|
|
Post by benhtafc on Sept 12, 2014 3:31:43 GMT 1
The sixth candidate doesn't get an interview because he's 6th not because he's white. As an encouragement for minority candidates to apply the best placed is interviewed. Don't see why some are getting so upset about this as there is no obligation to appoint. I'm with CP on this. Some of the counter arguments strike me as having undertones of the "I'm not racist but..........." brigade. UTT What? How does NOT wanting any discrimination based on race translate as being racist?? Honestly, thats a bewildering thing to say. I take offence to the suggestion that I am anything like the "I'm not racist but... Brigade" Equality has to come about as a result of people genuinely being treated the same, if there is an inherent racism in recruitment then that problem needs to be tackled at the root. The answer is not introducing patronising rules that suggest black managers aren't good enough to get an interview on their own merit and have to be handed one on a plate. I would not like to be in an interview and wondering if I was only there to fill a quota, or of I actually stood a chance of getting the job. If I was in the aforementioned "brigade" then my argument would be more along the lines of "I'm not racist but maybe white people are just better at management". That is not my argument and so don't tar those of us who disagree with your position as racists just as I don't think you, or the people who argue the same point as you are racist. This is not a thread for discussing whether black people should get management jobs, it's a thread for discussing which methods are favorable for giving them the same opportunities as everyone else. |
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 12, 2014 8:41:18 GMT 1
'Im not racist but....' has basically become the throw-away line that the PC brigade use when they can't form an argument against someone. Its like a kid taking his bat and ball home cos he can't win.
Some idiot will find' undertones of racism' in anything, anything at all. Here, macjinx has managed to label people arguing for no discrimination as being racist. LOL
|
|
terrier5
Tom Cowan Terrier
[M0:5]
Posts: 705
|
Post by terrier5 on Sept 12, 2014 10:05:33 GMT 1
Anyway, I think this debate's run its course and we're starting to go round in ever decreasing circles.
Agree to differ, Captain?
|
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 12, 2014 10:11:34 GMT 1
most definitely. We are all wanting the same thing, its just down to personal opinion on how it should be done.
Same as most discussions about the team I guess.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Sept 12, 2014 11:25:39 GMT 1
As far as I am aware, and I may be missing something, the only mention of 5 candidates and then a sixth if they need to fill the quota is only being discussed because it was suggested as a hypothetical situation by someone on this forum... Business does not work like that, a business (in this case a club) will budget resources for interviewing a number of candidates for a role. If that number is 5 then only 5 will be interviewed. If none of those are black, it is the FIFTH candidate that will be dropped for a black candidate in order to fill the quota. So enforcing a rule that there has to be a black interviewee will cause (on the case of a black person not being in the top 5 candidates) a person who would otherwise have been interviewed to be REPLACED by that black person. The argument that nobody would miss out as they would be interviewed as an extra candidate is false because a recruiting budget will be set and the clubs will not spend money to meet the quota, they will instead pick the top 4 plus the top black person, which means the 5th candidate who (assuming the black person was not a top 5 candidate) would have normally had an interview, now misses out due to the colour of his or her skin. Equality is about treating people the same, not systematically discriminating in favour of some. Ben, the Rooney rule was introduced by the NFL for the reasons of imbalance they saw within their organisation, I agree that it shouldn't be a piece of legislature that all busineses are duty bound to follow but I do believe there is scope for the 'rule' to be introduced if any organisation sees a similar imbalance and wants to redress the balance. The NFL is a very cash rich business and the scenario you described is of a business looking at costs and I guarantee you that in the NFL where the rule is applied the minority candidate will be ADDED rather than replace a member of the original shortlist. I believe we are going way too far from the rule in its current format and use, in these hypothetical scenarios. As I alluded to earlier, I think more former black players should be encouraged to take their badges and pro licences as I think it is a poor state of affairs to only have one black manager in the entire football league, if that makes me a yogurt knitter as the immature one claimed or a member of Capn's PC brigade then so be it. |
|
Macduff
Andy Booth Terrier
I've got a Gibson without a case but I cant get that even tanned look on my face.
Posts: 3,925
|
Post by Macduff on Sept 12, 2014 13:56:06 GMT 1
The sixth candidate doesn't get an interview because he's 6th not because he's white. As an encouragement for minority candidates to apply the best placed is interviewed. Don't see why some are getting so upset about this as there is no obligation to appoint. I'm with CP on this. Some of the counter arguments strike me as having undertones of the "I'm not racist but..........." brigade. UTT What? How does NOT wanting any discrimination based on race translate as being racist?? Honestly, thats a bewildering thing to say. No it's not. Equating affirmative action with prejudice against white candidates is a moronic posture . If anyone believes I have accused them of racism try reading the post. UTT |
|
|
|
Post by OldRastrickian on Sept 12, 2014 14:22:31 GMT 1
Anyway, good luck to Chris Powell in his first Town game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 12, 2014 15:54:36 GMT 1
What? How does NOT wanting any discrimination based on race translate as being racist?? Honestly, thats a bewildering thing to say. No it's not. Equating affirmative action with prejudice against white candidates is a moronic posture . If anyone believes I have accused them of racism try reading the post. UTT Just when I thought we'd wrapped this up... Owner- right, have we got our 5 candidates lined up to interview? CEO- yes. All great guys. No one else really ticked enough boxes. Owner- and have you remembered to make one of them a token black guy? CEO- Shit! No, I forgot. Owner- Well we're only interviewing 5 so you'll have to ditch one of the white ones to make room for a black one. CEO- Ok we'll drop this bloke. I hope he understands that we aren't discriminating against him because hes white and not black? Owner- Im sure he'll be fine about it. He'll realise that its moronic to suggest this affirmative action is in any way racially prejudicing against him because he's not black enough to keep his interview. And Im struggling to see how saying - 'Some of the counter arguments strike me as having undertones of the "I'm not racist but..........." brigade. ' is anything other than accusing them of being racist, no matter how many times you read the post. If their arguments have undertones of racism, then that kind of suggests they do too!! Its just a stupid, moronic comment on so many levels. Not least because the argument you are calling racist is the one that demands NO RACIAL DISCRIMINATION!!  |
|
Macduff
Andy Booth Terrier
I've got a Gibson without a case but I cant get that even tanned look on my face.
Posts: 3,925
|
Post by Macduff on Sept 12, 2014 17:23:54 GMT 1
Captain, I think you must have banged your head against that wall too many times. If you cant differentiate between affirmative action and prejudice against a white person then I truly feel sorry for you.
Maybe I haven't put my point across as well as Ted Chips, terrier5 and Hypotenuse, but the rule is there to at least encourage black applicants, and hopefully in time will not be needed as applications will start to reflect the make up of the population. That being said no-one is forced to appoint anyone so why get your knickers in such a twist.
I await the reply from "Captainslapperwhomustalwaysbeseentohavethelastword"
Aside from this, looking forward to hopefully the start of a new era.
UTT
|
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Sept 12, 2014 18:12:42 GMT 1
Love it when people accuse someone of wanting the last word as they attempt to have the last word. The thread had finished, been wound up , until you started it off again wanting the last word my friend!!
If you can't see that in these scenarios 'affirmative action' for black people RELIES on discrimination against white people then I don't know what to say ,other than to go back to banging my head on the wall!!
Anyway, feel free to have the last word you wanted. Im done.
|
|
|
|
Post by goodshot (FGS) on Sept 12, 2014 19:02:08 GMT 1
Wonder if Chris will use the Rooney Rule at the team selection meeting tomorrow  |
|
terrier5
Tom Cowan Terrier
[M0:5]
Posts: 705
|
Post by terrier5 on Sept 12, 2014 21:48:30 GMT 1
Thank fuck the international break's over and we can get back to arguing about football.
Just think, the Rooney rule could have saved us from Lee Clark taking over as he was undoubtedly a shit manager.
[puts tin hat on and runs off, giggling]
|
|
|
|
Post by benhtafc on Sept 12, 2014 22:46:48 GMT 1
As far as I am aware, and I may be missing something, the only mention of 5 candidates and then a sixth if they need to fill the quota is only being discussed because it was suggested as a hypothetical situation by someone on this forum... Business does not work like that, a business (in this case a club) will budget resources for interviewing a number of candidates for a role. If that number is 5 then only 5 will be interviewed. If none of those are black, it is the FIFTH candidate that will be dropped for a black candidate in order to fill the quota. So enforcing a rule that there has to be a black interviewee will cause (on the case of a black person not being in the top 5 candidates) a person who would otherwise have been interviewed to be REPLACED by that black person. The argument that nobody would miss out as they would be interviewed as an extra candidate is false because a recruiting budget will be set and the clubs will not spend money to meet the quota, they will instead pick the top 4 plus the top black person, which means the 5th candidate who (assuming the black person was not a top 5 candidate) would have normally had an interview, now misses out due to the colour of his or her skin. Equality is about treating people the same, not systematically discriminating in favour of some. Ben, the Rooney rule was introduced by the NFL for the reasons of imbalance they saw within their organisation, I agree that it shouldn't be a piece of legislature that all busineses are duty bound to follow but I do believe there is scope for the 'rule' to be introduced if any organisation sees a similar imbalance and wants to redress the balance. The NFL is a very cash rich business and the scenario you described is of a business looking at costs and I guarantee you that in the NFL where the rule is applied the minority candidate will be ADDED rather than replace a member of the original shortlist. I believe we are going way too far from the rule in its current format and use, in these hypothetical scenarios. As I alluded to earlier, I think more former black players should be encouraged to take their badges and pro licences as I think it is a poor state of affairs to only have one black manager in the entire football league, if that makes me a yogurt knitter as the immature one claimed or a member of Capn's PC brigade then so be it. I concede I am completely ignorant of how this has been implemented in NFL. I too think that encouraging black players approaching retiring age to take their badges is an excellent way forward here, i feel it tackles what I think is the real issue here of a lack of qualified black managers. It is easy to show (and i have done so earlier in the thread) that the percentage of qualified managers who are black is far, far below the percentage of current players who are black. I think this is due to the recent increase in black players (something I also backed up with stats in the aforementioned post) and when these players reach retiring age, they should be encouraged to take up management in the hope that these numbers increase. They are bound to increase since there are more black players now playing than there ever has been. |
|
|
|
Post by bluedogs, Esq. on Jun 4, 2015 23:25:56 GMT 1
Football League plans changes to black manager recruitment link |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Jun 5, 2015 4:20:46 GMT 1
Here we go again.....
|
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Jun 5, 2015 7:25:01 GMT 1
football club like any other privately owned/funded business can interview and hire who they like.. no questions asked..because anyone who funds a business and does not employ the best people they can possibly get whatever skin colour they are is an arse and wont have a successful business for long..
government funded organisations etc can introduce whatever rules they see fit but I agree with many posters that token interviews or placements is counter productive on just about every level..
ignoring the human rights of everyone else is as bad as ignoring the human rights for one particular section..
powell is here because dean thought he was best candidate of managers who were ;;
a. available
b. available to us..
he also didn't choose managers before because they were white..
surely we should have to interview at least one female as well and also one ethnic minority female also?? add in the need to interview a gay man, a black gay man, a lesbian and an etnic minority lesbian and a transgender male and female and the interviews might go on for ever..
the above does not include one each with a disability........
you could be half a season at least without a manager..
|
|
|
|
Post by townatheart on Jun 5, 2015 7:32:05 GMT 1
football club like any other privately owned/funded business can interview and hire who they like.. no questions asked..because anyone who funds a business and does not employ the best people they can possibly get whatever skin colour they are is an arse and wont have a successful business for long.. government funded organisations etc can introduce whatever rules they see fit but I agree with many posters that token interviews or placements is counter productive on just about every level.. ignoring the human rights of everyone else is as bad as ignoring the human rights for one particular section.. powell is here because dean thought he was best candidate of managers who were ;; a. available b. available to us.. he also didn't choose managers before because they were white.. surely we should have to interview at least one female as well and also one ethnic minority female also?? add in the need to interview a gay man, a black gay man, a lesbian and an etnic minority lesbian and a transgender male and female and the interviews might go on for ever.. the above does not include one each with a disability........ you could be half a season at least without a manager.. it also does not include one each of anybody with no background in football management but just thinks they know more than anyone else (any posters on here spring to mind)  |
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Jun 5, 2015 10:22:20 GMT 1
football club like any other privately owned/funded business can interview and hire who they like.. no questions asked..because anyone who funds a business and does not employ the best people they can possibly get whatever skin colour they are is an arse and wont have a successful business for long.. government funded organisations etc can introduce whatever rules they see fit but I agree with many posters that token interviews or placements is counter productive on just about every level.. ignoring the human rights of everyone else is as bad as ignoring the human rights for one particular section.. powell is here because dean thought he was best candidate of managers who were ;; a. available b. available to us.. he also didn't choose managers before because they were white.. surely we should have to interview at least one female as well and also one ethnic minority female also?? add in the need to interview a gay man, a black gay man, a lesbian and an etnic minority lesbian and a transgender male and female and the interviews might go on for ever.. the above does not include one each with a disability........ you could be half a season at least without a manager.. Interviewing one black candidate is voluntary. The compulsory bit is candidates for youth level coaching. And it hasn't been agreed yet - it won't until 2016 at the earliest. They look like relatively modest steps to encourage more black players to become qualified coaches. |
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Jun 5, 2015 15:54:47 GMT 1
it is not the business of government to tell private individuals who run and fund their own private business how to recruit and who they should recruit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Grizz on Jun 5, 2015 18:57:32 GMT 1
Getting sick of seeing shit like this.
'Black minority's make up around 4% of the over all British population but there's significantly more than that occupying a footballing role on the pitch, what are we going to do about this inequality of so many black players playing in the football league?'
|
|
|
|
Post by morleyterrier on Jun 5, 2015 19:29:17 GMT 1
I bet he does, he didn't get this job on merit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Jun 5, 2015 20:36:51 GMT 1
I bet he does, he didn't get this job on merit. Who didn't ? |
|
|
|
Post by royrace on Jun 5, 2015 21:36:58 GMT 1
Totally unnecessary, if they're good enough they'll get the job as Chris has found. I'm staggered at the mindset tbh of the people who think this rule is a goer, paranoia seems to reign supreme amongst certain people and it needs to be treat with the contempt it deserves not pandering to. Shame people can't find more deserving initiatives to throw their weight behind, there are plenty I'm sure.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using proboards
|
|
|
|
Post by gledholt terrier on Jun 6, 2015 0:17:22 GMT 1
it is not the business of government to tell private individuals who run and fund their own private business how to recruit and who they should recruit. I must have missed the bit where the government has been involved? |
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Jun 6, 2015 7:56:52 GMT 1
at what point do you think the premier league and the football league thought this up themselves?  bit like ffp??? smoke and mirrors, look as though you are busy doing something.. the football authorities wouldn't press for anything at all that might upset the money... |
|
|
|
Post by mightyterrier on Jun 6, 2015 8:16:26 GMT 1
I bet he does, he didn't get this job on merit. There is a football team much closer to where you live which is probably more suited to your beliefs, I think you would fit in well there, can you take Nick with you please |
|
|
|
Post by waltzingthecowshed on Jun 6, 2015 13:42:57 GMT 1
Best person for the job imo(like CP was for Town at the time was best candidate imo) and I cant think of any case were a 'black' person as been overlooked for a managerial position this is a multi billion £ industry ffs ...........next why stop with the Rooney rule they will say that a disabled person someone from each of the main religions and a woman will have to have an interview to satisfy box ticking Equal Opps
|
|
|
|
Post by Headless Chicken on Jun 6, 2015 14:23:16 GMT 1
No it's not. Equating affirmative action with prejudice against white candidates is a moronic posture . If anyone believes I have accused them of racism try reading the post. UTT Just when I thought we'd wrapped this up... Owner- right, have we got our 5 candidates lined up to interview? CEO- yes. All great guys. No one else really ticked enough boxes. Owner- and have you remembered to make one of them a token black guy? CEO- Shit! No, I forgot. Owner- Well we're only interviewing 5 so you'll have to ditch one of the white ones to make room for a black one. CEO- Ok we'll drop this bloke. I hope he understands that we aren't discriminating against him because hes white and not black? Owner- Im sure he'll be fine about it. He'll realise that its moronic to suggest this affirmative action is in any way racially prejudicing against him because he's not black enough to keep his interview. And Im struggling to see how saying - 'Some of the counter arguments strike me as having undertones of the "I'm not racist but..........." brigade. ' is anything other than accusing them of being racist, no matter how many times you read the post. If their arguments have undertones of racism, then that kind of suggests they do too!! Its just a stupid, moronic comment on so many levels. Not least because the argument you are calling racist is the one that demands NO RACIAL DISCRIMINATION!! I don't think you're being racist, just pig headed. Shame this thread didn't end after the post of yours I 'liked'. |
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Jun 6, 2015 14:49:50 GMT 1
best man/woman for the job..
appears to be pig headed or borderline racist???
my word its becoming difficult to argue or even discuss these issues, maybe some would like debate or discussion on it stopped altogether???
im anti anything that is patently unfair but im a loather of redressing any inequalities by stifling dissent and debate and insisting anyone not on side is something ugly..
said before and will say again because its true, we are total amateurs in race/religious hate compared to what we have imported here.. on the world scale of bigotry and sheer hate we don't come anywhere near the top 20 and from a nation that indulged in slavery etc and then casual racism even as entertainment not more than a couple of decades ago we really ought to stop kicking ourselves...
The Anti Nazi League?? dear me they ought to travel a bit...they would hand in their t shirts, pop their student IDs in their jeans and get back to being educated overnight..
|
|
|
|
Post by Captainslapper on Jun 6, 2015 23:42:50 GMT 1
Just when I thought we'd wrapped this up... Owner- right, have we got our 5 candidates lined up to interview? CEO- yes. All great guys. No one else really ticked enough boxes. Owner- and have you remembered to make one of them a token black guy? CEO- Shit! No, I forgot. Owner- Well we're only interviewing 5 so you'll have to ditch one of the white ones to make room for a black one. CEO- Ok we'll drop this bloke. I hope he understands that we aren't discriminating against him because hes white and not black? Owner- Im sure he'll be fine about it. He'll realise that its moronic to suggest this affirmative action is in any way racially prejudicing against him because he's not black enough to keep his interview. And Im struggling to see how saying - 'Some of the counter arguments strike me as having undertones of the "I'm not racist but..........." brigade. ' is anything other than accusing them of being racist, no matter how many times you read the post. If their arguments have undertones of racism, then that kind of suggests they do too!! Its just a stupid, moronic comment on so many levels. Not least because the argument you are calling racist is the one that demands NO RACIAL DISCRIMINATION!! I don't think you're being racist, just pig headed. Shame this thread didn't end after the post of yours I 'liked'. Pig headed? Is there a reason for that comment? If not agreeing with racial discrimination being introduced is being pig headed, then oink oink. |
|
