The FA adopt the Rooney Rule for all future appointments

[StringerBell]

12 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

What’s your solution to the systematic disadvantages faced by BME people in this country then?

Apart from just saying, but what about white people?

Assuming there are systematic disadvantages, depending on how bad it was, possibly some form of of social engineering like the Rooney rule.

But you talk as though I’ve accepted that these systematic disadvantages are based on race. I haven’t.

[McRainy]

55 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Asian women are more likely to commit suicide?

Black men are disproportionately represented in prisons?

???

Hilarious, isn’t it. 

53 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

So if the FA have concluded that racism is a problem within it's own organisation why are they not naming, shaming and removing the racists from their positions?

Go back and actually read the Guardian article I posted. It clearly explains the difference between acts of racial prejudice carried out by individuals and institutional racism which is often unconscious and unintended.

Unless you understand the difference you probably won’t grasp the need for actions like the Rooney rule. 

[McRainy]

38 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

you talk as though I’ve accepted that these systematic disadvantages are based on race. I haven’t.

What are they based on then, intelligence? Or class?

Which way are you swinging, left or right?

[McRainy]

1 hour ago, maxjam said:

Education

Agree, to an extent, but ultimately it’s down to unequal power structures in society which are always going to disadvantage one sector against another.

Institutional racism can only exist in a system based on class. 

[Alph]

12 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

Hilarious, isn’t it. 

Go back and actually read the Guardian article I posted. It clearly explains the difference between acts of racial prejudice carried out by individuals and institutional racism which is often unconscious and unintended.

Unless you understand the difference you probably won’t grasp the need for actions like the Rooney rule. 

It doesn't clearly explain it to me. It puts up statistics and then uses opinion to explain why these statistics exist

Like a few people have done in these threads. 

They post a statistic about the disparity and then say that the number of players/coaches/politicians/dog owners etc should be higher based on this other statistic.

I could do that.

For example this 

"and 38% of young black men currently unemployed, compared to 17.8% of young white men. These unemployment figures may go some way to explaining the staggering wealth gap that means the average white household has assets of £221,000, while the figure for black Caribbean households is £76,000"

Firstly is it not important to know what generation British ethnics we are talking about.

I'll give an example. I have 2 black mates. Both are from Jamaican background. One his Dad came over here in the 70's with nothing. He worked his finger to the bone to give his family what they have today. The other his Carribean background is from his grandad. Similar story but his grandad did suffer because he was black. 

Now these families and extended families all started life relatively poor after coming to the country in the 70's and earlier. They lived in poor areas. Areas with other ethnic minorities because that's all they could afford immigrating to this country.

Now further generations aren't blocked from education or high powered jobs by race. They're blocked by wealth. As are the white kids that grew up in those areas.

How much is racist discrimination  and how much is to do with wealth.

Part of that article is suggesting that it's because of their ethnicity that they're in higher rates of unemployment. 

When is it not likely that the crime rate, unemployment etc is higher in poorer areas? And that those poor areas are populated by... I don't know the correct term to describe what my black mates are... But 2nd or 3rd generation black British.

Whereas me, I'm on the same level but I'm God knows what generation. A lot. 

The opportunity afforded in the past have given white Brits an advantage in Britain. A white country  (in the same way I'd call Turkey a Muslim country. By ethnic majority not by right)

This doesn't mean race barriers exist.

Wealth barriers do. 

[maxjam]

19 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

Agree, to an extent, but ultimately it’s down to unequal power structures in society which are always going to disadvantage one sector against another.

Institutional racism can only exist in a system based on class. 

Well unfortunately unless there is a revolution of sorts (I kinda hoped Brexit might lead to another call for proportional representation but thats a topic for another discussion!) it is what it is and there will always be inequality. 

IMO education over generations is whilst not the quickest, the best way to go.  With regards to racism get children to see people as people which will eventually lead those children to teach their children to see people as people.  

Inequalities such as racism, sexism, homophobia, etc imo don't need The Rooney Rule.  If you're racist to any degree, interviewing a black candidate will only ever be a box ticking exercise.  Changing the culture (prolonged education) and removing the racists is the only long term answer, anything else is just a temporary band aid, box ticking, look at me I'm holier than though thou exercise. 

[G STAR RAM]

46 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

Hilarious, isn’t it. 

Go back and actually read the Guardian article I posted. It clearly explains the difference between acts of racial prejudice carried out by individuals and institutional racism which is often unconscious and unintended.

Unless you understand the difference you probably won’t grasp the need for actions like the Rooney rule. 

It's hilarious that them 2 things are being used as examples to prove systematic racism yes.

Asian women more likely to commit suicide? Wonder if that is because they are treated like dirt within 'their own' society. No must be systematic racism. 

Black people are over represented in prisons? Any idea why that could be? My guess would be because they must be committing more crimes? No must be systematic racism.

I've read the full article thanks. Just disagree with it.

[StringerBell]

41 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

What are they based on then, intelligence? Or class?

Which way are you swinging, left or right?

Different things but largely class yes. Culture is another factor I’d imagine. In the US at least families staying together would likely solve a lot of problems. In that silly privilege race video they count having a father figure as a consequence of a lack of privilege rather than a cause of it.

The link you gave with a list of areas in which bamers (I’m fed up of typing BAME on my phone, I’m calling them bamers) mostly details the comparative lack of wealth and academic achievement  amongst bamers. It seems more plausible this is a cause rather than a consequence.

And anyway, don’t Jews, Indian people and East Asian people do better than whites? So what’s with all the ‘what it’s like to be an ethnic minority claptrap?

[Stive Pesley]

21 minutes ago, maxjam said:

If you're racist to any degree, interviewing a black candidate will only ever be a box ticking exercise.

True - but this isn't about tackling actual direct outright racism. We have laws to tackle that, and British society has progressed to the point where almost everyone has the self-awareness and common decency to NOT be openly racist to anyone.

It's about trying to help remove casual racism from a process. I'll state again, to save anyone the bother, I'm not convinced about applying this in Football. I'm not against them doing it, but I understand the criticism and I don't think football is the area with a particularly big problem here

But weren't there studies done where people submitted 2 identical job applications with one obviously ethnic name and one "normal" British name and the responses showed that the application with the British name was getting far more interviews than the other identical application. I think they did something similar on Air BnB applications. I seem to recall that Stringer admitted he didn't like names like Lashondra as it triggered some kind of subconscious dislike? Correct me if I'm wrong or out of context there mate

The point being that if it makes you stop and think for even a second about this stuff then it has to be worth it. Even if 90% of people stop and think "that's stupid!! Bah! White Racism is worse!" etc - if the other 10% become more mindful of their subconscious feelings on the matter then it's got to be worth it. Tiny steps are still steps

[McRainy]

32 minutes ago, Alpha said:

How much is racist discrimination  and how much is to do with wealth.

It’s a vicious circle. Agreed, poverty and class keep down white and black alike, but black people are are more likely to be there to begin with and have more barriers keeping them from doing well. 

You criticise the statistics, then counter them with anecdotal evidence. All these oppressions are interelated and affect different groups in different ways. 

[StringerBell]

5 minutes ago, StivePesley said:

True - but this isn't about tackling actual direct outright racism. We have laws to tackle that, and British society has progressed to the point where almost everyone has the self-awareness and common decency to NOT be openly racist to anyone.

It's about trying to help remove casual racism from a process. I'll state again, to save anyone the bother, I'm not convinced about applying this in Football. I'm not against them doing it, but I understand the criticism and I don't think football is the area with a particularly big problem here

But weren't there studies done where people submitted 2 identical job applications with one obviously ethnic name and one "normal" British name and the responses showed that the application with the British name was getting far more interviews than the other identical application. I think they did something similar on Air BnB applications. I seem to recall that Stringer admitted he didn't like names like Lashondra as it triggered some kind of subconscious dislike? Correct me if I'm wrong or out of context there mate

The point being that if it makes you stop and think for even a second about this stuff then it has to be worth it. Even if 90% of people stop and think "that's stupid!! Bah! White Racism is worse!" etc - if the other 10% become more mindful of their subconscious feelings on the matter then it's got to be worth it. Tiny steps are still steps

Yeah I think there’s some proper daft names, mostly black American ones tbh.

I’ll take any excuse to post this

 

[McRainy]

18 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

Different things but largely class yes. Culture is another factor I’d imagine. In the US at least families staying together would likely solve a lot of problems. In that silly privilege race video they count having a father figure as a consequence of a lack of privilege rather than a cause of it.

The link you gave with a list of areas in which bamers (I’m fed up of typing BAME on my phone, I’m calling them bamers) mostly details the comparative lack of wealth and academic achievement  amongst bamers. It seems more plausible this is a cause rather than a consequence.

And anyway, don’t Jews, Indian people and East Asian people do better than whites? So what’s with all the ‘what it’s like to be an ethnic minority claptrap?

I read the silly video the other way round, that the lack of parental stability disadvantaged the next generation; which is pretty obvious, really. 

I agree that class, by which I mean an unequal economic power structure, is the fundamental cause of inequality. Race, culture, ability, gender can be compounding or mitigating factors, depending on circumstances.

Race is still a huge issue though; one doesn’t cancel the other out. Yes, many Asians and Jews do well economically, probably because they tend to have supportive family structures and adapt well to the education system, but they still face discrimination and are largely excluded from the top positions of power. 

You still haven’t said what you’d do about it; as a libertarian, I presume you’d like to see everyone have the opportunity to make the best of themselves. 

[Highgate]

13 hours ago, R@M said:

 

But the population aspect is relevant. You do not have to have played football to be a manager. That then opens the jobs up to anyone that has the drive and mental capacity to complete coaching badges, Non league managers are often pe teachers and such. 

There are currently 3 managers in the premier league who did not play. Was recently 4. 

As alluded to earlier, if you want to know if there really is an issue regarding discrimination or some other factor blocking BAME candidates from becoming coaches, then you need to separate those coaches being appointed from within football from those outside the game. Those two populations have vastly different proportions of BAMEs.  Sure some coaches are appointed from without, to simplify things leave those out of any study, or address them separately.

[Highgate]

6 hours ago, Norman said:

Not improving enough though, is it? So it doesn't look like it is working. There must be something else pther than oppurtunity. And the evidence does not point to racism.

I'm happy to change my mind, if proven wrong.

Most of the posters on this thread speak ********. There has been no fact checking, research, or any kind of evidence given to back up some disparaging claims.

People giving big opinions and sweeping statements on establishments, the old boys network, posters on this forum and society im general etc, and it is ********. Just an opinion based on nothing. Again. 

That's good then (not trying to be condescending).  Let's the FA try the Rooney Rule for a while then and see if it bears fruit. And if it does work, those with your opinion on the matter will hopefully share your willingness to change their mind.  If it doesn't, hopefully it's advocates, including myself, will be willing to admit that it's not suitable in English football.

It has been tried in the US where they seem to be quite pleased with the results. It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that it could have a similar effect in the UK.

[StringerBell]

52 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

I read the silly video the other way round, that the lack of parental stability disadvantaged the next generation; which is pretty obvious, really. 

I agree that class, by which I mean an unequal economic power structure, is the fundamental cause of inequality. Race, culture, ability, gender can be compounding or mitigating factors, depending on circumstances.

Race is still a huge issue though; one doesn’t cancel the other out. Yes, many Asians and Jews do well economically, probably because they tend to have supportive family structures and adapt well to the education system, but they still face discrimination and are largely excluded from the top positions of power. 

You still haven’t said what you’d do about it; as a libertarian, I presume you’d like to see everyone have the opportunity to make the best of themselves. 

I’m not a libertarian. Although if I was, I’m not sure why interfering in the lives of others would be something I’d be open to.

I haven’t said what I’d do about what? Wealth inequality? I’m not suggesting we do anything about wealth inequality at the minute, short of continuing to support the provision of social security for those who need it. I’d look at what we can do in deprived communities more provided we can afford it, but ultimately it’s up to the people to sort their own lives out and not blame others - a message that needs to be rammed home in schools.

Ultimately I am not pro equality, I am pro freedom.

[R@M]

5 hours ago, StivePesley said:

I don't think that's the problem at all. The BAME coaches that exist don't seem to have a problem getting jobs. No one has complained about not being selected for a job based on race. There just aren't that many of them.

It's supposed to be about grass-roots, removing barriers, helping under-represented groups believe that they can have the aspiration to succeed.

Like I say, I'm far from convinced that it's the right answer, but it doesn't feel like trying it causes any harm to anyone, so why not?

As an aside I was wondering what the representation of BAME players agents is? I seem to recall at least a couple of black ex-Derby players became agents. All the money of being a coach but none of the stress! And someone said that black players were sometimes stereotyped as "less intelligent"??

As a further aside - are there any black referees in the FL?

Ian Taylor came across very well and I remember thinking it was a shame he didn't try management(coaching) but he  opted for the (probably) more lucrative agent job. 

I think the issue about refs is probably down to perceptions on abuse they would get at grassroots level-and rightly so imho. Maybe encouragement and then better protection would be required. 

[McRainy]

14 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

I’m not a libertarian. I am pro freedom.

Okaaay...

[Stive Pesley]

15 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

Ultimately I am not pro equality, I am pro freedom.

I thought you said the other day you were pro equality of opportunity not pro equality of outcome.

I think the intent of the Rooney rule is exactly that - trying to provide equality of opportunity not outcome (as some others seem to assume/be afraid of)

 

[StringerBell]

1 hour ago, Lambchop said:

Okaaay...

I’m a liberal.

[StringerBell]

1 hour ago, StivePesley said:

I thought you said the other day you were pro equality of opportunity not pro equality of outcome.

I think the intent of the Rooney rule is exactly that - trying to provide equality of opportunity not outcome (as some others seem to assume/be afraid of)

 

I agree that is the intent, or so they say, I just don’t think people are denied equal opportunity based on race.

The stuff listed in the Independent article Lambchop put up is about a racial equality of outcome.