The Football News Thread 2014/15 - Everything not Wolves News Related

[Johnny75]

That is the logical next question. This article, while of course not scientific, does give some qualitative perspective on that issue.

That article references quantities data Alan. It doesn't use all of the data but that doesn't fit the journalists bent on this particular issue.

Again, the data does not back your theory.

 

[Alan]

That article references quantities data Alan. It doesn't use all of the data but that doesn't fit the journalists bent on this particular issue.

Again, the data does not back your theory.

Did you miss the bit where I said it "wasn't scientific" and provided "qualitative" (ie, not statistical) perspective?

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

I wouldn't say holding a UEFA Pro Licence automatically makes you a good manager. Paul Ince might bother his arse to get one some day but he'll still be shit.

For a time Kevin Blackwell was the most qualified coach in the country despite his football coming straight out of 1983.

 

[Johnny75]

Interesting that that is what you've linked to when it is exactly what I was looking at before.

3.4% is not equal to 4.2%, 4.8%, or 6.4%. It's close, but not equal.

Shouldn't the 9 remaining coaches with the UEFA Pro be immediately top candidates somewhere rather than looking for work?

No Alan, you are making the mistake of looking at the numbers as percentages only not as hard figures. At the very top level BME candidates have a 30% success rate. That's pretty good for any line of work. Are you saying all 13 Pro license coaches should be permanently employed?

And how do you know the other 9 candidates are suitable for roles at the top level?

 

[Alan]

No Alan, you are making the mistake of looking at the numbers as percentages only not as hard figures. At the very top level BME candidates have a 30% success rate. That's pretty good for any line of work. Are you saying all 13 Pro license coaches should be permanently employed?

And how do you know the other 9 candidates are suitable for roles at the top level?

They have their UEFA Pro which makes them more suitable than anyone without, does it not? At least enough to get them into an interview? And if not, what's the point of the licenses at all?

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

They have their UEFA Pro which makes them more suitable than anyone without, does it not? At least enough to get them into an interview? And if not, what's the point of the licenses at all?

Football doesn't work on any such basis. If it did then Garry Monk would never have got the Swansea job, but he seems to be doing just fine.

The more coaching qualifications you can gain the better. None of that necessarily means you're suited to management though, before you even start to consider what each individual club requires from its manager at any given time.

Or should Swansea have been forced to interview someone they didn't really want? Seems a waste of everyone's time?

 

[Johnny75]

They have their UEFA Pro which makes them more suitable than anyone without, does it not? At least enough to get them into an interview? And if not, what's the point of the licenses at all?

Why? Statistically there is a possible 192 other candidates at the same level, people can't interview everybody.

To turn the question round, why should BME's get an interview automatically?

Edit: ninja'd by DW who has said it better.

 

[Alan]

Football doesn't work on any such basis. If it did then Garry Monk would never have got the Swansea job, but he seems to be doing just fine.

The more coaching qualifications you can gain the better. None of that necessarily means you're suited to management though, before you even start to consider what each individual club requires from its manager at any given time.

Or should Swansea have been forced to interview someone they didn't really want? Seems a waste of everyone's time?

Two questions gleaned from this:

1. Really, what is the point of the licenses if not to prepare you for management?
2. If a club knows who they want to hire before conducting interviews, have they really done their due diligence?

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

1) They're coaching licences, not management licences.

2) That is their own business.

I would be 100% against the idea of outside parties telling clubs who they should and shouldn't employ.

 

[Alan]

So if I'm understanding this correctly, there are no Equal Opportunity of Employment policies or laws in the UK?

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

It is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, age, sexuality, gender etc when considering employment. None of that changes anything in this matter.

 

[Johnny75]

So if I'm understanding this correctly, there are no Equal Opportunity of Employment policies or laws in the UK?

So why do you think a BME candidate should get an interview?

 

[Alan]

It is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, age, sexuality, gender etc when considering employment. None of that changes anything in this matter.

But surely reaching the widest possible applicant base is part and parcel to eliminating discrimination? That is how we understand it here.

 

[Johnny75]

But surely reaching the widest possible applicant base is part and parcel to eliminating discrimination? That is how we understand it here.

Who is being discriminated against?

 

[Alan]

So why do you think a BME candidate should get an interview?

If they're qualified, they should be interviewed. But the feeling among BME players and coaches seems to be (again, qualitatively) that they won't get hired and in some cases won't even get interviewed. These feelings usually don't come from nowhere.

If you have any statistics on that specifically, I'd love to see them.

 

[Alan]

Who is being discriminated against?

BMEs? Obviously?

 

[YoungWolf]

So why do you think a BME candidate should get an interview?

Because there is a distinct lack of BME coaches and 'positive action' is required.

 

[Alan]

Because there is a distinct lack of BME coaches and 'positive action' is required.

Cue "reverse racism".

 

[YoungWolf]

What I will say is that as Dan said, the problem I sense with a quota would be that not all clubs go through an interview process. It certainly has to be thought out, and put up for discussion more I feel.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

But surely reaching the widest possible applicant base is part and parcel to eliminating discrimination? That is how we understand it here.

I don't see the benefit in adding layers of pointless interviews that aren't going to go anywhere. Clubs will employ who they want, if they decide that a black guy is best suited then they will pick him.

Chris Powell - pretty much established now as a solid manager at Champ level, will not really want for work unless he has a disaster or two somewhere
Chris Hughton - plenty of decent stuff on his CV, has been sacked a couple of times and easily found work again

They are demonstrably both competent managers to a point and therefore like all competent managers to a point will get work. Shit managers like Paul Ince (who lest we forget, has managed five different teams) will not keep getting work because people who own clubs don't want their clubs to be ruined by an indolent arsehole who prefers golf in Portugal to pre-season training.

Imagine this hypothetical scenario:

We interview Jackett in June 2013, initial talks go well. We're about to push the button and announce him when we're told we can't yet as we haven't interviewed a black candidate who's sat around waiting for a job and fancies a crack. While we're pissing about with that, despite not even being interested, Jackett gets bored of all this messing around and goes somewhere else. That doesn't seem very helpful to me.