SwedeFox
Well-Known Member
I believe that there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that the current crop of owners and chairmen consider the colour of someone's skin to be a factor in their decision making when it comes to appointing staff.
It doesn't matter how many times posters say the same thing over and over again, they back it up with nothing of significance. Consider your assertion in the context of a court of law. You'd be laughed out of the place.
You're saying that it's due to racist owners/chairmen that there are so few black managers. I say that is a lame and frankly disrespectful attitude based on out-dated and weak assumptions. Just consider the many and varied nationalities and cultures represented in our boardrooms nowadays. Just because something may have been a factor in the past, doesn't mean it still has to be now.
I don't know what sort of evidence would satisfy you. First of all, not everyone is as stupid as Ron Noades, as Jeff pointed out. Secondly, people can make racist decisions without ever articulating racist beliefs. And, thirdly, even if they did, you would dismiss it as anecdotal evidence, as you have with everything in this thread. What do you want, a poll where 50% or more of the chairmen come out as white supremacists?
The fact that fewer black players go on to become managers, compared to white people, and struggle to get top jobs, needs an explanation. You can put it down as accidental or whatever, but since society as a whole is skewed in favour of white people I think it's fairly natural to believe that football is not exempted from that.
Last edited: