FA Chairman resigns after remark about Black Players

RasTa

Greg Clarke has resigned from his role of Football Association chairman, reports Matt Slater.

Clarke was forced to apologise after he used the word "coloured" before a Digital, Culture, Media, Sport committee on Tuesday.

He was also criticised by anti-discrimination group Kick It Out after saying that black and South Asian people had “different career interests” from each other, as well as saying that being gay was a “lifestyle choice”.

Wonder who is going in next.

Agent Coulson

Will he resign as Vice President of FIFA as well I wonder.

RasTa

No chance, what he said wasn't that bad in fairness.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-WpHgGTGkM

radiata

RasTa wrote: »

Wonder who is going in next.

I didn't think it was racist using the word 'coloured', the world is fcuked!

magma69

radiata wrote: »

I didn't think it was racist using the word 'coloured', the world is fcuked!

You don't have to be some SJW loon to know the word has been widely considered to be outdated for about 20 years.

That said, it's madness that it would warrant his sacking or resignation.

Fromvert

magma69 wrote: »

You don't have to be some SJW loon to know the word has been widely considered to be outdated for about 20 years.

That said, it's madness that it would warrant his sacking or resignation.

He also said being gay is a lifestyle choice. He's just not the guy that can be the head of the FA when anti-racism, pro gays rights and equality are near the top of the agenda.

Your old relative (or friends/family etc) says this in a private conversation you roll your eyes and might try and talk to them about it, head of a public facing organisation, you're done. I can't believe he wasn't overly prepped for this, he seemed to just answer off the cuff with not a lot of prep for what he was going to be asked about.

He didn't show any malice in his words but he came across as ignorant and out of touch. His lol excuse of well I spent a lot of time in America was the cherry on top. Well Greg 'people of colour' and 'coloured' are not the same thing and it has the touch of 'well when I was lad we used to be able to say ......'.

What he said is a no no.

Someone might know, I'm guessing its not as objectionable in the USA, given that the NAACP still use it. But on this side of the Atlantic, it's pejorative.

adaminho

Deleted User wrote: »

What he said is a no no.

Someone might know, I'm guessing its not as objectionable in the USA, given that the NAACP still use it. But on this side of the Atlantic, it's pejorative.

There's a big difference between coloured people and persons of colour! Also he said Asians preferred IT, Gay was a lifestyle choice and girls didn't like the ball being kicked hard at them!

Edit: https://twitter.com/ChiAlreadyKnow/status/1326215964866850819

CSF

I think having to resign for saying coloured accidentally instead of person of colour is harsh.


But by the sounds of it, this is just the straw that broke the donkey's back based on some of the other things people are saying he has said.


One harmless unintentional slip with no malice attached should not see anyone condemned, but if he is a walking ridiculous quote machine, then he has no place leading the FA given one of their biggest tasks at the moment is dealing with bigotry.

adaminho

adaminho wrote: »

There's a big difference between coloured people and persons of colour!

But the NAACP uses "coloured people" in its acronym and has rejected calls to change.

It's academic, he said it in Britain and it's just not acceptable there.

adaminho

Deleted User wrote: »

But the NAACP uses "coloured people" in its acronym and has rejected calls to change.

It's academic, he said it in Britain and it's just not acceptable there.

What about the rest of his comments?

adaminho

adaminho wrote: »

What about the rest of his comments?

Gay being a lifestyle choice is jaw dropping stuff.

Asians preferring IT is maybe not as awful, but still really bad.

Girls not liking the ball being kicked hard is silly, I don't think it's in the category of his other comments though.

Augme

His comment call into question his judgement. I really don't understand how he could have said what he did given the context of that meeting. You could get away with possible one slip of the tongue, but added with the 3 others and it was just a car crash style interview.

It reminded me of the episode in the office when Gareth talked about his dad and said he was outdated because he used the terms darkies inside of coloureds. The greg dyke speech was like something you would have seen in the office.

~Rebel~

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Gay being a lifestyle choice is jaw dropping stuff.

Asians preferring IT is maybe not as awful, but still really bad.

Definately still very bad, and so so stupid. As a rule, probably a good idea to avoid any racial stereotyping.

Girls not liking the ball being kicked hard is silly, I don't think it's in the category of his other comments though.

Considering he was the head of the FA, which includes women’s football, it’s absolutely ridiculous.

The guy comes across as an absolute dinosaur, and worse, a dinosaur that hasn’t even tried to stay current. Just total indefensible ignorance. Definitely no loss.

adaminho

Deleted User wrote: »

Gay being a lifestyle choice is jaw dropping stuff.

Asians preferring IT is maybe not as awful, but still really bad.

Girls not liking the ball being kicked hard is silly, I don't think it's in the category of his other comments though.

So if he miss spoke the first time he's still homophobic, racist and VAR is deciding on sexism! He's the head of the FA discussing with Parliament, not some neanderthal off the street! I've witnessed and received racism in the stands in the UK, the last thing you need is the head of the FA saying it's okay!

.G.

Added to everything above is the fact that he was the instigator or Project Big Picture, not Liverpool and Man United and when the backlash came he lied through his teeth about it.

Being head of the FA, that alone should have led to questions regarding his suitability to hold the position he held.

Ikozma

I honestly didn't realised we can't say coloured anymore, I just thought we couldn't say black

Cookiemunster

Ikozma wrote: »

I honestly didn't realised we can't say coloured anymore, I just thought we couldn't say black

That's in America. Black is the accepted term in the UK. There's no equivalent to African American.

Mr.Nice Guy

I've never been able to work out how we reached a point where 'coloured person' was offensive, but 'person of colour' was dignified and respectable. They mean the same thing. Imagine trying to explain this to a non-native English speaker. They would be scratching their heads.

I was always under the impression 'coloured' was offensive because there was an underlying implication that it meant white was 'normal' and everything else was not. I can understand black people finding that objectionable. If this is the case, I don't get how 'of colour' somehow came to be acceptable parlance. Again, this description implies difference between races, which surely ought to be discouraged in a multicultural society.

Both of the terms are idiotic imo. All of us are a colour of some sort.

Colored or person of colour is just dinosaur talk tbf.

Very rarely hear anyone say either these days. And it's usually from the older generation when I do.

~Rebel~

6 wrote: »

Colored or person of colour is just dinosaur talk tbf.

Very rarely hear anyone say either these days. And it's usually from the older generation when I do.

Ikozma wrote: »

I honestly didn't realised we can't say coloured anymore, I just thought we couldn't say black

Both Black (capital and Person of Color are accepted terms. (For the latter I'm mostly speaking from US experience living there, can't speak to how it's received in the UK). Person of Color doesn't mean Black though, it's the broad term that speaks to the collective of non-white races - Black, Asian, Latin American, Middle Eastern etc etc - used a lot in the US. Often also used as BIPOC, to differentiate Black and Indigenous populations.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I've never been able to work out how we reached a point where 'coloured person' was offensive, but 'person of colour' was dignified and respectable. They mean the same thing. Imagine trying to explain this to a non-native English speaker. They would be scratching their heads.

English isn't the problem, History is. The main differentiation is that 'Colored' was literally the label on segregated bathroom doors, busses, water fountains etc that Black people were to use. So it wasn't just seen as a descriptor, but a tag of 'less than'. It carries a lot of negative weight as a result, so even though Person of Color seems similar, it doesn't come with decades of historical weight behind it as a term. Also, as mentioned above, Colored was more specifically tied to the Black population in the US, which POC is not.

If this is the case, I don't get how 'of colour' somehow came to be acceptable parlance. Again, this description implies difference between races, which surely ought to be discouraged in a multicultural society.

Both of the terms are idiotic imo. All of us are a colour of some sort.

I know what you mean - in Ireland that's definitely true. But there are daily conversations that need to take place in the US about the difference in treatment and status of white people and people of color, so in that context it makes sense to have a descriptor to be able to use. For instance, women of color are 3 to 4 times more likely to die in childbirth than white women in the US. POC are also significantly more likely to die from Covid. And if you want to dig into these conversations you need to accept the disparate experiences of white people and people of color. (Social strata also plays a huuuuge part, but thats a conversation for another day!)

CSF

~Rebel~ wrote: »

English isn't the problem, History is. The main differentiation is that 'Colored-only' was literally the label on segregated bathroom doors, busses, water fountains etc for Black people. So it wasn't just seen as a descriptor, but a tag of 'less than'. It carries a lot of negative weight as a result, so even though Person of Color seems similar, it doesn't come with decades of historical weight behind it as a term. Also, as mentioned above, Colored was more specifically tied to the Black population in the US, which POC is not.

Ah, makes perfect sense now.

~Rebel~

CSF wrote: »

Ah, makes perfect sense now.

Yeah, fairly ****in' horrendous alright! And not that long ago either. Right up to 1964.

tinpib

adaminho wrote: »

There's a big difference between coloured people and persons of colour! Also he said Asians preferred IT, Gay was a lifestyle choice and girls didn't like the ball being kicked hard at them!
/QUOTE]


It's all absolutely, 100% believable as an Alan Partridge script.

tom1ie

6 wrote: »

Colored or person of colour is just dinosaur talk tbf.

Very rarely hear anyone say either these days. And it's usually from the older generation when I do.

So what is the appropriate thing to say.

rob316

Aren't we all colored though? White is a color, just like brown or black.

GLaDOS

Wise words from my former basketball couch as a kid

"What colour am I? ("Black"). Then call me black!"

chicorytip

Clarke's track record and previous utterances suggest that in no way whatsoever could he be described as a racist unlike Lord Kilcloney(John Taylor), for example, whose track record and previous utterances suggest that he could certainly be described as racist and bigoted. This was just an unfortunate slip of the tongue.
Ron Atkinson, a leading promoter of black footballers in his day, also made an unfortunate slip of the tongue on live television, referring to a black player as "that lazy n- - - - r" in a moment of exasperation. Anybody who knows football would never describe Atkinson as racist or prejudiced against blacks. We live in a politically correct society nowadays where the slightest verbal misstep can potentially destroy careers.

Grayditch

chicorytip wrote: »

Ron Atkinson, a leading promoter of black footballers in his day, also made an unfortunate slip of the tongue on live television, referring to a black player as "that lazy n- - - - r" in a moment of exasperation. Anybody who knows football would never describe Atkinson as racist or prejudiced against blacks. We live in a politically correct society nowadays where the slightest verbal misstep can potentially destroy careers.

Haha Jesus Christ. Of course you get fired for calling someone a that word to tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of people.

GLaDOS

The Chinese people have the best contraception in the world - but I can't understand why there's so many of them because their women are so ugly."

-Ron Atkinson

eagle eye

It's becoming a world I don't want to live in.
I'm not racist, I'm not anti-anything.
Only people I don't like are loudmouths and bullies who demand you accept their beliefs as gospel or else. The PC brigade have now become like that.

Guy:Incognito

eagle eye wrote: »

It's becoming a world I don't want to live in.
I'm not racist, I'm not anti-anything.
Only people I don't like are loudmouths and bullies who demand you accept their beliefs as gospel or else. The PC brigade have now become like that.

Pc brigade my hole.

The leader of a sporting organisation with not 1 out gay man saying that being gay is a lifestyle choice is so far beyond unacceptable.

There's nothing wrong with people deciding how they want to be addressed and if black people decide they don't want to be called black or coloured or any other word by people of other races that fine too and should be respected. Just like all the idiots whinging about peoples pronouns (half of them have no experience of even having to do it and just listen to charlatans like Jordan Peterson telling them they are being oppressed by people deciding how they want to be referred to) . They'd the the first ones losing their **** if they hate being called Steve instead of Stephen and someone kept calling them Steve anyway.

Just because others got there first with Mr/Mrs/ms/miss doesn't mean that's all there can ever be and everyone has to pick one of those 4 (men don't get a choice and women have to pick one of "their" 3) and just shut up & deal with it.

So many people in and around football need to move out of the 70s. Whether they like it or not.

Mr.Nice Guy

~Rebel~ wrote: »

English isn't the problem, History is. The main differentiation is that 'Colored' was literally the label on segregated bathroom doors, busses, water fountains etc that Black people were to use. So it wasn't just seen as a descriptor, but a tag of 'less than'. It carries a lot of negative weight as a result, so even though Person of Color seems similar, it doesn't come with decades of historical weight behind it as a term. Also, as mentioned above, Colored was more specifically tied to the Black population in the US, which POC is not.

I know what you mean - in Ireland that's definitely true. But there are daily conversations that need to take place in the US about the difference in treatment and status of white people and people of color, so in that context it makes sense to have a descriptor to be able to use. For instance, women of color are 3 to 4 times more likely to die in childbirth than white women in the US. POC are also significantly more likely to die from Covid. And if you want to dig into these conversations you need to accept the disparate experiences of white people and people of color. (Social strata also plays a huuuuge part, but thats a conversation for another day!)

Never thought it about like that before. Makes me see it in a different light now. Cheers.

CSF

chicorytip wrote: »

Clarke's track record and previous utterances suggest that in no way whatsoever could he be described as a racist unlike Lord Kilcloney(John Taylor), for example, whose track record and previous utterances suggest that he could certainly be described as racist and bigoted. This was just an unfortunate slip of the tongue.
Ron Atkinson, a leading promoter of black footballers in his day, also made an unfortunate slip of the tongue on live television, referring to a black player as "that lazy n- - - - r" in a moment of exasperation. Anybody who knows football would never describe Atkinson as racist or prejudiced against blacks. We live in a politically correct society nowadays where the slightest verbal misstep can potentially destroy careers.

Wait what

CSF

eagle eye wrote: »

It's becoming a world I don't want to live in.
I'm not racist, I'm not anti-anything.
Only people I don't like are loudmouths and bullies who demand you accept their beliefs as gospel or else. The PC brigade have now become like that.

Definitely sounds like you’re more sensitive here than the average PC Principal

eagle eye

CSF wrote:

Definitely sounds like you’re more sensitive here than the average PC Principal

Do you mind me asking what was in your mind when you decided to make that response to my post?

CSF

eagle eye wrote: »

Do you mind me asking what was in your mind when you decided to make that response to my post?

A general frustration at seeing the same posts every time someone sticks their foot in it.

The extreme PC brigade are pretty annoying when the thing they’re freaking out about is basically nothing, but the ‘PC world gone mad, can’t say anything anymore’ brigade are infinitely worse IMO.

There are obvious reasons why the head of a huge organisation who is tasked with managing a diverse workforce, needs to be able to avoid constantly saying insensitive things.

Nobody should be hung out to dry over one misstep, but people have already illustrated in this thread how this is a guy who can’t avoid tripping over his own feet.

eagle eye

CSF wrote:

A general frustration at seeing the same posts every time someone sticks their foot in it.

But you didn't say that, you basically attacked me.

CSF wrote:

The extreme PC brigade are pretty annoying when the thing they’re freaking out about is basically nothing, but the ‘PC world gone mad, can’t say anything anymore’ brigade are infinitely worse IMO.

There are some who go too far complaining but there's lots who are seemingly on standby waiting for anybody to attack these days.

CSF wrote:

There are obvious reasons why the head of a huge organisation who is tasked with managing a diverse workforce, needs to be able to avoid constantly saying insensitive things.

Nobody should be hung out to dry over one misstep, but people have already illustrated in this thread how this is a guy who can’t avoid tripping over his own feet.

Yes there are good reasons but if a person is constantly learning and improving themselves then that's a good thing isn't it?
Having a public figure who makes mistakes but is known to be a good person is a good lesson for the public that's it's ok to make a mistake. So long as he/she apologises and makes it clear that there was no intent to insult or hurt anybody.

eagle eye

eagle eye wrote: »

But you didn't say that, you basically attacked me.

Did you not attack those here who felt he deserved to go?

eagle eye wrote: »

Only people I don't like are loudmouths and bullies who demand you accept their beliefs as gospel or else. The PC brigade have now become like that.

DM_7

Mod Split off from General Premier League Thread. This is a thread to discuss the resignation and related items.

Please keep an open mind and be respectful so we can discuss the topics and help understanding of the issues in relation to football.

DM_7

I think Clarke's position was under such severe pressure as it follows on form the high profile football activities in recent months and the FA launch of the diversity code to increase BAME and female representation.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/54702729

Former Chelsea and Aston Villa defender Elliott, who helped develop the code, told BBC Sport: "We want to create greater diversity in leadership positions.

"We are trying to modernise football so it stops relying on its 'little black book' and group of networks and actually give equal opportunities to those who are qualified.

"This isn't about tokenism, this is about equal opportunities. To be the same as everyone else.

"What really inspired me to create the code was a comment from Raheem Sterling, when he said he looks up to the directors and senior leadership and doesn't see people like him.

"Also Jermain Defoe. He's had such a wonderful career and has thoughts about being a coach, but wonders whether it is worth getting qualified as he doesn't think he will get a job.

"We've lost three generations of players who have been denied opportunities, we can't lose a fourth."

I agree that people can and should be able to make a mistake and be allowed the chance to make up for it, sometimes the position and the broader circumstances require more as appears to be the case here

eagle eye

Deleted User wrote:

Did you not attack those here who felt he deserved to go?

Pointless discussing anything with you if you are going to be childish and so desperately seeking to look smart.

In my opinion that's a really stupid comment. It's like you can't read.

CSF

eagle eye wrote: »

But you didn't say that, you basically attacked me.

There are some who go too far complaining but there's lots who are seemingly on standby waiting for anybody to attack these days.

Yes there are good reasons but if a person is constantly learning and improving themselves then that's a good thing isn't it?
Having a public figure who makes mistakes but is known to be a good person is a good lesson for the public that's it's ok to make a mistake. So long as he/she apologises and makes it clear that there was no intent to insult or hurt anybody.

My opinion would be that the tone of our posts were similar. You were frustrated by the people who get agitated by things that aren't PC and I was equally frustrated by the people (you in this instance) who get agitated any time someone complains about the PC brigade, every time someone says something that they shouldn't and get called out on it.


In terms of Greg Clarke in particular, I think you're showing a really low bar of expectation for someone in such a senior position. It is ok to make a mistake, but repeated mistakes of the same nature would be an indication that someone is not suitable for a senior leadership role that requires a high standard of behaviour.


The chap may well be a genuinely nice guy (I think for now there is no evidence to suggest that, or to suggest the contrary, so we will give him the benefit of the doubt) but he is clearly not in possession of the traits required to make football a more inclusive sport for minorities. That much is now clear after these repeated droppings of the ball.

Agent Coulson

Listening to the Chapman and Ornstein podcast and they said his FA Chairman role is an unpaid role he gets expenses that’s it.

The FIFA role on the other hand is a quarter a million a year plus expenses and that role also puts him on the UEFA board which is also a paid gig.

He previously dismissed claims that there was institutional racism in the FA as fluff when the organisation came under fire after it was claimed that the then England manager had asked if the Nigerian relations of one player would bring the Ebola virus to Wembley. As far as I can make out, the FA ended up paying settlements to both the players and the former manager!

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/41764739