That being the case, Declan Rice is to be wished well — in the sense that it is to be hoped that he ends up being comfortable with his decision.

It is impossible to wish him success; that would mean England being successful.

As Irvine Welsh — author of Trainspotting –—put it during the last World Cup when a load of pompous fools were insisting that Scots should shout for England: “This is the sort of shite talked by armchair w**kers who tune into big tournaments but don’t understand footballing rivalries having never attended a game.”

But, allowing for that, Rice’s personal decision is unworthy of any vitriol.

Naturally, there are lads out on Twitter with pikes and short ropes and boiling tar — but there appear always to be lads out on Twitter with such things at their disposal.

The abuse is not on the Jack Grealish scale, but such as there is stands devoid of perspective — the jagged edges of this story do not lend themselves to neatly boxed off packaging.

That is not to be said that there are no legitimate questions to be asked of Rice.

There are — and they are fairly basic and they merit asking. One of them came from Kevin Kilbane, who said: “If you’re a ‘proud Englishman’ then why play for us in the first place?”

That’s a reasonable question — although it is also a point being made as well as a question being asked.

And the answer lies in the fact that the bottom line is that migration patterns mean identity is a complex thing. It is patently the case that you can be proudly English and still be proud of an Irish heritage.

Any Irish person who understands the realities of extended generations of cousins who are scattered around the world must be able to understand — from basic conversations — that multiple identities are normal and commonplace.

And it is entirely reasonable to feel more than one thing.

The story of Declan Rice is a reminder of the tangled relationship between sport and national identity.

On top of that, Rice is 20 years of age, living in the madness of the Premier League, trying to figure out his life in the full glare of public opinion.

The statement that he issued to announce what he was doing was well-considered and was the product of care.

There is no doubt that his statement was crafted by advisors, but he would have been silly not to have taken assistance in what he was doing.

That he also rang Mick McCarthy to inform him personally of his decision is commendable. It was obviously the right thing to do but it should not be taken as a given.

McCarthy’s reaction was classy, and stood in direct contrast to the goading comment by the owner of West Ham, David Gold.

Not as difficult as you thought Roy 😉 https://t.co/GHsyOEIcz6

— David Gold (@davidgold) February 13, 2019

No matter which way Rice twisted, there was grief coming his way. But, ultimately, on balance, he deserves to have the decency of the sentiments that he expressed accepted and respected.

There are wider issues here that also deserve consideration. The brilliant historian Eric Hobsbawn once wrote that a nation could be most easily understood through its sporting teams.

The flags, the anthems, the emblem, the colour, the dignitaries in the soft seats, all appear to underline his point.

But what Hobsbawn says is also not at all true. When it comes down to it, players and athletes have long accepted the notion of making compromises that allow them to compete on a global stage regardless of birth or heritage or expressed nationality.

And the supporters of almost any national team appear willing to accept anybody who will improve the fortunes of that team, regardless of birth or heritage.

Basically, supporters want the national team to be successful and they don’t get overly caught up with the ethics of how that happens.

If that means that somebody is English, or South African, or Australian, or a New Zealander one day, but turns Irish the next, then ‘grand’ appears to be the overwhelming sentiment.

In this respect, at least, international sport is a bit of a sham. A lot of a sham, in fact.

There many examples from many sports to illustrate this point. But here’s a good one: the Irish runner Fionnuala McCormack came fourth at the 2016 European athletics championships in Amsterdam in a 10,000m race.

She was beaten by Turkey’s Yasemin Can. Except the Turk, Yasemin Can, was not really the Turk, Yasemin Can. Instead, she was actually a Kenyan woman whose real name is Vivian Jemutai.

In the months before those 2016 European Championships, Vivian Jemutai changed her name and her allegiance to Turkey. By the way, she continued to live in Kenya and train in Kenya.

Fionnuala McCormack nailed the whole farce perfectly: “I am kind of sick of it really. It’s a joke really. I am not just saying this because I came fourth, it’s the same in every sport and I don’t think people should be able to just hop countries just because they feel like it.”

Yes, to all of that.

The cynical ‘country-hopping’ denounced by Fionnuala McCormack is obviously wrong — but it is still the case that population flows and the need to be flexible to cater for the migration of people in modern life must be facilitated.

It is much too crude an instrument to equate sporting nationality with a place of birth, but working out where to draw the line has proven well beyond sports administrators.

And the Irish are no mere victims here. In recent years, James McClean, Shane Duffy, and Darron Gibson all played underage soccer for Northern Ireland before moving their allegiance to the Republic of Ireland.

It was the kind of decision that led Jim Shannon, a DUP MP, to table a motion in the House of Commons in London which read: “That this House expresses concern over the pursuit of Northern Ireland (NI) born football players by the Football Association Ireland; and calls for the chief executive of the FAI, John Delaney, to send out a clear message that there will be no poaching of NI players, that the boundary lines will be respected and honoured, and that the game will be played fairly and within the rules.”

Presumably the lads who are raging with Declan Rice agree with Jim Shannon?

Or do we only apply nuance when it suits us? And, nuance in this instance, relates to the immediate context of the Good Friday Agreement and the post-Troubles accommodation of contested identities on this island.

The key to understanding how international sport works is to accept that in a professional environment, identity is only part of the question.

Rugby is the ultimate modern example of this.

At the 2015 Rugby World Cup, some 40 players born in New Zealand played for other countries in the course of the competition.

Some of them played for Ireland, of course, but they also played for eight different countries: Australia, Scotland, England, France, Romania, Tonga, and Japan.

For their part, the All-Blacks had five players in their squad who were actually born in American Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, and Australia.

The way Irish rugby has used the residency laws to recruit players who were not Irish is wrong. Nobody can deny the contribution of these players or the fact that they are well respected and liked.

But moving to the country to play a sport for a minimum of three years should not have been allowed as a qualification for playing for that team.

That the rules have been flagrantly abused by every serious rugby team in the world — with the exception of Argentina — does not diminish the Irish actions.

It merely underlines the extent of the absurdity.

That the Irish identified particular players in particular positions in order to ‘grow’ the options in that are makes it all the worse — the ‘Project Players’ approach is absolutely within the rules, but it undercuts the meaning of international sport.

It is true that the residency rule has now changed from three years to five years — at least it means that the players recruited internationally by the IRFU will actually qualify for citizenship at the same time that they can play for the country.

But the point is that we have gladly milked the world for our own ends and cannot really complain when we lose a player in the other direction.

As for Declan Rice, the photo of him playing for Ireland cannot be erased.

The fact that he switched allegiance is something that will trail him throughout his career. He looks like a magnificent player in the making.

It is absolutely justified to mourn the fact that he is lost to Ireland, but the real issue is the farce that defines too much of international sport.

Paul Rouse is associate professor of history at University College Dublin.