It's been a huge success in the NFL where the number of minority senior staff and coaches has increased substantially, and is an excellent model for many other sporting leagues. From what I've read, in large part it's effective because owners end up speaking to candidates they normally would not have and end up impressed and candidates get more opportunities to interview and see what they need to work on to be better candidates.
FA adopting 'Rooney rule'
- Thread starter KM
- Start date
I agree with it in the NFL actually. Franchise owners are typically old white men who value black players for their athleticism, but wouldn't trust them to make decisions. For example, the wide receivers, running backs are typically black, the Quarterbacks (who make on field decisions) are white. And if somehow you do end up with a black QB, typically they are characterised as a "running QB," i.e. someone who uses his athleticism to succeed rather than his brains/decision making. Good white wide receivers are "scrappy," or "intelligent," whilst good black wide receivers are "freakish" athletes.
Also, the NFL and America as a whole, has a whole lot more black people playing the sport. Mike Tomlin, who is a very good coach, probably got the head coach job at the Steelers based on being given the opportunity by the Rooney Rule, and I honestly don't think he would have got the chance if not for that.
Conversely, in England, this is just gonna mean Paul Ince gets interviewed for the England Managers job once every 5 years. A better solution would be to implement the rule at Championship and below level, giving black managers the opportunity at a club, to make their names for themselves from there.
Also, the NFL and America as a whole, has a whole lot more black people playing the sport. Mike Tomlin, who is a very good coach, probably got the head coach job at the Steelers based on being given the opportunity by the Rooney Rule, and I honestly don't think he would have got the chance if not for that.
Conversely, in England, this is just gonna mean Paul Ince gets interviewed for the England Managers job once every 5 years. A better solution would be to implement the rule at Championship and below level, giving black managers the opportunity at a club, to make their names for themselves from there.
It's named after the bloke who encouraged the adoption of a similar rule brought in by the NFL.
It's misleading to talk about this as something that can (yet) change things at the very top. When United recruited after SAF left, I'm sure only well known names like Guardiola, Mourinho, Ancellotti and of course Moyes were on the list. If we'd been looking a few years earlier maybe Rijkaard would have been there as well.
However, there's still no harm in asking United to interview a black candidate - even if the only outcome for the candidate is that he becomes a name in Woodward's head for the next vacancy, or a name that Woodward might suggest to some other chairman with a job to fill (and a less exalted shortlist).
We have BBBEE over here. Just saying.
Maybe you have misunderstood my comment, as my questions were totally genuine. You completely ignored them and went straight away into assessing an opinion I haven't even given yet. I feel kind of offended of how quick you made a deduction about me personally, without even knowing me in real life.
Thank you for answering my first question and I understand you points completely. However, I would seriously like to know specifically who are the managers that could fall into this category. Will it be done on some sort of random-based choice from people, who have their professional coaching licences, would it be sportsmen with some pedigree and a CV to show for before such an interview?
I've just googled the board members of the FA to see whether the people implementing these rules live by their own standards, and as it turns out they've actually appointed two women to the board in 2017, one of them also seems to have Indian roots. At the same time realistically it's not that much of a development if you take into account that one female appointment was a replacement of another female, but still I guess it's better than doing nothing. I can definitely understand the cynical reactions of some people though.
http://www.thefa.com/about-football-association/who-we-are/structure
"The Council approved the appointment of Kate Tinsley as a new independent non-executive director of The FA in October 2017."
"Rupinder Bains joined The FA Board as our third Professional Game [PG] non-executive FA Director, appointed jointly by the Premier League and the EFL, in November 2017."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/football...-fasfirst-asian-director-joins-board-english/
How do you enforce such a rule and is it even democratic to do so? Do the clubs have to fire the manager so another can take his place, or is it when they are recruiting a new one? And what if the owners of the privately owned football club believe another person is more qualified and since it's their money it depends on, would rather hire him?
There are so many problems that such a legislation could create, the biggest being the state meddling with the private sector and basically totally diminishing the idea of a free market, which is especially true for the EU.
But I really sympathise and understand the problem, just not sure this is a competent way to solve it.
Rooney rule will do nothing unless all the clubs adopt it and the FA make changes for minorities to enter the sport at a coaching and managerial level
At the end of the day any pro can become a coach and take their experience the manager's seat for lower level clubs there has to be a reason why there are so few minorities there and I think that's the area the FA should prioritise along with adopting the Rooney rule for all football league clubs and not just the national team
At the end of the day any pro can become a coach and take their experience the manager's seat for lower level clubs there has to be a reason why there are so few minorities there and I think that's the area the FA should prioritise along with adopting the Rooney rule for all football league clubs and not just the national team
Come on man, you know that isn't what he said.
But how would forcing a minority in the pool of applicants help, if they won't get the job anyway because they are somehow discriminated against?
I'm not saying it's going to discriminate against the most qualified, what I tried to say is I doubt there's a big system in place to disallow minorities the opportunity to manage football teams based on their skincolour. Based on that, and the (apparant?) lack of minority managers, they might not be the most qualified, or is my logic wrong?
Not all discrimination is intentional or conscious. I remember there was a study showing that people with foreign sounding names are less likely to go from the CV stage to the interview stage - even when everything else is the same on the CV. However it doesn't mean that the employer is looking at the name and thinking "that sounds foreign, I'm not giving them the job". It might be more subtle than that.
Anyway what it means is that more minority candidates get the opportunity to prove themselves at the interview stage.
As for how it might help, it seems obvious to me that if more get interviews then that will have a direct impact over time. Not only that, but it's likely that potential candidates are more likely to put themselves forward if they think they will have more of a chance. Thinking longer-term, the same principle should also make it more likely that young people will do the necessary qualifications etc.
EDIT: I think this was the study I mentioned. https://www.theguardian.com/money/2009/oct/18/racism-discrimination-employment-undercover. There have been a few in different countries and as far as I know they all had the same result.
What changes? Are there any barriers for minorities to enter the sport at a coaching level currently? What are they? Where are they?
We're calling for solutions here without naming any specific problems, it seems to me.
Does anyone really believe any black managers will get a job as a result of this scheme? It’s just another tick the box exercise from the FA. What are they going to do 5 years down the line when they are getting interviews but not getting the jobs?
Also, what is Paul Ince currently doing to help his cause other than moaning? I’ve just glanced over his managerial career and I can understand why clubs are avoiding him.
Also, what is Paul Ince currently doing to help his cause other than moaning? I’ve just glanced over his managerial career and I can understand why clubs are avoiding him.
Seriously, Britain is full of organisations in which the ultimate priority is to cover their arses.
And I'm not talking about Jippy.
And I'm not talking about Jippy.
I think it's widely accepted that removing names from CV's as well as the names of the schools they attended, has the effect that they're looking for.
It's elegant, simple and fair.
But it promotes absolute diversity and removes all possibility of prejudice. So nobody does it. Then people look for hackneyed solutions like the ridiculous 'Rooney Rule' to claim that they're trying.
The world is a joke.
In fairness Rooney is pretty equal opportunities in his approach to who he shags.
As I said in my post there has to be a reason why so few are in coaching roles
I don't know that reason but the FA should look into it because the Rooney rule on it's own will not change anything if minorities are not entering coaching roles to begin with
Why is it when this question comes up certain people start naming specific black managers. This rule is not to help Paul Ince. It's much more likely to help the person we haven't heard of who might not even have done his qualifications yet.
I'd imagine that the CV approach doesn't quite work for the specific job of England's national football team manager.
?
I was referring to the BBC video with Paul Ince in that somebody else posted in the thread.
Regardless of whether this needs addressing or not surely promising to interview someone is a pretty pointless rule. If they weren't going to hire that applicant before this rule, they aren't going to now.
Good.
Right. I understand. But what does "few" mean? The number of black coaches is more or less proportionate to the number of black people in England (even higher if you take into account other countries that managers most often come from). Are we certain there's a real problem here?
I don't see the rule as actively harmful or discriminatory, by the way. It creates the idea that there is a problem I'm not sure exists, however, for mostly PR reasons, the way I see it. It's not a big deal but I don't love it.
Last edited:
This is farcical, interviewing managers should only be on merit, not on what colour your skin is.
Yes i'm not sure either I don't have the statistics but i'm just giving my opinion that the Rooney rule on it's own is useless unless wider changes aren't made to get more minorities in coaching roles
If the proportions are on par with the amount of minorities then I don't see the problem either
My opinion is the job should go to the best candidate not what colour skin they have the gender they are or where they went to school but who is the best person to have that position
Females are at an advantage in today's society because of "equality" when in reality females are giving positions based on gender and the need to have more women which only makes modern society more sexist
Easyjet want more female pilots for example which means they will will most likely overlook better candidates that are male just to balance out the numbers that is the world we are living in today unfortunately where the jobs do not go to the best person but to the person who ticks the right boxes
I agree with this. I’m 100% in favour of BAMEs getting more chances at all levels of the game but no club or organisation should hire someone just because of their ethnicity.
Positive discrimination involves intentionally disadvantaging non-minority (i.e. white) candidates. This isn't.
The purpose of it is to force people to interview someone who IS good enough for the job but wouldn't otherwise be interviewed owing to not belonging to the right golf club, or whatever.
Well yes, but I suppose that, looking at the bigger picture, even being present as a token minority might be better than not being present at all.
Who is asking them too? They are being asked to give everyone a fair shot which somehow is annoying certain posters here.
Anyone has a problem with this needs to take a good look at themselves before they head off to their national front meetings
Also the next person thatmentions Paul Ince or Paul Parker should be banned .The fact you cant think of another black manager might just be the point of this
And another 10 years after that must interview at least 1 gay and 1 transsexual.
Jobs in all walks of life, if you aren't good enough for a job you don't get the job it's as simple as that (nothing to do with skin colour) and you aren't qualified enough for the job then don't apply for the job, why waste your or other peoples time?
If there's only a handful of good black managers in football, why should a black person, if clearly not qualified or experienced enough for that position get a interview, taking up an interview spot over someone more qualified (irrelevant to skin colour) for a Manchester United or any other top club in England just because they are black and have passed their coaching badges?
If there's only a handful of good black managers in football, why should a black person, if clearly not qualified or experienced enough for that position get a interview, taking up an interview spot over someone more qualified (irrelevant to skin colour) for a Manchester United or any other top club in England just because they are black and have passed their coaching badges?
Does anyone actually get interviewed for a football manager's job? The clubs mostly pick their man and then agree (or not) terms.
Have you ever been discriminated against on the basis of your sex, race, ethnicity or sexual orientation? Because its easy to make a laugh and a joke about such things and be facetious, but these are very real issues in our society that need addressing.
Michael Owen just sends out brochures.
Ok, I see.
This all seems like a token gesture. Are there even enough BME managers who satisfy the criteria to be shortlisted for the the England positions? If the FA is serious about this, they would fix the pipeline of BME managers.
This is a good step. The replies in this thread suggest how so many of you are still unaware of how difficult minorities have it. The playing field for minorities is not level right now. That has to be happen. Until it is, minorities should get preferential treatment with getting hired.
The state of this post.
Not really. The FA talks about a BAME background candidate being interviewed - "Black, Asian, minority ethnic" - that's roughly 10% of Britons. You could argue that we don't actually see many Indian or Chinese heritage players I guess, if you want to look at football demographics. But if you do look at football demographics you'll certainly find that more than 10% of the British born pro players are black.
So, no. It's not proportionate. Plus, a move like this is about telling potential candidates to get the coaching badges and apply for the jobs as well as about telling association boards, local FAs and clubs to take recruitment more seriously.
Gender there's equal rights now for women in all walks of life and racism in football (at least in England) as come on a long way, as for a persons sexual preference.
The big push by the LGTB community for a gay footballer to come out as 'gay' annoys me, it's as almost if they are wanting a straight player to say he's gay (even if he's not), so they can put a rainbow flag around them.
What difference does it make and what as it got to do with anyone else (and football for that matter) what a person likes to do in the bedroom in the privacy of their own home?