Football's new rules are a clumsy way of guaranteeing diversity - Clive Smith
So, let’s say Pompey’s owners decide they’ve had enough of Kenny Jackett – the long ball system is giving them neck ache and they’re fed up visiting the chiropractor – and so the manager’s job becomes available. Now, under the Rooney Rule (nothing to do with Wayne), they will have to interview at least one black, Asian or minority ethnic (BAME) person for this position – or be fined by the FA.
They won’t want to be fined so say they invite an Asian man for interview – (for argument’s sake
we’ll assume he’s not good enough for the job). How would he feel knowing he’s only there as a token gesture?
This ruling will also create the ‘well, you only got the job because you’re black’ feeling. You’ll get people believing they never got the job on merit.
It feels like a backwards step to me. A club being forced to interview someone they have no intention of employing in the first place seems stupid. It’s just a box-ticking exercise. You shouldn’t get a job because your employer has a quota to fill.
Guaranteeing some candidates interviews because of skin colour but not others is not equality, despite
how much people want to dress it up as so. A more accurate term would be ‘positive discrimination.’
Inequality of representation doesn’t necessarily equate to inequality of opportunity.
Look at the racial make-up of the England squad. Does it accurately depict race ratios in this country? No. It just reflects the best 23 players available to the manager.
Will the FA introduce a quota to level the playing field so at least 15 of the 18-man match squad have to be white? Of course not. Diversity rules just seem a clumsy way to go about dealing with the lack of BAME mangers.
I’m not saying I know what the solution is. But I don’t believe it’s this. Next there will be a requirement for at least one woman to be interviewed. Then someone LGTB. Someone Disabled.
If a person is good enough their CV will reflect this. Do we then move on to people less than 4ft 10in, bold men, hairy women, people with size 12 feet?
Has the Catholic church not got more pressing issues?
I’m not religious in the slightest but am I alone in finding it slightly odd that the Pope had just decided to change the words to the Lord’s Prayer?
It’s been changed from ‘Lead us not into temptation’ to ‘Do not let us fall into temptation’.
That removes the implication that God may lead us into temptation.
Not a massive change admittedly, but you wonder why the Pope feels he knows more about how it should be written than Jesus or whoever knocked about with him at the time and wrote it in the first place.
Anyway, it’s good to see the Catholic church has got its finger on the pulse of the most pressing issues plaguing the church right now.
Calorie-counting exam questions will not trigger obesity
The serially offended have struck again, upset that a question in a GCSE paper required pupils to count the calories in a variety of foods. Apparently, it could have triggered ‘eating disorders’. What rubbish.
So, if a question pops up like: ‘A child buys a can of fizzy drink for 95p and a chocolate bar for 70p how much change will there be from £2?’, should I complain my daughter’s homework may trigger obesity?
Could the child not have bought something healthy; a couple of sticks of celery and a probiotic yoghurt?
Most of us have never used algebra or Pythagoras since school. But counting calories or seeing them on every bit of food we buy ... yes, we all have.