The Woolster

I must commend you for your articulate and well thought out responses but I do feel that you are wasting your time somewhat. I wasted a good hour of my life recently trying to convince the same person that john barnes was not a striker. He (obviously) proved me wrong on that one and explained to me how barnes 'certainly finished his career playing up front' not in central midfield as the rest of us were led to believe. Said poster seems to continually spout nonsense then when people pull him up on it he accuses them of some form of internet bullying.

I realised that, but it was a slow day at work.

He reminds me of that Kenny's Spell is a Bell or whatever his name is, are they infact the same?

You don't just work on it though at that level, the coaches that train you tell you what to work on and while you might think that they would automatically think that way, the fact of the matter is, they don't.

 

If you're fast as fuck and you're told to run down the wings all day and that's all you're told to do then you're not working on rounding your game off are you. Do you think Tony Pulis is teaching the finer points of tiki taka to his side? Of course he isn't.

 

Of course race comes into it when the discussion is "BLACK MANAGERS.... WHERE ARE THEY". If this was a discussion about football in general then no race shouldn't enter into it but when the context is race in footaball it's kind of a pre requisite don't you think?

 

The fact of the matter is that you've just agreed with me that black players are more likely to be physically fitter, faster and stronger in general, there is scientific fact that backs up not only the proof of this but the factual genetic reasons as to why and yet you still have a problem with it?

 

If we didn't acknowledge that people of different race are genetically different, well, let's hope your doctor isn't "racist" if you're black and need to receive treatment .

Is Pulis a bad manager because he plays direct football? No.

Does playing for Pulis mean that you won't be a good manager because you have not played Tika-taka football? No.

Being fast and told to run up and down the wing all day has nothing to do with whether you think about the tactical side of the game or not, whether you listen to what the coaches are saying, in general or to other members of the squad, or whether you ask the coaches why the team is doing things in a certain way, whether you watch as much football as possible to see how other teams play, and it has nothing to do with whether you would be a good manager or not.

Being a Paul Scholes type player, who controls the pace of the game, who thinks about the position of team mates and what the best pass would be, who links defence and attack, and who has fantastic technique equally doesn't mean they would be a good manager. I think Scholes would be a shit manager actually.

It is not the physical qualities, nor the style of player, nor the style of the teams they have played for which determines if someone would be a good manager, it is the personal/mental qualities. That has nothing to do with their colour.

I've never once said that any black player lacks the fortitude, i've said they don't have to rely on it as much but as usual what I've said doesn't seem to matter when certain people are around (I'm not having a go at you on that score).

 

Regardless of whether you are black, if you are fitter, stronger and have more stamina then you don't need to work as hard at your game and to suggest that it might be a reason why any player in that bracket might not work as hard at their game is fair comment is it not? I mean it might not be right but it's certainly not going to cause the overreaction my comments have.

 

Now if you admit black players are usually physically fitter, faster and stronger IN GENERAL then if the statement in the paragraph above stands alone then it stands to reason that black players would not have to work as hard at their game in those respects. If you look at the sucessful black managers they have come from clubs where every player is treated the same regardless of position, stature, age etc (the way it should be). So I surmise that while these black players (or talented players of any race whose abilities center around physical attributes) are not being taught the right lessons, they then become less suitable for managerial positions. I again qualified this by pointing out.

 

Barcelona and Holland have an education first policy for all their players and will refuse to keep a player around just for his physical attributes as some clubs do, these two footballing powers have been responsible for three of the finest finest world class players who have gone on to prove themselves at managerial level. Cruyff, Rijkaard and Pep and the fact that Cruyff, Rijkaard was given the job or sacked from it had nothing to do with the colour of his skin.

 

If you want to become a quality manager in this game (if you want to take into account the rebbeca theory) then get yourself to Ajax or Barca, learn the game from the greatest teachers day in and day out (like Mourinho did) and then tell people you've done that.

 

Maybe I'm naive but I can't believe the reason Kenny Dalglish has had two shots at the Liverpool job is because Barnes is black.

 

As for the lower levels? Well I don't know how you get a shot at those jobs other than to do what Owen Coyle did for example and just win games you shouldn't be until a bigger side notices you or you promote your way to the prem.

If I was a professional sportsman, I would hope that I would work at my weaker aspects, and I think many top athletes would be the same, it could be what differentiates the best from the average.

So I think it is wrong to presume that because someone is fitter, they are less likely to work on their reading of the game, I would say there is a good chance of the opposite. But a person's race should not come into it whether you think one way or another, as it is neither here nor there.

Had I said all black people were fitter, stronger and with more stamina then you might have a point. I pointed out that in general and within the context of the game of football that black players tend to be fitter, stronger and faster. Prove that wrong and you prove me a racist. I qualifiied my remarks time and time again. I didn't at any time say ALL black players are fitter/faster/stronger and nor did I say at any time they were thick.

 

I did not say that you said those things either, but you do not need to say those things for a comment to have some derogatory undertones to it. And I agree that black players tend to be fitter, stronger and faster. But that has nothing to do with ability to be a manager.

What you have said is that as black players (although it doesn't matter if black or white really, the same could be said about Ronaldo for instance, who is fitter and quicker than most) rely on physical attributes, such as speed, is less likely to be a good manager because they will not have worked on the tactical side. But these attributes have absolutely nothing to do with whether the player works on the mental side of things or not, or how tactically aware they are. Its like me saying, and to use one of the players you mention, that because Alonso reads the game so well and has good technique, that he is less likely to work on the physical side of his game. But there would be no basis for me to make that assumption.

By saying "Black players are usually physically fitter, faster and stronger in general than white players and maybe for this reason they over rely on these aspects and don't develop the mental side of their game as much, so maybe this explains why they don't go into or do well in management." you are linking a person's physical abilities with their mental fortitude and intelligence, but there is no link, and by using the generalisation of a black person's physical abilities, you have brought a person's race into it.

Go fuck yourself, and the same goes to anyone who has used my posts as an excuse to be racist themselves. Nothing I've said is racist and not once have I accused anyone who was black of being thick, never.

 

If you can't tell the difference between someone saying that if you are physically gifted you don't have to work as much on the mental side of the game to compensate and all black people are thick then it's you that I pity.

You are not being racist in the sense of hating a particular race, or that you are superior, which is what most people take as being racist. However you are using stereo types and sweeping generalisations by saying that black people are fitter/stronger/faster, ergo do not have to work on the mental side of the game, therefore they don't work on the mental side of their game, thus are not likely to make good managers. But you are making a massive presumption that just because someone relies on pace as their main asset that they don't work on the mental side of their game and therefore don't think about the tactical side of things.

Now you may think that this is not being racist, however if your viewpoint is shared by those that employ the managers, which I think is quite possible, then this provides a massive barrier to black people getting getting a job as a coach or manager, and so in a very subtle way a group of people are being restricted due to their race. The knock on effect is that if black players think this, then they are inlcined to not bother trying to become a coach/manager themselves, as what is the point.

You may still not see your view as being racist, but if you look at the definition of a racist you will see various forms

Racist | Define Racist at Dictionary.com

rac·ism   [rey-siz-uhm]

–noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

You are basically saying that as black players are more reliant on being fast/strong/fit, that they tend not to work on the mental side of the games, and so are less likely to make a good manager, which is basically the bolded part of the definition above.

Now, I am not saying that you are a racist, and I don't think you are in terms of point 3 in the definition, or even the unshaded part of point 1, and I am not trying to cause an arguement, but I am trying to show how your view is of a more subtle, ingrained type of racism that, when shared by many, can limit the opportunities available to people of different races.

And anyway, as I said in an earlier post, I don't think the style of player necessitates being a good manager or not. Ferguson, a bruising centre forward by all acounts, Bruce, McCarthy, Alardyce were no nonsense centre backs, Hughes was a physical forward

Name me one black player at the top level that compares to the intelligence shown on the field of an Alonso, Carragher, Scholes where their game intelligence is the first thing you identify.

Dunno if it is the first thing you identify (but its not the first thing I identify about Scholes or Carra either), but game intelligence was/is an important factor for all the below I think

Barnes

Des Walker

Paul Mcgrath

Thuram

Desaily

Makele

Viera

Sol Campbell

Rio Ferdinand

Paul Davis

Gullit

Rijkaard

Seedorf

Kanu

But I don't think style of play as a player is really a big factor in being a good manager anyway, the list of Premierleague managers is made up by quite a few no nonsense burly defenders and strikers.

I remember seeing something, I think on Football Focus, with a few black ex players who were coaches or had been tring to get into management (I think Viv Anderson may have been one) and they all said that they basically lost out on jobs to people who had far less experience than them, and were often just not responded to when they applied for a job. I'll try and find it.

 

A great example for me is Paul Ince and Roy Keane, very similar players, similar recors in terms of winning things, similar winning attitutde, one starts his managerial career at Macclesfield in League 2, whilst the other starts at Sunderland, who although only being in the Championship, had just been relegated and have a massive stadium and fan base (relatively speaking) and was given a load of money to spend.

And I think this is the Footy Focus one I may have been confusing the Newsnight one with. This was from 2007

BBC SPORT | Football | Focus: Football's black mark

English football's claim to be fair and equal is fatally undermined by the current plight of the country's black coaches.

These statistics show the scale of the problem:

Less than 1% of senior coaching staff at the 92 league clubs are black - even though more than 20% of players are.

Only two managers - Macclesfield's Paul Ince and Torquay's Keith Curle - are not white.

Just two of the nine most highly-qualified black coaches in the country - all of whom have better qualifications than Middlesbrough boss Gareth Southgate - currently have jobs in the league.

Since its inception in 1992, there has never been a black English manager in the Premiership - even though about 25% of its players are not white. Jean Tigana managed Fulham and Ruud Gullit was in charge at Chelsea and Newcastle, but there has not been an English black manager in the top flight.

Garth Crooks, the BBC broadcaster, former Tottenham striker and football adviser to the Commission for Racial Equality, describes the situation as "appalling".

"Football should be ashamed of itself," he told BBC Sport.

"Bearing in mind the self-confessed tolerance of English football today, it's shocking that Paul Ince and Keith Curle are the only black managers in the league.

"We're certainly not in a position where we can afford to exclude a whole section of society from coaching and management."

WHY ARE THERE SO FEW BLACK COACHES AND MANAGERS?

RECRUITMENT

The University of Warwick's Sue Bridgewater, who has carried out extensive research on black coaches and managers, says: "There is a general view that they are not being given the same opportunities as their white counterparts."

Crooks says the different opportunities given to former Manchester United team-mates Roy Keane and Paul Ince highlight this.

They were two of the finest central midfielders of their generation and captains of their country.

Yet Keane was handed his first managerial job at Championship side Sunderland, while Ince was passed over for a Championship job before taking over at Macclesfield, who were bottom of League Two.

"One is at the bottom of the league and the other is near the top," Crooks said. "Why is that?

"Is it because people are more comfortable with Roy Keane, his culture and the way he looks and talks?

"The view among black footballers used to be that they had to be much better than their white counterparts to get in the team. The same seems to be true of black managers now."

Viv Anderson, England's first black international, now runs his own business after becoming disillusioned at the lack of opportunities to become a manager after eight years as assistant at Middlesbrough and a season before that as boss at Barnsley.

He describes football as "an old pals act, a closed shop where chairmen appoint managers they know and are comfortable with, and the managers choose their own backroom staff".

When you consider that there is not a single black chairman or director at any of the 92 league clubs, this suspicion is not surprising.

Crooks describes the way that some clubs recruit their coaching staff as "bordering on the medieval".

"People should be allowed to be interviewed and properly assessed, based on their record and CV, just as they are in most other walks of life," he says.

"As an example, I know two reserve-team coaches who have recently been appointed without even having the qualifications. No other industry in the world would appoint on that basis."

Bridgewater insists that most clubs do now use the same recruitment techniques as industry. She cites the example of Coventry, who employed recruitment consultants, sifted through CVs and interviewed candidates before appointing Iain Dowie earlier this week.

Yet there are exceptions. A spokesman for Leeds United admitted Dennis Wise had been appointed without any other candidates being interviewed for the post.

"The chairman thought Dennis was the right man for the job," he said.

And managers often bring their own backroom staff with them without going through a formal recruitment process.

Jason Galbraith Marten, a self-employed barrister specialising in employment and discrimination law, says clubs are leaving themselves open to legal action if they use such a recruitment process.

"The code of practice of the Commission for Racial Equality recommends what you should do to have a fair and transparent recruitment procedure," he said.

"If you failed to follow this, it would strengthen your case at a tribunal. If successful, you could claim compensation for injury to feelings and loss of earnings."

NOT ENOUGH CANDIDATES

Despite the shortfalls in the recruitment processes of many clubs, Notts County striker Jason Lee says black coaches themselves are partly to blame for their plight.

The former Nottingham Forest forward is in the twilight of his career and beginning to take his coaching badges.

"I don't think enough black players are pushing themselves," he told BBC Sport.

"I think more internationals, some of the better players, should be pushing themselves. I don't think enough of them have done the badges and put the time and effort in.

"I'm frustrated with some of my black colleagues who don't give it a real go. It's easy for me to say at the minute, because I haven't applied for these jobs yet and been given knock-backs.

"But if I start to get rejected in favour of people less qualified than me then I'd start to break it down and wonder why I wasn't getting the job.

"If you can't find any reason, it's easy to say 'well I'm black and he's white'. I think that's just the way of the world and some people just need a reason."

Former Newcastle and England striker Les Ferdinand is currently taking his Uefa B coaching licence and told BBC Sport "you don't see black faces on the courses".

Brendon Batson MBE, one of the first top black footballers and now a consultant to the Football Association on issues of equality and diversity, says a lack of role models is a big problem.

"There haven't been any role models for young black coaches, which has led to a mindset among black players of 'this isn't for us'," he told BBC Sport.

Crooks says this is because he and Batson are part of a "lost generation" of black coaches - players who made the breakthrough into English football in the 1970s and 1980s yet were never given the chance to move into management.

For example, Crooks says former England international Cyril Regis - who was one of the "Three Degrees" at West Brom in the 1970s - became an agent after failing to make the breakthrough into management.

"He wasn't even given the courtesy of a reply when he applied for jobs," Crooks says.

"I made the decision a long time ago that I would be better off making a career in broadcasting rather than management.

"I don't see why I should suffer the humiliation of not even getting a reply."

BEING PREPARED

John Barnes, the finest black player of his generation, was held up as the great hope for black managers.

He was handed a massive opportunity when he was named manager of Scottish giants Celtic in June 1999, but lasted only eight months after a disastrous run of results including a Cup defeat by Inverness Caledonian Thistle.

Barnes was eager to move back into management, and even coached for free at Swindon for a while, but was not given a second chance and now works as a television presenter.

Barnes was not given another management opportunity after Celtic

Ferdinand says he is angry that Barnes was not given another opportunity.

He told BBC Sport: "People say he wasn't ready for that job. But there are plenty of Caucasian managers who weren't ready for jobs, failed, and were then given another chance.

"John was a fantastic player, is intelligent and thoughtful, and will have learned from his experiences at Celtic. But he seems to have been thrown on the managerial scrapheap."

Yet Bridgewater has a statistic that 55% of first-time managers never work again.

So the resounding message is that when a job comes up, you have to be ready for it.

As well as Ferdinand taking the Uefa B course, three of the 21 coaches currently taking the Uefa Pro Licence course - Iffy Onuora, Keith Alexander and Leroy Rosenior - are black.

WHAT IS BEING DONE?

The CRE published a report on racial equality in English football in October 2004 entitled "It's Everyone's Game".

It was highly critical and prompted the sport's governing bodies to confront the issue. Yet, ironically, there were more black managers in the league - three - then than there are now.

The Premier League introduced a "racial equality standard", which 14 of its 20 clubs have signed up to. The Football Association points out that the coach of its women's team, Hope Powell, is black, as is recently-appointed England under-16 and 19 coach Blake.

Yet the Professional Footballers' Association seems to have been the most proactive in ensuring that there are more black coaches and managers in the future.

It set up a black coaches' forum, headed up by former Arsenal midfielder Paul Davis, in the wake of the CRE report.

Davis contacts black players as they near the end of their career to find out if they want to pursue a career in coaching.

He then gives them advice and information about getting their coaching badges and qualifications, lets them know about job vacancies, helps with CVs and interviews, and encourages them to go to games and network.

Former England full-back Earl Barrett told BBC Sport: "I thought I had no chance of becoming a coach when I finished playing, because there were so few black managers in the game.

"But the forum encouraged me to try and gave me hope. They encouraged me to keep busy and go to games. Now I'm getting qualifications (he has completed a sports science degree and is now looking into taking his Uefa B badge) and hope to get a foot in the door."

Bobby Barnes, the PFA's London representative, says Barrett is part of a new generation of black coaches who will be qualified to manage at the very highest level.

Bridgewater says the aim must be for there to be the same proportion of black managers as there are players, which would mean about 18 of the 92 clubs having non-white bosses.

"Steps are now being taken and black coaches are becoming highly qualified. The issue is out in the open and steps are being taken to correct it."

She, Barnes and the governing bodies believe there will be more black managers in the future.

Yet Keith Alexander, who led Lincoln to four consecutive play-offs before having a short and inglorious spell at Peterborough, thinks it will take a bigger change.

He told BBC Sport: "How many black chairmen or board members are there? I don't know of any.

"How many of the FA coaching courses are run by black people? Only Noel Blake.

"It makes you think it will take a black owner with plenty of money, who comes in and appoints a manager, or someone like Paul Ince going through the divisions for a black manager to get a chance at the highest level."

I remember seeing something, I think on Football Focus, with a few black ex players who were coaches or had been tring to get into management (I think Viv Anderson may have been one) and they all said that they basically lost out on jobs to people who had far less experience than them, and were often just not responded to when they applied for a job. I'll try and find it.

 

A great example for me is Paul Ince and Roy Keane, very similar players, similar recors in terms of winning things, similar winning attitutde, one starts his managerial career at Macclesfield in League 2, whilst the other starts at Sunderland, who although only being in the Championship, had just been relegated and have a massive stadium and fan base (relatively speaking) and was given a load of money to spend.

This is the one I meant, it was from newsnight back in 2004 and transcript is below. I've highlighted a part for WrongIslander

BBC NEWS | Programmes | Newsnight | Black football managers

Black football managers

The kindly clichés about English football, the beautiful game of the people, took another knock.

For "people", read "some of the people". One professional footballer in four is now black. But fewer than one in every 30 clubs has a black manager. There's also a dearth of black coaches and administrators.

The watchdog Independent Football Commission said many believe this is clear evidence of institutional racism.

Peter Marshall investigated with some of English football's black stars.

Watch the interview

COLIN KING:

Get a partner. Get one ball between two. As you approach your partner. I'll will show you what I want you to do. Ready. First of all I'm going to say take and I'll take the ball...

PETER MARSHALL:

Colin king is a football coach with all the FA's qualifications but no job. So turning a negative into a positive, he's got a PhD out of it. The academic title, Institutional Racism in Football Coaching, Management and Administration.

KING:

They've been quite awful actually, I mean at 17 years of age I tried to get into a professional club and was told that niggers couldn't be in the game and so I went down the coaching route and I got all the qualifications. I wrote to a lot of clubs asking for coaching jobs, nobody ever responded. I had a lot of racist experiences when I went on coaching courses. I was called a black Hitler, I had a chip on my shoulder, I was difficult, I was uppity.

PETER MARSHALL:

John Barnes is a football idol, a superstar, one of the most talented ever to play for England. He had one brief spell as a football manager, that was four years ago, since then, nothing.

JOHN BARNES:

I have tried for about four or five jobs, I have applied for jobs and I've also had Graham Taylor and Terry Venables who I've worked with, and who of course you would think if they phoned clubs up..

MARSHALL:

England Managers.

BARNES:

...England Managers, to recommend me even for an interview, not necessarily to be given the job. And that has not brought anything, not even, not even an interview.

MARSHALL:

Do you think you might be aiming too high?

BARNES:

Well, if I'm aiming for a second division club, the only other alternative is either third division club or the conference. I know Luther Blisset, I know so many other England internationals have been turned down from Third Division clubs so, I don't know how much lower we can go. Maybe we should go into the Sunday league, possibly?

MARSHALL:

It's a mystery, isn't it this?

BARNES:

It's not much of a mystery, no.

MARSHALL:

Along side the superstar, John Barnes and the coach and academic, Colin king, there are at least two generations of successful black footballers, conspicuous by their absence from the running of the game, from coaching and managerial jobs. These are people with all the right qualifications to be football bosses, apart from the colour of their skin. There are 92 premier and Football League clubs in England and 20 to 25% of the players are from ethnic minorities, but only three of the managers are black. They are doing well, but in the bottom division. The players union, the PFA has found that while 73% of white players are keen to remain in the game after retirement, even more, 76% of black players want to stay on, yet their opportunities are restricted. It took 30 years for black players to be regarded as simply footballers, to beat the racism of the crowds. In the vanguard were two England strikers, Luther Blissett and Cyrille Regis. Since retirement, both have worked as coaches, but never got the chance to manage. Today Regis has given up to become an agent while Blissett has been out of work for 15 months.

LUTHER BLISSETT:

You know you've done well in the interview, because you know if you've cocked it up or not, just like on the football pitch, you know when you've cocked it up. You are honest with yourself. Then you don't even get anything after, a letter to say no or whatever. That's it. That's the end of it. Things like that, that is hard sometimes to understand why that can happen.

CYRILLE REGIS:

As a player it's tangible. You can hear the racist chants, you can see the letters, you can see the bananas on the pitch and you can react to it, but when you are going for jobs and interviews and putting your CV's in and job applications, you can't really tell somebody's heart where they're coming from, what prejudices they have inside of them.

BLISSETT:

Often you get letters back, and you'll either say, yes we'd like you to come for an interview, which I've had on a couple of occasions and the others you sort of get, maybe we are looking for somebody with a bit more experience, which is a bit of a slap in the face for somebody that's played at the various levels in the game that I have played and played at some of the clubs in the countries that I've played football in.

MARSHALL:

The only black managers to be appointed in the Premier League and both are now gone were the Dutchman Ruud Gullit and Jean Tigana from France. World stars, their international status transcending race. Given the current football fashion for importing managers, it's harder for English-born bosses to get jobs if they are white, when they are black...

KING:

I have done a lot of research, and you speak to two white managers and white coaches and I think there is a thing called the "comfort zone" that white managers and white coaches probably are much more comfortable working with white coaches and white managers, based on their personal friendships and their relationships outside of the game and they're maybe not so comfortable working with people who they have played with but maybe not built up that type of close relationship outside the game.

MARSHALL:

So it's a friendship thing in some ways?

KING:

I think definitely it's a friendship thing. You ask most players, any top manager or coach, they will pick people based on who they know, rather than what they know.

MARSHALL:

It was 1999 when Kenny Dalglish, the new technical director at Glasgow Celtic, introduced his friend and protégé John Barnes as his choice of manager.

BARNES:

Kenny Dalglish was taken as technical director and he insisted on me coming. He trusted me, he knew me, we'd worked together before so he had belief in me. And although we won 12 of the first 13 or 14 matches, I realised very early on that you know if I lost a couple of matches, because everyone there wasn't fully behind, or wasn't, not necessarily supportive, they were supportive while I was there and they were behind me when I was there but they weren't all in favour of the appointment. So I knew that because they are not in favour of the appointment if I lose three or four of the matches that will just reinforce, yes, we've got the wrong man.

KING:

I think John Barnes' situation for me is what I call the one theory, black players are given one chance and that's it. I think John Barnes is a very interesting situation, here is a black player, that we've been told that he is probably the best role model we have had for 20 years, and if he makes it we can do it anywhere. The fact that he didn't make it at Celtic, maybe implicitly saying that black players are not ready at the moment.

MARSHALL:

John Barnes was sacked after only eight months and some poor results. You are not suggesting there was racism involved in Celtic's decision?

BARNES:

Not at all. In fact my Englishness seemed to be more of a problem than my blackness up there! But no, in no way was I accusing Celtic of racism but we are talking of the dynamics of when a black manager is at a club. In many respects it is unconscious. You know it's unconscious, you say to people, you tell people your ideas it is unconscious in terms of you can see do they actually believe what you are telling them. That is what I'm talking about. Not necessarily the Chairman, the directors, it's everybody concerned with the club. Ricky Hill was at Luton, as much as everyone loved Ricky as a player and may have loved me as a player, when you become a manager do they actually have the belief in what you are telling them?

MARSHALL:

Ricky Hill survived only five months at Luton and his assistant, the first black man to be a fully accredited FA national coach lasted just three months. He has now had to go to America for work. For all its claims to modernity there are some old fashioned attitudes in the world of football. Two apparently forward-thinking Chairman I spoke to referred to their coloured players with whom they have no problem. At the FA, which set up an equity unit over a year ago they've still no idea whatsoever, how many black players are taking coaching badges. It will be this summer before they even start collecting the figures to tell them how big a problem they have got. Paul Davis is South London born and a North London hero. He won a host of medals and cups with Arsenal, today he is working part-time for the players union. Puzzling over why there are so few black coaches in football.

PAUL DAVIS:

The FA have got no black coaches at the moment, I believe, in the professional game within the structure of the FA, that's the governing body of football.

MARSHALL:

So that's the message being sent?

DAVIS:

So People look at that. They think, well 30 years down the line, we have had some great players who have come through the game, all interested in getting involved in football and coaching.

MARSHALL:

In fact the FA say that two of their 18 full-time coaches are black. One is a woman with the women's squad, the other coaches the learning disabilities team. Today's report from the Independent Football Commission says on race,"the football authorities need to place a much firmer emphasis on results... The FA in particular must raise its profile and put a much stronger emphasis on action and outcomes as opposed to plans and intentions." But how to set targets and change the make-up of individual football clubs? They will choose who they think is the best man for the job. Despite qualifications, they will say that it comes down in the end to personality, that such and such is probably a better manager then so and so, therefore we'll go for him?

DAVIS:

Well, there is no point in having qualifications then or going for all these courses because if at the end of it the clubs are going to be able to dismiss that, and forget it, well what's the problem, we don't need to look at that because we are going to choose somebody because of this, then the whole process is going to be flawed.

MARSHALL:

Paul Davis speaks from bitter experience. As a junior coach at Arsenal, he recently found himself passed over for promotion in favour of a less-qualified colleague. After 26 years with the club he resigned. His case is now at arbitration, one more black coach lost to the game. With English football about to enter a new era with the new Wembley Stadium, the game's image needs remodelling too. Institutional racism may be subconscious, may be unintended but it's still deeply damaging.

KING:

It just shows you how powerless black players are to change the system. If the black players are under represented as Chairman or directors, they haven't got the financial investment in those structures. They are being excluded and that's how institutional racism operates.

BARNES:

The stereotype of a black man is that he is a good athlete, therefore, he should be able to run fast, box, sprint, play rugby, play football, we are athletic but can we think? That is the hardest barrier to overcome.

BLISSETT:

When you get knocked back, if it was week after week, day after day, whatever, you've got to eventually start to suspect there may be something else going on somewhere. It's human nature. It's not because I'm black why I'm saying that. Anybody that knows me knows I have never been one to go down the route, it's because I'm black or whatever. That's never ever been a part of my thinking, and it still isn't even now. That's probably the reason why I still persevere as I do.

MARSHALL:

After the struggle to gain acceptance and acclaim on the pitch the barriers to get on to the coaches bench still look formidable.

This transcript was produced from the teletext subtitles that are generated live for Newsnight. It has been checked against the programme as broadcast, however Newsnight can accept no responsibility for any factual inaccuracies. We will be happy to correct serious errors.

Oh right, "plenty" then, you win, i simply can't debate against such compelling evidence.

I remember seeing something, I think on Football Focus, with a few black ex players who were coaches or had been tring to get into management (I think Viv Anderson may have been one) and they all said that they basically lost out on jobs to people who had far less experience than them, and were often just not responded to when they applied for a job. I'll try and find it.

A great example for me is Paul Ince and Roy Keane, very similar players, similar recors in terms of winning things, similar winning attitutde, one starts his managerial career at Macclesfield in League 2, whilst the other starts at Sunderland, who although only being in the Championship, had just been relegated and have a massive stadium and fan base (relatively speaking) and was given a load of money to spend.

Oh! Carol, I am but a fool,

Darling I love you tho' you treat me cruel,

You hurt me and you made me cry

But if you leave me I will surely die.

 

Darling there will never be another

Cause I love you so,

don't ever leave me,

Say you'll never go

I will always want you for my sweetheart

No matter what you do

Oh! Carol, I'm so in love with you.

 

 

too gay ?:whistle:

Oh Carroll, number 9 for the Pool,

He scares defenders,

And makes them look like fools.

We cheer him, as he wins another in the air,

You know he's a real man, who doesn't dye his hair.

You always know he's gonna score another,

And the Kop will sing his name,

He's Andy Carroll,

The best striker in the game.

He will always battle for the redmen

The boy from the Tyne

Oh-oh-oh Carroll, Liverpool's number 9

Will we sing Sit Down Pinocchio when we play Villa? I'm sure he'll find it funny

VDV has said the other club in for him was not bayern, but us, and he chose spurs due to harry.

Definitely a bargain at £8m, but not sure he is the type of player we need as we have a few midfield playmakers now, and he showed during the WC, that he is no winger.

Thought that Elia lad who always came on as sub for the dutch looked a player though, and could be perfect for us on the left

I am posting from my phone so no link, but Sportinglife is quoting SSN on this.

In fact reading through Kuyts quotes again he says he is happy at Liverpool, he wants to stay, he is happy to talk about a new contract, and that it is not dependent on whether Rafa stays or not. To me it does not sound like Rafa has had a word in his ear to say he may be leaving and that he wants him to go with. If that was the case he would probably say that there was no rush and that he was concentrating on performing well for the rest of the season or something along those lines

Why would he advise Kuyt not to sign his contract ? Then as soon as Rafa signed his five year deal' date=' Kuyt sudenly signs his contract extension. I think there was another player too, but i'm not sure so I wont name him. But Rafa was advising Kuyt not to sign. Regardless of whether you rate Kuyt or not, I can see no other reason why Rafa would do this, unless he was paving the way to take Kuyt to his new club.[/quote']

 

One possible reason is that Rafa knew that his new contract was likely to give him much more power at the club with regards to signings and the playing staff, and I presume that would include contracts of players already at the club. We all know kuyt was one of his favourite players, is it beyond the realms of possibility that he said to him that he really appreciates his contribution to the team, and to hold off signing the contract as once he has sorted out his own that he may be able to offer better terms?

 

Straight out of the Harvard Business School MBA course on how to motivate staff to both perform well and remain loyal if you ask me. These few posts are all I have heard about it though, so dunno if there is more inside information

Even though that he is a Londoner

We still love Joe Cole

Even though that he is a Londoner

We still sing his name, when he scores a goal

I get a funny feeling inside of me

When he beats his man again

Even though that he is a Londoner

We love our number 10!

Ha! Had literally just read the words "villa are currently in Dublin for a training camp" on the back page of the metro whilst waiting for the latest topics page to load, then checked my phone and found this thread at the top!

I reckon its a sign, not sure what its trying to tell me though. Maybe that I should go to Dublin and get pissed?

They don't play in the same position and wouldn't command the same transfer fee.

 

A fairer comparison would be Kuyt and Malouda. Nobody in their right mind would take Kuyt.

Didn't Rafa try to buy Malouda but were outbid by Chealsea? And I wouldn't really say Malouda has a questionable attitude either. Probably not the best of sticks to beat Rafa with.

What about Kuyt or Pennant?

Or if they have to command the same fee, Kuyt or Queresma or Joaquin from a few years ago?

Its not avery good arguement as will always find players that can prove the other one wrong.

Really a good team/squad, if they can't have players with both the attitude and the technique throughout, should have a team with both types of player so that they can compliment each other.

No need, I've also lost the will to live.

Do let me know if I've missed anything out - I tend to ask this off people that accuse me of missing out answers to questions and they inevitably don't reply. Strange that eh? If they do reply they get an answer - always.

Oh, and apology accepted

 

Do let me know if I've missed anything out - I tend to ask this off people that accuse me of missing out answers to questions and they inevitably don't reply. Strange that eh? If they do reply they get an answer - always.

 

You got into the discussion about Benitez straight away, you could easily have left it, but instead that is what the thread ended up being about because you kept going on about it, and you brought up that the squad is only good enough for 7th by the way, which started that part of the discussion.

So sometimes, if you think someone is being an idiot, perhaps it is bet to let them continue being an idiot, particularly if it is a flippant one liner. If we start arguing about flippant one liners, which happens a lot here, then that will reduce the constructive and interesting discussions.

You may think that I have strengthened some of your points, but then I think that you are one of the "far too many people that read a post, apply their own interpretation and then proceed with that interpretation as fact into a debate." So I guess we are just going around in circles there.

I don't understand how you can make that statement without saying that you have read my post and interpreted them the way you want to. I've NEVER come out on here and told anyone what my view of Benitez is. I simply enter arguments about Benitez and put all factors of the equation into the melting pot. Lots of people - you as well apparently - interpret that the way they want.

 

So what is your view on Benitez, have I interpreted you incorrectly? Do you think he should stay? Much of your debating seems to be about the fact that he has not had the funds to make the squad stronger, and if he had that he would be able to compete, am I wrong about that?

Or do you "simply enter arguements about Benitez" because you like to argue/debate? Do you ever play devils advocate in these debates?

Top 5 reasons why arguing on a forum is stupid:

 

 

5. The person you’re arguing with doesn’t know anything relevant or useful anyway

 

4. Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.

 

3. When it comes right down to it, you don’t care what the person you’re arguing with has to say.

 

2. The only thing anybody’s ever been persuaded of from an argument is that the other person is an asshole.

 

1. Don't argue with idiots. They'll only drag you down to their level............ and beat you by experience.

I wish I had seen this post about 20 minutes ago. Unfortunately I think I am in too deep now

Pottery and Rafapology? Ooh, you're a scientist!

 

HAHA! This did make me laugh when I saw it yesterday.

I have a very typical Jewish mother, and she has been texting me and calling me for the last week or so to check if me and the missus (who is preggers) are ok, but I have just kept forgetting to get back to her. I just got this text from her "Are you OK? You've got an Ology but you can't phone you mother!"

Thats quite funny for her, but also a bit of a coincidence!

There's absolutely no need to be calling people names and trying to appear smart when replying. Just apply logic and debate the points you wish to make. That'll make it much more interesting.

Earlier in this very thread, you called someone an idiot. Now that may be a statement of opinion, but it also name calling. I said you was repetitive, that is merely a statement of opinion and not calling you any type of name, although some would regard it as fact. I suppose did say that you are humourless, apologies if that upset you.

And why do you despair at the education system in response to one of my posts. What can you conlude from my post about my education? Do you think that inferring that I had a bad education, and therefore am unable to comprehend things could be interpretted as name calling?

Can you accept that you have been somewhat hypocritical there?

Right there is one of the reasons I get frustrated with some of our fans - it's absolutely ridiculous to make that statement. BOTH are intrinsically linked - One is part of the other. It's like saying People can run marathons, therefore people who require heart transplants should still be able to run a Marathon. That people can run marathons does not effect the heart and therefore there is no link. One is has an absolute direct bearing on the ability to do the other.

Do you understand causality and effect? The lack of transfer funds is an effect of the financial situation at the club, which itself is due to the club being bought using debt and having very little capital injected by the owners.

Just because 2 things are intrinsically linked, it does not mean they can't be discussed in isolation. If I asked you about what causes the tides of the sea, would you be able to tell me about the gravitational pull of the moon without telling me that we can play around in the waves and go surfing?

The Article was very very clear in mentioning that the Leeches have had to pay £78 Mill in interest - an overall loss of £92 Mill over two years. I then dug a little deeper into those figures and pointed out that a £92 Mill loss over two years - of which £78 Mill was interest payments - would have equated to £65 Mill available for the transfer budget which would have allowed us to possibly take the next step. I'm not going to apologise because you either missed or were unwilling to accept that.

There are lots of other threads discussing whether Benitez has had enough transfer funds. Would it not be better disussing it in one of those, and by all means use the facts you have found out from this one, so that this thread could be left for something that, in my opinion, has not seen much discussion?

Can you see how that by bringing transfer funds into the subject, and whether the squad is good enough for 4th or not for that matter, may be annoying?

And there, right there is where you have completely missed my point - I wasn't suggsting that our transfer policy had caused our financial situation - where have you grasped that one from? - I've said, very very very clearly throughout that the financial situation AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE PAYING £78 MILL IN INTEREST PAYMENTS has dictated our transfer policy. i.e. There ISN'T one!

No, you missed my point. I did not say that you did suggest that, I am saying the our financial situation, and what I think was the more important aspect of the the article, how we can most effectively see off the yanks, can be discussed in isolation from the transfer funds and the quality of our squad.

Given that you do come across as reasonable I honestly believe that had you read my initial posts you would have agreed with what I said then. You've confirmed as much in these posts.

Perhaps that is because I am reasonable. However, I have also seen a number of other posters who I consider to be reasonable, from both sides of the Rafa arguement, take issue with you recently. Have you noticed any of their comments to you? Would that not suggest that it is possible that you are being unreasonable?

I am not taking issue with what you say, I would say I am on your side of the arguement with regards to Benitez, but that is neither here nor there, what I do take issue with is that you say the same thing, with the same hysterity, all the time, and everywhere.

I know there are a lot of questions there, but seeing that you take umbrage when people don't answer your questions, I do hope you will answer all of mine.

Apologies to everyone else for carrying on this pointless arguement.

It's impossible to mention the financial situation at the club without mentioning the transfer policy as the transfer policy is directly related to the financial situation at the club. There's absolutely NO WAY they can be seperated. The first line of your reply to me attempted to do exactly that:

 

You said:

"But the article hasn't got anything to do with what the yanks have spent or not, it is about the financial problems of the club"

 

The article mentions this and indeed gives figures £78 Mill in interest payments TO DEAL WITH THE FINANCIAL SITUATION AT THE CLUB over two years. Which, as I said means that effectively there is £65 MILL that has been taken away from the transfer budget that could have allowed us to take the next step and win the prem.

 

That was all in my posts you replied to and tried to seperate the clubs financial situation from transfers. I'm not making it about Rafa - my point is and has been throughout the thread that the Leeches have denied the Manager Approx £65 Mill in transfer funds that could have taken us the next step.

 

All this is for another thread, and that is what my point is.

And you still haven't answered my first question.

I don't know why I'm gonna bother with this, but here goes. You are right that the transfer budget is related to the financial situation of the club, of course it is. But the transfer budget in itself does not affect our financial situation, and that is why it can be discussed as a seperate issue. For instance Utd have a significantly larger debt and interest payments than us, however they are able to still spend huge amounts because they have a big stadium which enables them to service their debt.

Our transfer policy has not caused the mess we are in, it is a consequence.

Can you see the difference and how it is more than possible to discuss cause and effects as seperate issues?

 

Boycotts are the ONLY way to get the Leeches attention - they don't care about popularity, they don't care about trophies (other than trophies bring prize money, they don't care about marches, they don't care about demonstrations. MONEY is what they care about and if that income is threatened they WILL take notice. It may effect the way a potential purchaser views us but to be honest I would accept that. If a potential purchaser pulls out of the negotiations because of the passion of the fans - they're the wrong sort to be custodians of OUR club.

 

I also agreed with the original articles premise that the quickest, safest way to get them out was to give them the profit they crave. I don't see any way around that.

Well done, now that you are on topic, I can say that I agree with much of what you say.

I think people need to realise that boycotts will very probably mean that they are here longer. However I think it is worth the risk of them actually being here longer if it is becasue what we have done is what is right and we have made our voice heard.

That would only have an effect on the Rafa situation and whether he thinks he can work under the new (if they are new) conditions or not, and if he feels he cannot he could possibly have a chance at constructive dismisall I think.

It would unlikely have an effect on C&A leaving though, if anything, it could mean they are here longer if they Rafa leaves and they have to pay him off. They are likely to have a target return on equity that they are looking for, that includes both the profit from sale and profits (or loss) they earn whilst the still own us. Any payoff means that it will take longer for them to hit their target, as well as making us less attractive to potential investors, as in all likelyhood it would mean a furhter increase to the clubs debt to pay him off.