Jack Grealish’s decision to commit his international future to England despite playing for the Republic of Ireland at Under 17, U18 and U21 level provoked much discussion this week.
Twitter and other social media were alive as football fans vocalised their unease at the Aston Villa man’s choice, arguing that players should be allowed to represent only one nation.
Two of the most high-profile cases of players changing teams in recent years are Brazilians who opted for Spain: Marcos Senna, born in Sao Paulo, was part of the Euro 2008-winning side, while Diego Costa currently turns out for Vicente del Bosque’s team despite having previously played two friendlies for the country of his birth.
Under the existing arrangement, players are able to switch if they have not represented another nation in a competitive fixture at senior level.
It is not an ideal situation, but extending this to friendlies and youth football would be a dangerous move that would benefit only larger footballing countries.
In a globalised world, thousands of players qualify for more than one nation.
Numerous French players in recent years, including Patrice Evra, Patrick Vieira and Claude Makelele, were born in Africa, while some of the current Cameroon, Ghana and Algeria squads grew up overseas.
A rule change would tempt larger countries to give caps in friendly matches to any promising youngsters, tying them to their nation and preventing them from representing another.
Lesser global powers would be unable to sweep up those deemed not quite good enough in the long run for the likes of France, Brazil, Spain and Germany.
The selection pool for the non-elite would shrink considerably, with countless players needlessly consigned to the international wilderness.
Preventing switches of allegiance may sound good in theory, but in practice it would benefit only the few at the top.
Follow us on Twitter @NatSportUAE
