: Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:08 pm  

Beanman wrote:

Fair enough as you say as long as its applied fairly

Presumably that means we have seen the last of Jonathon Ross etc. interviewing "hell raising US actor ...." but somehow I just can't see it happening that way

Possibly, but there has to be a balance, and the hell raiser may have hell raised in the past but is now OK (e.g Mickey Rourke). But if Clooney gets sent down for affray for example, he could be effectively prevented from entering the UK, yes. Whether he would is questionable, and if let in the UKBA would fall back on the "individual circumstances" argument

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 9:08 pm  

Digby wrote:

How come Greg Birds visa application was accepted so quickly for his new club, Catalan? Michael Crocker had submitted his 2nd application before Greg Bird was even denied for Bradford, yet Crocker is still waiting his outcome. I can only assume the French are more efficient, or more lax, they're certainly more accepting!

French authorities are quicker?

: Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:00 pm  

So if Bird cant come to the UK with the Cats, i bet Jacko is worried about getting here for his 31 night stay

: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:16 am  

Kosh wrote:

Bird's wishes are essentially the same - to earn a living playing RL.

no, birds wishes to enter this country as as different as they could possibly be, he has gone from wishing to move here, living here, working here, being paid here to visiting here for three days to play 1 game of RL before leaving

they arent 'essentially' the same at all

So, let me get this straight...

You think that some trivial changes to his circumstances that are, by your own admission, completely unrelated to the reason he was originally rejected will somehow make the UKBA change their minds?

Yeah - I can see how that would work...

The only significant difference between his original application and any future attempt that takes place before his trial is resolved is continuity of time spent in the UK. If the reason for his rejection is actually as has been suspected, that shouldn't make any difference.

I still think that, on the balance of probabilities, he is likely to be turned away at the port of entry.

yes the only difference between his two applications is why is looking to come (a visit as opposed to living here) the length of time (a few days as opposed to two years) and where he is applying from (france rather than australia), but yeah they are essentially the same

ill explain it to you again, because for some reason, you tell us you are intelligent, yet seemed to miss a very obvious point

when his application is assessed, he wasnt immediately rejected purely on the basis he has outstanding charges, even if that was the only reason he was rejected

his application was looked at, as a whole, somethings went in his favour, others went against him, these things were weighed up, and in this instance the judgement came down on rejection

now, what you are doing, and i have no idea why, is looking at the major things we know will have counted against him, seen they havent changed and decided that he then cannot come into the country, and you have completely ignored that pretty much everything else around his application has changed,

whats even stranger is you then take on a patronising tone to explain how because these things that counted against havent changed it is crazy to think he will get in, and les catalans have made some huge cockup and that this should be obvious to everyone, but you then go on to admit you are making this up as you have no idea why he was refused in the first place or what the decision is going to be anyway

: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:24 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

whats even stranger is you then take on a patronising tone to explain how because these things that counted against havent changed it is crazy to think he will get in, and les catalans have made some huge cockup and that this should be obvious to everyone, but you then go on to admit you are making this up as you have no idea why he was refused in the first place or what the decision is going to be anyway

If he is, he's not the only one.

: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:48 am  

Chris28 wrote:

If he is, he's not the only one.

Personally, IMO, I would be astounded if he did not play in the UK.
It's a no brainer for me IMO, completely different circumstances to the original Bradford application.

: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:52 am  

hull smallears wrote:

:lol:

Personally, IMO, I would be astounded if he did not play in the UK.
It's a no brainer for me IMO, completely different circumstances to the original Bradford application.

Like everyone, we're speculating as we don't know the reasons for the original refusal. If Bird was refused for not having a work permit for example, he'll get in fine, as Smokey has been saying. If he was refused under the general rules, then unless there has been a change in his circumstances, he will have a tough job getting in.

The circumstances of his "application to enter the UK" may be different in purpose, but he still has to qualify under all the relevant immigration rules.

: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:59 am  

I thought all sportsmen/women entering the UK had to apply for a sporting visa rather than a working visa ? .

: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:59 am  

Chris28 wrote:

Like everyone, we're speculating as we don't know the reasons for the original refusal. If Bird was refused for not having a work permit for example, he'll get in fine, as Smokey has been saying. If he was refused under the general rules, then unless there has been a change in his circumstances, he will have a tough job getting in.

The circumstances of his "application to enter the UK" may be different in purpose, but he still has to qualify under all the relevant immigration rules.

I hope he is refused, just don't think that he will be
Does anyone know out of interest, what requirements or forms if any, a sporting team (players) requires to enter the UK for a short time to play sport?
Just wondering.

: Thu Mar 05, 2009 12:05 pm  

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/policyandlaw/immigrationlaw/immigrationrules/part2/ Paragraph 46M http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/IDIs/idischapter2/Chapter2__visitoridi.pdf?view=Binary Paragraph 2.8

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/policyandlaw/immigrationlaw/immigrationrules/part2/ Paragraph 46M http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/IDIs/idischapter2/Chapter2__visitoridi.pdf?view=Binary Paragraph 2.8