AndyinLiverpool Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 51 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: He would be furious because he wants discrimination eliminating from the game right? 10 out 11 BAME players is completely disproportionate right Oh no, that is on pure merit, but when the boot is on the other foot it's because of racism, I see. Can you provide me with even one single piece of evidence that backs up your claim that managers are not being picked on merit and purely based on skin colour? Is anyone claiming that managers are being selected 'purely based on skin colour'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 5 minutes ago, StivePesley said: Can't really be arsed with the wummery, but you don't need to do a deep dive into stats land to get a feel for 1) the percentage of BAME players vs non BAME players 2) the percentage of Managers/Coaches who are ex-players The percentage of BAME Managers/Coaches should then be roughly around the same ratio but it's not. It's nothing like it. So why is that? If you're saying it's not racism (and it might not be) then what do you think explains it? I mean I'd rather have a meaningful discussion rather than triggering a load of WAAH WHAT ABOUT RACISM AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE!! guff. Wummery because I'm sick of people making an issue out of something that doesn't exist. Instead of being a smart arse give us these facts then. Who are these BAME managers that are not being given a chance? Why should the percentage of players be the same as the percentage of managers? That's based on guessing that exactly the same percentage are going into coaching and doing their badges. I'm not trying to trigger an argument about racism against white people because to be honest I know it doesn't exist. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of people who are in bodies that are supposed to be eradicating discrimination doing exactly the opposite to suit their own agendas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 12 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said: The points are not really there though. Chelsea fielded a lot of black players? What is the point you are making? Someone is not as cross as you think they should be? No sorry, don't understand. But as someone else has already noted on this thread, I am an idiot. My point is if people want selection based on quotas then it should work both ways, not just when it suits them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 8 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: Why should the percentage of players be the same as the percentage of managers? That's based on guessing that exactly the same percentage are going into coaching and doing their badges. Precisely the sort of questions you'd hope that they are asking. Personally I think it's a deep rooted issue that will take a long time to normalise, but getting more BAME managers into the game con only act as an incentive/ role models and encourage more BAME players that going into management/coaching is a real option. Right now it's an anomaly and this is a worthy (but probaby not very effective) way of accelerating the normalisation and fixing the anomaly. But it feels like doing something is better than doing nothing right? If all they have to worry about is the usual whataboutery bleating of the minority who think the opposite is true then I don't think that's going to put them off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 47 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said: Except at no point in this thread have I said this. I may be an idiot (you could not know this) but at least I haven't resorted to cheap name calling. To reiterate, I am looking at equality from the point of view that things as they currently stand are not equal; others, some of whom cry discrimination against white people, seem to believe that they are. My contribution has been along the lines of clubs not doing the recruitment job properly. If that makes me an idiot, then so be it. 2 hours ago, AndyinLiverpool said: Poor white people. We must rise up and take control. I understand that this was a joke, but whether knowingly or not, you decided to ignore G Star's points. At best dismissing them as irrelevant and at worst implying that anyone who harbours such thoughts must be racist. If the FA answered Lord Ouseley's complaints with a flippant and sarcastic reply, like "Poor black people. They must rise up and take control" all hell would break loose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 22 minutes ago, StivePesley said: Precisely the sort of questions you'd hope that they are asking. Personally I think it's a deep rooted issue that will take a long time to normalise, but getting more BAME managers into the game con only act as an incentive/ role models and encourage more BAME players that going into management/coaching is a real option. Right now it's an anomaly and this is a worthy (but probaby not very effective) way of accelerating the normalisation and fixing the anomaly. But it feels like doing something is better than doing nothing right? If all they have to worry about is the usual whataboutery bleating of the minority who think the opposite is true then I don't think that's going to put them off. It's worth doing something about if it's an issue yes. Who are these managers/coaches that are getting overlooked? If there was a stat that 99% of refuse collectors are white, would this guy be making an issue of it? Not sure why football always seems to be targeted, couldn't be because of the money could it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 50 minutes ago, StivePesley said: Can't really be arsed with the wummery, but you don't need to do a deep dive into stats land to get a feel for 1) the percentage of BAME players vs non BAME players 2) the percentage of Managers/Coaches who are ex-players The percentage of BAME Managers/Coaches should then be roughly around the same ratio but it's not. It's nothing like it. So why is that? If you're saying it's not racism (and it might not be) then what do you think explains it? I mean I'd rather have a meaningful discussion rather than triggering a load of WAAH WHAT ABOUT RACISM AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE!! guff. Wrong. The average age of managers is around 50, and given that there has been a significant increase in the number of BAME footballers over the years, it is inaccurate to compare the ratio of BAME managers to BAME players in 2017. You would need to look at the ratio of BAME players 15/20 years ago to achieve a more accurate representation. This normally works out at around 12.5%, so there's undoubtedly still an issue with the number of BAME managers and coaches, but it isn't nearly as severe as dishonest people like Ouseley make out. I can't blame him though, if my entire job rested on systemic racism existing in football, I would likely misrepresent the figures to protect my position too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 2 hours ago, AndyinLiverpool said: Poor white people. We must rise up and take control. Do you think white purple are born with original sin or something? I know there's a lot of Catholics where you're from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 I know a lot of figures have been given, but is there actually any data from BAME candidates suggesting they have been overlooked for jobs they knew they were as equally qualified for as other candidates? Surely that is the stat that should be looked at not how many managers and coaches compared with players there are etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyinLiverpool Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 19 minutes ago, Anon said: I understand that this was a joke, but whether knowingly or not, you decided to ignore G Star's points. At best dismissing them as irrelevant and at worst implying that anyone who harbours such thoughts must be racist. If the FA answered Lord Ouseley's complaints with a flippant and sarcastic reply, like "Poor black people. They must rise up and take control" all hell would break loose. I implied nothing of the sort. You infer all you like. After all, you are clearly not an idiot like me. The point was boo hoo discrimination against white people. That's not a point at all. That's the defence of the status quo, my opinions on which I have expressed elsewhere in this thread. If you really want an exposition on the relative power of different ethnic groups in society, you can get one elsewhere. Listen to 'Only a Pawn in their Game' by Bob Dylan for example. That'll do it in 4 minutes. Suffice to say that the 'discrimination against white people' argument is only ever used when white people feel a position they held in society is under threat. A position where being white has always been enough to get a start. The stuff about managers being chosen purely on the colour of their skin is patent nonsense, so yes, I ignored that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyinLiverpool Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said: My point is if people want selection based on quotas then it should work both ways, not just when it suits them. Nobody is saying interview fewer white people. Just interview more black people. Interview more people. Do a more thorough job of recruiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 1 hour ago, StivePesley said: Can't really be arsed with the wummery, but you don't need to do a deep dive into stats land to get a feel for 1) the percentage of BAME players vs non BAME players 2) the percentage of Managers/Coaches who are ex-players The percentage of BAME Managers/Coaches should then be roughly around the same ratio but it's not. It's nothing like it. So why is that? If you're saying it's not racism (and it might not be) then what do you think explains it? I mean I'd rather have a meaningful discussion rather than triggering a load of WAAH WHAT ABOUT RACISM AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE!! guff. I don't think you are from Liverpool but here's more sarcasm belittling racial prejudice against white people, like white people have no right to complain if they experience racism. More white guilt/original sin. I just don't get it. Racism is racism. Besides, it might well be wummery to hoist someone by their own petard. But it's also the right thing to do. One minute G star is engaging in wummery, the next he's pointing out that discrimination can work both ways (which you don't seem to have a problem with, even though I would recommend that you should). Is there some reason we shouldn't apply these standards Mosely wants to Chelsea's youth setup? Is that not an extra consideration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 11 minutes ago, Anon said: Wrong. The average age of managers is around 50, and given that there has been a significant increase in the number of BAME footballers over the years, it is inaccurate to compare the ratio of BAME managers to BAME players in 2017. You would need to look at the ratio of BAME players 15/20 years ago to achieve a more accurate representation. This normally works out at around 12.5%, so there's undoubtedly still an issue with the number of BAME managers and coaches, but it isn't nearly as severe as dishonest people like Ouseley make out. I can't blame him though, if my entire job rested on systemic racism existing in football, I would likely misrepresent the figures to protect my position too. OK - that's more like it. You're coming up with realistic reasons why they aren't the same, but admitting that they still don't quite add up. Not sure about the accusation that Ouseley is overstating things to justify his job as chairman of the kick it out campaign. Ad hominem attacks seem a bit unneccesary. Or do all campaigners for injustice make stuff up to justify their existence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 7 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said: Nobody is saying interview fewer white people. Just interview more black people. Interview more people. Do a more thorough job of recruiting. In order to cast their net wider they shouldn't interview more people in general, they should interview more black people specifically? All through this you've been applying this idea that it's not about racism, it's about casting a wider net, but the solution to the problem is to racialise the issue that isn't a racial issue. This is motte and bailey argumentation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 2 minutes ago, StringerBell said: Is there some reason we shouldn't apply these standards Mosely wants to Chelsea's youth setup? Is that not an extra consideration? Not sure if calling him Mosely is funnier if it were deliberate or a fredudian slip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 9 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said: Nobody is saying interview fewer white people. Just interview more black people. Interview more people. Do a more thorough job of recruiting. And why has he chosen to level this at football clubs? What insight does he have into their selection processes? Why should companies (let's not forget that's what football clubs are) be forced to interview people just to fill up quotas. And who is going to determine what criteria you need to meet to qualify for interviews? If it's just based on the badges you hold then surely that is going to throw it open to lots more white people...which I am sure he would hate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringerBell Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 Just now, StivePesley said: Not sure if calling him Mosely is funnier if it were deliberate or a fredudian slip Whoever the sad sack is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 4 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: And why has he chosen to level this at football clubs? Erm - because he's the chairman of the Kick It Out anti-racism in Football campaign? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 1 minute ago, StivePesley said: Erm - because he's the chairman of the Kick It Out anti-racism in Football campaign? But if he's so passionate about this surely he should be looking at all sectors - supermarkets, coal mines, refuse collectors. There's an endless list of jobs where I'm sure he could invent issues to keep himself in a job and help out allsorts of people who are discriminated against? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyinLiverpool Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 9 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: And why has he chosen to level this at football clubs? What insight does he have into their selection processes? Why should companies (let's not forget that's what football clubs are) be forced to interview people just to fill up quotas. And who is going to determine what criteria you need to meet to qualify for interviews? If it's just based on the badges you hold then surely that is going to throw it open to lots more white people...which I am sure he would hate That's his brief. Football clubs should be subject to the same discrimination laws as everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.