This has come up before, I think football does need a period of positive discrimination to get the ball rolling. I don't see an issue with it, you can still employ who you want, it just means black people get more interviews. Imagine if every interview had to have at least one black person, thats alot of encouragement to get black people going into management in the first place.
But why should there be encouragement for someone because of their ethnicity? As my manager at work say. The opportunities are there for you, but we won't hold your hand and tell you every step you must take. You have to go get it! Any manager will have to start somewhere, that somewhere will be dictated by where they did their badges, how much they impressed not just then but during their playing career. Then unlike Mr Barnes they will have to find a level. What to many white and black and green managers have like too many in society have, a sense of entitlement. If they want to manage, start low (high if you have the right contacts), if you're good you'll rise up to where you want irrespective of skin colour. Bah!
I didn´t say he was only fired because he was coloured, Colk, but I do still wonder if it didn´t play a part in some fans´ antagonism towards him, especially when combined with some of the miserable football he served up. It´s just a thought I had, and naturally I hope it´s entirely misplaced, but certainly no-one on here can possibly guarantee that it wasn´t the case, as we can all, only speak for ourselves.
Maybe a very small minority thought that but I'd say there is no point in bringing it up as for the vast majority (Certainly everyone I have spoken to) it was entirely about the playing style. While there will probably always be bigoted people it is better in my opinion to either ignore or ridicule them. Don't make it seem like their preposterous ideas have any effect. I know you were just bringing it up as a possibility and not accusing any of us, I just felt it wasn't a warranted point is all.
Fair enough Colk, the only reason I brought it up was because it was related to the theme of the thread - end of story.
Barnes was a decent player and probably got extra attention as he was coloured and that was still reasonably rare in those days. As a manager he was a disaster and there is no point hiding behind anything and to use the race card is pathetic. He is also a watse of time as a summariser but that is a general trait with so many. I saw a headline this morning saying "Townsend looking to improve" but it wasn't the ITV dick after all.
Is it really that hard? It seems to me they're just dumbing it down as much as possible and Neville is the only one who thinks the people watching actually understand the game. I'm sure plenty of pundits also don't have a strong working knowledge of the game so have to fall back on the cliches just to get by.
Getting back to the OP, Chris Ramsey has now echoes the original comments. As I said before, I'm really curious if there is any kind of evidence, either statistical or from conversations with board members of racism influencing hiring decisions.
Yes I guess it is a hard job but they are not forced to do it and to just turn up and come out with dross is really poor. I don't have Sky but understand that Gary Neville is leading the way. There are so many that are a total waste of space that the viewer would be probably much better off without them. Southgate is probably one of the worst.
Like every business arena, I'm sure there are a small and diminishing bunch that might consider ethnicity, but I think ultimately it comes down to; Are you qualified? Decent CV and references? have you impressed before? (Barnes nope) do you have a good agent? do you interview well? (I guess this is the cusp of the point, getting to this stage!) (Barnes unlikely!) I'm not convinced that skin colour is likely to be anywhere in that succession of questions. Bah!
How many of the top Football Association staff are white men? How many of the Chief Exec's at the top clubs are white men? How many Directors of the top clubs are white men? When you find out the answer is - pretty much all of them - does the 'not good enough' argument really hold up? You either acknowledge how hard it is to break the pattern for ANYONE who isn't a white man, or you deny the reality.
Isn't this more a function of where we're coming from though, rather than where we are? Football in this country used to be completely dominated by white males, and I'm not naïve enough to suggest that racism hasn't played some part in shaping that landscape, as well as other factors. But whilst attitudes might change, and we've had an influx of players from a whole host of backgrounds, they don't turn into managers, coaches and owners overnight. We've got an imbalance in the manager market because there was an imbalance in the player market 20 years ago. A Rooney Rule might help speed that transistion up, but if there fundamentally isn't the talent pool to recruit from, (and I'd argue that is the case) then there's only so much that can be done except let things improve with time.
We've only ever had one black referee as far as I can remember, and he was bloody useless, but NOT because he was black!
Uriah Rennie was a great ref when he first came on to the scene. He only seemed to go downhill when he got the top games. I wouldn't actually have called him useless at all.
Always amused that Barnes' only contribution to a World Cup campaign was to sing the awful rap on 'World in Motion'
