramsey supposedly caused controversy and risked upsetting Wales football fans by posing in the shirt of the Great Britain Olympic team.
Unless I'm completely out of touch with the feelings of most other Wales fans, I don't see anything to be upset about. The FAW, like its counterparts in Scotland and Northern Ireland, are against Welsh participation in a British team next summer. The argument is that by having the four home countries playing as one at the Olympic Games, then they will all be put under pressure from Fifa members who believe it is unfair for the UK to maintain the privileged position it finds itself in. And it's true, England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are lucky to have sporting independence when there is an absence of political independence.
However, do other Fifa affiliated countries really care about this? I would argue that it is in the interests of other countries that our independence remains, but only in a sporting sense. Merging the four associations would strengthen the possibilities for the team. Admittedly, a GB team would contain mostly English players, but add to that the likes of Gareth Bale and Aaron Ramsey and we would have a team that would be more of a threat to the major teams in Europe and South America. From the perspective of foreign countries, creating a permanent GB team would be to strengthen a rival.
If this were purely an argument about the team each country of the UK puts out, then surely the FA would have reservations about the Olympics too? After all, if the fears of the other FAs were realised there would be no more England football team. Yet the English, to me at least, don't seem to be at all worried about this.
The real reason that the FAW, SFA and IFA are so against the idea of a British Olympic team is because the four home associations hold high positions of power in world football which are undeserved and massively out dated. The laws of football are made by the International Football Association Board, in which Wales, England, Scotland and Northern Ireland each hold one vote, and Fifa (represented by more than 200 other countries) holds another four votes. In the 21st century this seems a bizarre and archaic set up. It has been this way since 1958 though the organisation has existed since the 19th century. There is a long held resentment by Fifa members that the UK holds such a position in the game and it is hard to argue that today this is deserved.
Now it is easier to understand the position of the home associations. The FAW do not want to lose that position on the IFAB as well as the post of Fifa Vice-President which is retained by the UK and rotated throughout the home nations. It is not surprising that the home nations are desperate to cling to this power but it is not good for football that it remains this way. Why should the UK have as much say in the laws of the game as the rest of the world put together? It is understandable why our unique position would be threatened with a combined Olympic team.
 |
| Uruguay's pioneering 1924 Olympic team |
In my opinion, Bale and Ramsey should definitely play for 'Team GB'. I would want to play if I could, after all the Olympic football tournament has a great history and for Welshmen it's likely to be a once in a lifetime opportunity to play on such a stage. While it would be catastrophic if we were to lose our Welsh national team and I am as patriotic as any Welshman, I don't think this is what upsets other major countries within Fifa. What I do feel sympathy with is the view that it is old fashioned and wrong that the UK should hold a Fifa Vice-Presidency and half the votes on the law-making board. There's no way four small countries would give up such power easily but giving up this privilege would be progressive for world football. History and tradition justifies keeping four teams, but it should not justify holding onto excessive power.
