John Barnes says being black has damaged his career as a manager

Big difference between "provable" truths and somebody claiming a Pyrrhic victory in what is an undeniably just war that sets the cause back many years eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orkney_child_abuse_scandal

 

I'd argue that Barnes as a player pioneered the way for black players to even be considered as worthy. He's done more for shutting up the racist fans than any other player and arguably why we are in the position we're in today with between 25%-40% black players across the leagues.

He makes a living lecturing on racism and spreading the word, maintaining throughout that he's not a victim and will never wear that tag. Would you say the LMA published figures that 63% of black first time managers never managing again was a 'provable' truth?

 

Then he goes and suggests racism has prevented him from working as a manager. Making a mockery of those who have actually faced discrimination from potential and current employers.

Way to undo your hard work, Barnes. Maybe he should do what all but a tiny fractiom do, and earn his stripes?

 

Is this your attempt at a provable truth?

 

So your isolating fat people now too?

 

Just because he lectures on it and makes his living from it does not mean he understands it, remember racism (and celebrity status) works in all sorts of strange ways.

As for the stat re first time black managers,I would say its a statistic that at this point proves nothing, lets see the actual totals of first time managers split across different groups to see if those figures for black first time managers is normal across the groups. Even then if it does fall out of the norm that still proves nothing, it just gives a pointer of where to look for a cause.

 

I can't actually believe you wrote that. Have you listened to any of his lectures?

What do you mean by 'different groups'? The LMA say overall figures for first time managers not managing again is 49% - this includes BME managers. So given the figure of 63% is included in that, it means the % of white first time managers is somewhat lower than their black counterparts. And isn't that enough anyway for it to be an area to be looked at.

'a pointer of where to look for a cause' ... is precisely what I've been talking about. Bearing in mind Barnes isn't the first black ex-player looking for managerial jobs to have highlighted this situation.

 

Those stats that you've continually regurgitated mean **** all, as they're not formed from a representative sample size

The 49% overall figure is made up of hundreds of managers, the black only figure of 63% I'd made up of a handful by comparison, so it only needs a very small shift to create a massive swing in those numbers. They're also not up to date btw.

 

are you guys still wondering about this stuff?

 

Well if you've got the answer .............

 

You still don't get it dont you?
How are they going to look into it?
"Oi, charman bloke, you racist?"
"Nah"
Discussion over.
Or are you proposing they bug all the phones of football league chairmen and listen out for any racial slurs?

You cannot tackle covert racism with a sledgehammer.
Overt racism, sure, if someone says or does something stupid, hit em hard.
But covert racism is next to impossible to prove, and can only be fought with patience and diligence and targetting the youth, because its in youth that the racism seed is planted.
Once it has sprouted, ie once the kids are grown men with their own ingrained belief system, however ignorant and bigoted it may be, it is too late.
And I still firmly believe Barnes gets snubbed because he is **** primarily. If he had Jose's record, I think most chairmen wouldn't give a flying p!ss what colour his skin was. For all their "old fashioned" bigoted ways, there is one belief these chairmen hold dearer than any racial belief, and thats the belief in money!!

 

I think it's you who still doesn't get it - instead of making leaps in logic, ask a question like 'what do you mean by look into it?'

You seem to think I want an investigation to take the form of going to every chairman of every club - I don't.

Interesting you chose Mourinho, his first two jobs he had worse record than Barnes!

 

Like I said previously, for the owners money has no colour. If Pulis was black he will still be recruited by anyone to save a club from relegation: " I am prepared to lose tens of millions because I do not want to employ a black manager". Dream on!!!

May be the relevant question that Barnes should have asked himself, with his track record, if he were white would he have been employed by a struggling club which had just sacked their manager?

 

So what DO you mean?
Or do you yourself even know?
Thats like the 5th time you have said "I dont mean...blah blah" and each time you have failed to say what you actually DO mean.
So say it and clear up the confusion!

 

Barnes was asked about his managerial experience as part of that tv programme hence him giving a personal answer but his stance on the issue has never been personal and it isn't now. He asks two things: why black managers are given less time in the job - they are according to the LMA - and why they aren't offered more opportunities to get a job - again backed up by the LMA.

As it stands he barely has a track record because he wasn't given enough opportunity to make one. As I said in my last post when JM was mentioned, his first two jobs gave him a worse 'track record' than Barnes but it didn't stop other clubs offering him positions. And go look at the white managers of his era who had similar records but got more jobs - so to answer your question yes if he was white he would have got further employment - you've even provided your own example in Pulis!

 

I think youve got yourself very confused. I used Pulis as an example of someone who has got sacked from previous jobs but has shown enough ability during his job to be given another job. His track record in some specific aspects like saving a struggling club is good. So if I were a club owner on the verge of relegation I would employ him. If he were black and I was a racist, I would still employ him. Why? because it is my bleeding money and when it comes to money there is no black, blue or pink or any other colour.

Barnes had difficulty in getting a job because he has not shown he is good enough to save a struggling club. Most of the recruiting clubs are. If I were an owner it is my money and I would choose the one who would likely save me millions. If Pulis, or Big Sam or Pardew were black I would still employ them.

To say that Barnes was not employed by a club because he was black is a huge step. Because it is specific. Racism may be endemic in football but his using his own example was completely misguided.

 

I haven't got myself confused at all. Pulis is similar age to Barnes but was given a} more time in the job [to do a bad job] and b} lots of opportunities. I wouldn't have picked him as an example but seeing as you'd already used his name I was trying to show that inadvertently you'd sort of proved Barnes point.

So I take it you don't think there's hidden racism in football? And Barnes used 'his own example' because it was programme about his life in which he was asked a specific question!!

 

FFS this is like talking to a brick wall.

YES, there is hidden racism in life in general not just football.
BUT, that fact most likely has dick all to do with Barnes being unemployed.

You seem to be pushing this stupid argument that anyone who doesnt agree with Barnes and immediately excuse his unemployment as racism, as believing that racism doesnt exist....not the case at all and why you persist in making that claim is very bizarre.

 

I'm not pushing that at all because ......... I don't necessarily agree with Barnes either which is why the OP is a five word question.

Your leaps in logic and illogical conclusions to what's actually written are what's bizarre.