Rooney Rule

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/48555148

So, every manager/head coach vacancy the employing club has to interview a black, Asian and ethnic minority candidate. Now, what if an Asian candidate doesn`t apply for a vacancy? How are the FA going to police this rule? Should women be included in this rule as well? If the black manager doesn`t get the job will they have grounds for legal action?
I wish people did get jobs based on their skill/experience no mater what colour their skin is or what gender you may be. What gets me though is each of the black, Asian/ethnic minority, female candidates could pursue legalities if they are not chosen, a white male just has to accept it. Thats not being racist it`s a fact.
Debate.........

 

I think it’s a waste of time in a lot of cases. It seems very rare that it goes out to some kind of interview process, most of the time they’ve already decided on a manager to replace the one they have or they promote from within.

For example when Johnson left & Heckingbottom took over would we have had to bring a black or mixed race manager for an interview even though he’d already got us promoted? If so what would be the point as he’d never get the role.

If the thinking’s that even if they don’t get the job they might impress enough to get a coaching role at the club then that tends to make more sense

 

From the article :

"the principle of providing more opportunities to BAME candidates is mandatory when clubs consider multiple applicants for a role"

Since we wouldn't have been considering multiple applicants it would not have applied. I also don't think you have to interview a BAME candidate if none apply, but if a BAME candidate does apply, and don't get an interview the club must show they interviewed a different BAME candidate.

 

Reading the BBC version it appears that 1 of each minority group has to be interviewed. The American football version states at least 1 of the 3 has to be interviewed. Whilst not in total agreement with the process. Diversity in the workplace is fairly common in most big companies. On a smaller scale diversity may be impractical. So therefore the job goes/should go to the best candidate. If an employer uses discrimination they are treading in hot water. eg knowingly giving a job to a white person instead of a better qualified minority person. (Could be viewed as racism)

 

What happens if said club have 3 applicants only for the job and all are white, what hapoens? I havent read it through tbh

 

What they keep forgetting is a large percentage of the black players in the upper echelons are non english... so french, african etc.
The vast majority of whom leave the uk at the end of their playing careers to live in tje sunshine...

So straight away this reduces the potential pool of applicants from this ethnicity.

 

Would be interesting if the FA release the numbers of how many black, Asian and white individuals are fully qualified to undertake a management role in England. This may then explain why majority clubs are employing white managers/ coaches. I couldn’t care what colour skin our manager has but I feel it’s a matter of time before clubs like us or clubs in similar positions will feel the need to appoint a black manager for the sake of it, regardless of their qualifications.

 

The people doing the training have admitted that the % of BAME players taking the course are on par with BAME Managers.
In other words large majority taking the required courses are white, which suggests the issue is not at recruitment level but getting them to take the time to get the qualifications.

 

I think a lot of people get terribly upset about the rule when, in reality, it's not that big a deal.

My limited understanding of it all is that it is the lack of opportunity that is felt to the root cause. I don't think anyone could argue that there is a high proportion of black players but virtually no black managers. Is that because black people are inherently incapable of managing a football team? Course not. So there must be something in it. There must be an unconscious bias that doesn't see them interviewed.

The rule isn't that you must employ them, merely that the door must be open to give an opportunity to impress.

It may well be that a club has an idea of who they want to employ, adopt the Rooney rule and give an interview to a potential black manager, and he blows their mind at the interview and changes their plans. That's not a bad thing. If that person was never given the opportunity in the first place then everyone is missing out.

I can understand resentment to positive discrimination which does give potential for a better candidate of a different ethnicity to miss out; but having a rule to give an opportunity doesn't seem something worth anyone taking umbrage with does it?

 

to be honest i think only a complete t*t wouldnt give the job of managing his club to the best prospect of getting success never mind, colour,creed gender, sexuality, jeez if julian clarey could get me 25 goals a season from midfield he'd be in. personally i think the rooney rule is racist because its giving someone an advantage because of the colour of their skin and not the ability. surely if ( excuse the phrase) players of an ethnic minority/background dont apply then you can legislate all you want as it aint going to change a thing

 

Said this before, don’t see why it needs a specific rule for sport, if a BAME person is being penalised there are plenty of options available to take recourse.
The reality is there are very very few taking their badges and the ones who do are people like Sol Campbell who has a huge chip on his shoulder and actually makes it harder for others as a result.

 

He's already getting a boat load for Liverpool under his stage name Bobby Firmino.

 

But surely the answer to discrimination is not more discrimination. It just feeds resentment and creates racial tensions. Social engineering is not the answer, education and opportunity for all is the only answer even if it takes a long time. I look back over my life and things are so much better for black and Asian people now than 50 years ago. But to create special cases and special circumstances and rules is wrong and sends out the wrong message.

 

The rule could have a negative effect inasmuch as some BAME applicants would not apply because they would feel they got the job because of their ethnicity rather than their skills and they are patronised.
And everyone would look at them and assume they're in post because of their skin colour not because of their ability.

O/T a bit - in the area of disability some organisations took the stand point that if a disabled person was able to do the job he/she should be appointed. That is they didn't always go for the best go for the best candidate but appointed someone who could do the job.

Very often the hierarchy of these organisations that push for appointments from minority groups themselves have few if any representatives form those groups in their senior positions.

 

How about including "Home grown" in this list, indifferent of what race, creed or colour they are they have to be British.
When was the last time the top 5 clubs in this country battled to sign a young British Manager, and when one does appear like
David Moyes did he get a fair crack, Van Gaal's record was initially worse but "Given Time" I believe that Sarri had won nothing much but was handed a top 5 English club....based on what !!!!
Also was Solskjear's record better than say Eddie Howe...no, but was Howe mentioned or touted as a candidate , no
Were told we cant tell clubs who to sign as players cos it's an open market, it's down to who applies but also what chances clubs want to give people, if clubs now need to justify appointments it's gonna get really interesting...sorry if ya disagree it's just how it comes across

 

Many years ago, my wife was on a YTS or equivalent scheme in Barnsley library. When a permanent position came up, she applied for it and her colleagues wanted her to get it, but was rejecting in favour of a disabled person who was physically unable to do the work (and left after a short period of time). The Mrs left the scheme as a result, so the library lost a good employee, the disabled person had their confidence knocked after being unable to do the work, and my wife missed out on a career that she would have enjoyed.

 

If the disabled person was unable to do the job then he/she should never have got the job and your wife was badly treated.
I know of someone in exactly the same position as your wife - when he looked into why he hadn't got a job but the disabled person got it he found that the senior managers had told the interviewing board that they had to appoint the disabled person.

 

This nonsense needs to stop now or where will it end, i believe 100% that the best candidate should get ANY job no matter what their colour ,religion , sex or sexual orientation is, BUT theres no way someone should get a job just BECAUSE they fit the said criteria, the worlds gone mad...

 

This sums it brilliant, best candidate who applies gets job.....

 

You obviously feel a lot stronger than I do on it mate.

I'm certainly not trying to goad you into an argument on it but I don't see it as discriminatory to say that at least one person from a minority is interviewed. It's no more than that. There is no obligation to employ that person, only to interview at least one person.

If you decide the white guy you interviewed is the man for the job because he is better qualified then you're totally free to employ that person. The rule is designed to improve opportunities from an under represented minority, nothing more.

If you see it as more than that then I'm certainly never going to persuade you otherwise and vice versa. We can agree that Deon Burton was sh*te when he was on loan so we still have common ground

If the rule was "Every 2nd managerial appointment at a club must be black" it would obviously be wrong ... Chelsea would also be leading the world in diversity!

Quite a few seem outraged and all I can say is to repeat that the rule doesn't bother me in the slightest and it definitely doesn't preclude a club from appointing the person they think is best for the job. It just ensures a wider candidate pool.