The FA adopt the Rooney Rule for all future appointments

[McRainy]

1 hour ago, StringerBell said:

I’m glad you’re here to tell us straight, cis, white males how wrong it is to discriminate based on race, sexuality, and gender.

Progressivism ladies and gentlemen! Take a bow!

Calling you out is not discriminating against you. 

[eddie]

57 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

No that isn't all it boils down to.

I'm sick of campaigns using football time make an issue of something that in reality doesn't exist.

Was there an outcry when Arsenal and West Ham were fielding teams with mainly black players? 

If not, why not?

This is about wanting equal representation isn't it?

I thought that it was about equal opportunity. The fact that there is a disparity in representation is thought to highlight a non-level playing field historically, and the 'Rooney Rule' is an attempt to address that.

[StringerBell]

30 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

Calling you out is not discriminating against you. 

Calling me out based on race, gender, sexuality is. Maybe I just disagree with you. Maybe others just disagree with you. Maybe you should treat them as individuals rather than act like the type of bigot you supposed don’t like.

[McRainy]

4 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

Calling me out based on race, gender, sexuality is. Maybe I just disagree with you.

You, and others, are expressing opinions which show a lack of awareness of their privilege. 

Disagree all you like, pointing that out still isn’t discrimination. 

[Alph]

14 minutes ago, eddie said:

I thought that it was about equal opportunity. The fact that there is a disparity in representation is thought to highlight a non-level playing field historically, and the 'Rooney Rule' is an attempt to address that.

Why is there not equal opportunity though? 

Is the proof the lack of black managers in the top flight? 

To prove there's no equal opportunity you'd have to have numerous cases of 2 individuals that hold pretty much the exact same CV in their hand and the job given to the white guy more often.

That's never the case.

Are people seriously suggesting that the greed at the top levels of football or the struggle at the bottom are not important enough to overlook the colour of someone's skin.

There's a huge disparity in our country. Over 95% of people are white. How are you going not going to see more white people represented in everything

What percentages are there in football? 

I saw one stat showing the number of BAME players in comparison to BAME managers. I mean what is that supposed to show? 

Why do we have to work hard to make things equal representation. Is it not enough not to be a racist?

[Alph]

3 hours ago, Lambchop said:

I think you’re confusing personal prejudice with systemic racism. On a personal level yes, I agree, people are people and no one cares, unless they happen to be prejudiced. 

What that doesn’t address is the power structures in society which systematically disadvantage black people from day one. Anti racism isn’t about seeing race everywhere, it’s about recognising that just not being racist yourself doesn’t do anything to counter the disadvantages black people encounter at every stage of their lives and careers. It is far from being a level playing field, and these anti racist measures attempt to address that. 

I don't understand.

What power structures?

What disadvantage is there to being black in the UK? And in football?

I don't understand why people think it's not a level playing field. Is it because of the lower representation of black people in high powered jobs? Rich lists? Our country is predominantly white. I don't expect a majority white people to top many lists in Ghana. 

I'm fairly confident that if I'm a black lad in the UK I can be anything the white lad next door can be. 

In football clubs hire racists, rapists, murderers and thugs etc. But they let race get in the way of their decisions?

 

[GboroRam]

1 hour ago, StringerBell said:

Position? So you’re talking jobs?

The people at the BBC who lost their jobs due to being white, their positions weren’t threatened in the slightest? Even though they lost their positions?

I can't find much about this. Except the mail and the express, who I do not view as trustworthy journalism, I saw one article about Jon Holmes (presumably not that Jon Holmes) saying he'd been fired for being white but BBC responses were they had decided to change the show after 18 years and were recruiting based on merit. Presuming you aren't suggesting the BBC have a duty to not change their shows, and you don't have an objection to recruiting based on merit, there must be some other issue?

[StringerBell]

5 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

You, and others, are expressing opinions which show a lack of awareness of their privilege. 

Disagree all you like, pointing that out still isn’t discrimination. 

Yes it is. I don’t have privilege for a start. I’m not a member of the old boys network that the research into this topic discusses. And because of this rule I’d actually now be disadvantaged if I were to get into football coaching. So that’s put that to bed.

Also, the balls on you to come on a forum predominantly frequented by men due to it being a football forum, a forum for a team based in a predominantly white country, to then reduce those individuals to a collective, and make generalisations about that collective. 

I understand your arguments. I do not agree with them because I have thought about them and I regard them to be nonsense. Not because I’m a straight, white male. But congrats on making the trio of people who I’ve heard state I should be mindful of my whiteness in the last fortnight a quartet. So that’s you, Stive, an obnoxious podcaster and the de facto leader of the alt-right.

[Alph]

28 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

You, and others, are expressing opinions which show a lack of awareness of their privilege. 

 

Are you saying being white is my privilege? 

What advantages have you gained or I gained by being white.?

Who do you know that's gained an advantage by being white?

I can see the privilege in being born rich. I can see the advantage you would have over me if you had greater wealth. 

Don't take anything I'm saying here with any spite or aggression. I'm not mocking or patronising you. So many threads like this get nasty. I'm not into that. This is a huge pub table and we're buying rounds. So hopefully we can keep this thread above the nasty ***** that you usually see in them

A lot of it can come from the tone one person thinks another has used. Please don't read anything I put in that kind of tone. 

 

[StringerBell]

22 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I can't find much about this. Except the mail and the express, who I do not view as trustworthy journalism, I saw one article about Jon Holmes (presumably not that Jon Holmes) saying he'd been fired for being white but BBC responses were they had decided to change the show after 18 years and were recruiting based on merit. Presuming you aren't suggesting the BBC have a duty to not change their shows, and you don't have an objection to recruiting based on merit, there must be some other issue?

No it wasn’t just those publications that covered it.

He says they were deciding to change the host and wanted more diversity. So he lost a job he was good at because his genes and chromosomes were wrong. 2 weeks later the autumnwatch presenter said the same thing had happened to him, only he was such a cuck that he agreed with it!

I’ll take Holmes’ version of events over those of a company that has diversity quotas and has excluded non-whites from applying for posts on more than one occasion.

 

 

[ariotofmyown]

14 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

No it wasn’t just those publications that covered it.

He says they were deciding to change the host and wanted more diversity. So he lost a job he was good at because his genes and chromosomes were wrong. 2 weeks later the autumnwatch presenter said the same thing had happened to him, only he was such a cuck that he agreed with it!

I’ll take Holmes’ version of events over those of a company that has diversity quotas and has excluded non-whites from applying for posts on more than one occasion.

 

 

The end days cometh

[StringerBell]

13 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

The end days cometh

Ah I see your mistake. Due to the overly emotional, god awful progressive ******** that you swallow up you’re so used to seeing racism against ethnic minorities characterised as ‘oppression’ and ‘systemic’ that when someone points out discrimination towards white men (let’s face it, the worst kind of person) you think they’re being over dramatic. 

Now, about that complete lack of empathy that you show towards a person who has lost his job simply because it suits your agenda not to care that I was referring to earlier... And the misrepresentation of others views to an extreme caricature...

Thanks. Thanks for making my point.

[CaverRam]

Maybe this happened:

FA Executive Meeting, some oak lined board room in London.

Day of discussion about the future of the game. The Inclusion and Diversity session comes up. The investment in the female game gets a tick in the box, lots more girls' grass roots teams, Women's professional game also growing and Pro teams taking it seriously.

Move on to ethnic diversity. The game has come a very long way in the last 30 years since the dark days of the Mark Walters and John Barnes banana throwing incidents. The question is raised about minorities in management and coaching roles and the apparent disparity in racial demographic between players and managers. Is it an issue? Could the game be better with a broader mix? Debate happens.

If there was a desire to be more diverse, how could it be done? The Rooney rule is raised, the idea that by mandating the inclusion of people from diverse ethnic backgrounds may just stimulate and encourage interest. As someone has already suggested, the trickle down may just encourage a broader group of talent for teams to choose from if something is done now at the top of the game. The best person for the job will still get it but the intent is to try to make the scouting and consideration of the potential hire a little broader. 

No doubt the FA will be aware that the Daily Mail and others will be outraged, but they feel the need to find some way to address the situation. It has worked in the US in NFL, and been tried broadly in business in some of the biggest companies, with mixed results, but the learnings are useful and some positive impact has been made. Providing people understand that the idea is to encourage, broaden and grow a talent pool for everyone's benefit in the long term, it's something very difficult to be critical of. There are no targets, no mandated quotas, no white people losing their jobs or opportunity. I understand its not an exact science, I understand it's emotive, but really, there are no losers with such an initiative.

[Highgate]

1 hour ago, Andicis said:

Yet some people are refusing to acknowledge, maybe the lack of black coaches is because there is other candidates who earned their spot by merit?

You're so sure that something is stopping them, yet you can't comment on what it is, so is probably be discrimination?

I don't see Chris Hughton struggling to find his next job, and quite rightly so because he has proven himself to be a good manager. Really, I don't see a reason why these football clubs wouldn't hire a good coach for any of those reasons. I don't think an owner is going to say ''this guy is more likely to get us promoted, but he is black so we won't hire him, and we'll get this guy instead because he's white'' that seems ludicrous.

That something is stopping them is not debatable, are you arguing that they are in fact not under represented in coaching roles?  Maybe it's only their own reluctance or disinterest that is stopping them...but there is certainly a reason. Incidentally i said merely that discrimination was a 'plausible option' rather than probable. However I will go further if you prefer and say that it probably exists at least to some degree.

I don't know how you can be surprised that I'm aware of a certain repeated effect (lack of minorities in sporting coaching roles) and I'm convinced there must be a reason (because it's repeated) and even though i don't know what the precise cause is I'm willing to rule out one explanation (that minorities are less capable coaches). This is perfectly normal behaviour.

Interesting that you bring up Chris Hughton to support your case. You'll agree that Hughton has very relevant first hand experience of this issue. So you'll be interested to know he has been very vocal in his support for the introduction of the Rooney rule 'or something like it' across English football.

If coaching appointments were based purely on merit, don't you think we'd have seen more BAME coaches by now ?

[ariotofmyown]

13 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

Ah I see your mistake. Due to the overly emotional, god awful progressive ******** that you swallow up you’re so used to seeing racism against ethnic minorities characterised as ‘oppression’ and ‘systemic’ that when someone points out discrimination towards white men (let’s face it, the worst kind of person) you think they’re being over dramatic. 

Now, about that complete lack of empathy that you show towards a person who has lost his job simply because it suits your agenda not to care that I was referring to earlier... And the misrepresentation of others views to an extreme caricature...

Thanks. Thanks for making my point.

They are such rubbish examples. One of the white men involved didn't even have any empathy for himself!

There is a trend of coaches not been black. You are arguing against this by citing a change of DJ on a bbc radio show!

Read @CaverRam's beautiful post on this subject. Can't you just imagine there may be good intentions in what people do sometimes?

At least the Daily Mail are using their anger in an attempt to shift papers so they can sell adverts. What are you trying to sell? What are you trying to change?

[Norman]

15 minutes ago, Highgate said:

That something is stopping them is not debatable, are you arguing that they are in fact not under represented in coaching roles?  Maybe it's only their own reluctance or disinterest that is stopping them...but there is certainly a reason. Incidentally i said merely that discrimination was a 'plausible option' rather than probable. However I will go further if you prefer and say that it probably exists at least to some degree.

I don't know how you can be surprised that I'm aware of a certain repeated effect (lack of minorities in sporting coaching roles) and I'm convinced there must be a reason (because it's repeated) and even though i don't know what the precise cause is I'm willing to rule out one explanation (that minorities are less capable coaches). This is perfectly normal behaviour.

Interesting that you bring up Chris Hughton to support your case. You'll agree that Hughton has very relevant first hand experience of this issue. So you'll be interested to know he has been very vocal in his support for the introduction of the Rooney rule 'or something like it' across English football.

If coaching appointments were based purely on merit, don't you think we'd have seen more BAME coaches by now ?

Are they under represented?

Black males make up 1.5% of the population. 

We need 1 manager in all the professional leagues. 

Asians, though. There is a case that needs answering. Why do they not make professional football? That then leads to no coaches and managers. I can see that needing a Rooney Rule. If you can"t make it as a professional football, like black and white kids can, do you find it harder to get into a coaching job?

Still not racist that they are under represented, or down to the establishment being racist or society in general. 

[Highgate]

6 minutes ago, Norman said:

Are they under represented?

Black males make up 1.5% of the population. 

We need 1 manager in all the professional leagues. 

Asians, though. There is a case that needs answering. Why do they not make professional football? That then leads to no coaches and managers. I can see that needing a Rooney Rule. If you can"t make it as a professional football, like black and white kids can, do you find it harder to get into a coaching job?

Still not racist that they are under represented, or down to the establishment being racist or society in general. 

I think it's closer to 3% in the 2011 census, including mixed backgrounds I'm guessing. Given that coaching roles are predominantly given to ex-footballers, just focusing on a community's overall percentage of the population is not really the relevant data figure to consider.

How many coaching roles are given to ex-footballers? How many of these are given to BAME ex-footballers?  Does the number of BAME ex-footballing coaches accurately reflect the number of BAME footballers?. Given that the answer to the last question is 'obviously not', then the next questions are, why is that the case and what can be done about it?

Those are the relevant questions to ask in my opinion.

 

[PodgeyRam]

All I'm seeing on here is a lot of argument about something that will more than likely have no negative effect on anybody, whether they're black, white, asian or blue with green polka dots.

[Norman]

1 minute ago, Highgate said:

I think it's closer to 3% in the 2011 census, including mixed backgrounds I'm guessing. Given that coaching roles are predominantly given to ex-footballers, just focusing on a community's overall percentage of the population is not really the relevant data figure to consider.

How many coaching roles are given to ex-footballers? How many of these are given to BAME ex-footballers?  Does the number of BAME ex-footballing coaches accurately reflect the number of BAME footballers?. Given that the answer to the last question is 'obviously not', then the next questions are, why is that the case and what can be done about it?

Those are the relevant questions to ask in my opinion.

 

 I disagree with the percentage. It's closer to 2, lolz.

Are the majority of black players in the PL foreign?

Do they go back home when they retire?

Do they coach in their native country?

Is the amount of money they earn so good here, that when they go home (or even their roots) they get involved in charities etc instead of looking for something else to fill their time with. Like coaching?

Give me the numbers. If you can't, I suggest not stating your opinion as a fact.

It's more annoying than the poster who used the word 'cishet' earlier.

I think the rule is aimed at Asians. It would make more sense. There is a problem there. Nobody can deny that.

Only a tit would claim it is racism, though.

[PodgeyRam]

8 minutes ago, Highgate said:

I think it's closer to 3% in the 2011 census, including mixed backgrounds I'm guessing. Given that coaching roles are predominantly given to ex-footballers, just focusing on a community's overall percentage of the population is not really the relevant data figure to consider.

How many coaching roles are given to ex-footballers? How many of these are given to BAME ex-footballers?  Does the number of BAME ex-footballing coaches accurately reflect the number of BAME footballers?. Given that the answer to the last question is 'obviously not', then the next questions are, why is that the case and what can be done about it?

Those are the relevant questions to ask in my opinion.

 

I suspect some of it may be an unconscious bias. How often do we see black footballers described as "powerful", "pacey" and "athletic"?Rarely are they described as being "intelligent" or having superb mental reading of the game. If you are an ex-player looking to become a coach I imagine it could be difficult to overcome the impression people have of you as a player.

And what do clubs look for in their coaches? Intelligence and a good mental reading of thee game. It's not an large leap of faith to imagine some board members at clubs going "oh he wasn't really an intelligent player was he? Relied on his physical ability didn't he?" This could lead to them discounting a black ex-player who has the qualifications without meeting them.