[Closed] Greg Clarke, what a moron.

My wife has mixed opinions on this.   Her view is that if it wasn't used in a negative context he should have been warned that it can be perceived negatively and advised never to use the word again.   If attempting to describe the wider connotation of non white/caucasian players is what he was doing then it not really much worse a categorisation than BAME, other than its roots.

So perhaps not an instant sacking offence, but an opportunity for apology and education to be publicly displayed for all to learn from as an example of subliminal racism from a person who likely grew up with the word "coloured" as the least offensive categorisation in his vocabulary - e.g. intrinsically habitual albeit not acceptable in todays society.

Edit:  So yes he's right to resign, and should use his outcome and fading platform as an example to educate

Agree that his choice of the word "coloured" was probably lazy or clumsy rather than intentionally offensive. That said, his stereotypical views on different ethnic and sexual groups are offensive and removing him from his position would have been a valid course of action.

Don't think it was just his use of the word coloured but also his views on Asians being better at IT than football and black people being better at football than IT and that ethnicity / race determined what you were likely to be good at which were more shocking to me.

Struggling to work out how this has turned into such a massive story, he used an inappropriate term, but was genuinely apologetic and gave a valid enough reason for it. It does seem to have gone a bit political now though, which is never a good thing, from what i can see it's just going to cause more division by the way things are going on this.

He just sounded like an old duffer stumbling over his words. I don't think that he intended to offend, but he did and made his position untenable.

Bottom of that BBC story says he was warned about language a few years ago. So quite possibly a case of having to go because he has previous and has shown an inability / unwillingness to learn. Not a good trait in a leader in any organisation.

Don’t think it was just his use of the word coloured but also his views on Asians being better at IT than football and black people being better at football than IT and that ethnicity / race determined what you were likely to be good at which were more shocking to me.

Almost a dictionary definition of 'prejudice'....

Also, diversity in football and tolerance towards POC, gay people etc is very topical and should be top of his 'to sort out' list. He's, at best, failing to make even the most basic provisions to make that happen and at worst being wilfully ignorant about the biggest problem in the sport that he oversees.

My wife has mixed opinions on this. Her view is that if it wasn’t used in a negative context he should have been warned that it can be perceived negatively and advised never to use the word again. If attempting to describe the wider connotation of non white/caucasian players is what he was doing then it not really much worse a categorisation than BAME, other than its roots.

So perhaps not an instant sacking offence, but an opportunity for apology and education to be publicly displayed for all to learn from as an example of subliminal racism from a person who likely grew up with the word “coloured” as the least offensive categorisation in his vocabulary – e.g. intrinsically habitual albeit not acceptable in todays society.

Edit: So yes he’s right to resign, and should use his outcome and fading platform as an example to educate

If you take his words in the context of someone who described institutional racism as 'fluff' a few years back, it's just further evidence that perhaps his private stance on these issues is flawed (a generous interpretation), and that perhaps, the FA needs some new leadership.

I don't think using the word then apologising is wildly offensive it's just that along with the other (more offensive/clumsy) stuff he said it makes him look like a dinosaur.

There's also the whole shady moves he made around the European Super League.

Struggling to work out how this has turned into such a massive story, he used an inappropriate term, but was genuinely apologetic and gave a valid enough reason for it

Some people (myself included) may argue that there is no valid reason to use such language.

Don’t think it was just his use of the word coloured but also his views on Asians being better at IT than football and black people being better at football than IT and that ethnicity / race determined what you were likely to be good at which were more shocking to me.

Last football match I watched had loads of talented, well paid black footballers. Last IT department I worked in had loads of talented, well paid Asian software developers.

We had quite a discussion about this this morning. Unusually we ended up with us taking the opposite views to the ones expected.
Mrs W is black and a right on social worker. She accepted that he was an old duffer whose words reflected his age, places where he had worked and that it wasn't being used in a negative manner. His immediate apology seemed sincere to her. She even used the phrase "PC gone mad". It was what she would possibly expect from my 94 year old mother who is the least offensive person you could imagine and would be very upset if her choice of language caused any hurt.
I took the view that he is leading an organisation that includes representation of a large number of role models and has high public visibility. Therefore he has to work to and present the highest standards. He needed to be projecting the correct values rather than some well meaning intentions.
I do wonder if there were other pressures at play and this created an opportunity for change. Even if this wasn't the case at least he recognised the issue, held up his hand and acted honourably. Oh that others would do the same!

Surely at this level you prep for an interview, and given the topic you use the words and phrases around the subject that you would have heard on one of your much heralded equality & diversity programmes at the FA. But no.

He did the organisation no favours yesterday when he really could have and instead exposed failings, no matter how apologetic he was.

Bottom of that BBC story says he was warned about language a few years ago. So quite possibly a case of having to go because he has previous and has shown an inability / unwillingness to learn. Not a good trait in a leader in any organisation.

Yeah, I think it was the straw that boke the camels back. A failure to learn and "get it" he was just trying to use the "correct words" and failed to understand the issue.

The most noticeable thing about the interview wasn't the racism, seism or homophobia, though that was bad enough

It's that, like a lot of people in senior roles in this country - including the present government - you look at people like him and think 'how in the name of god did you end up in that position?'. Other than the Old Boys Club and good old fashioned nepotism.

He'd turned up for an important meeting un-briefed (or hadn't bothered to read his brief), totally unprepared, seemed to have no specialist knowledge, rambled on incoherently at length, was clearly just winging it, seemed completely out of touch with reality, then chucked in some glaringly offensive opinions and terms just for good measure

It reminds me of someone else who's inexplicably ended up in a senior role he's completely unqualified for.

Anyway... at least we're left in no doubt why the FA is in such a mess if thats the standard of leadership at senior management level

Surely at this level

This is the crux of it. It is not some old out of touch retired bloke who used the word when asked a question in the street it is someone in a position of power where they have a lot of race issues to sort out so should be aware of what is acceptable in 2020.

It's not just the 'coloured' idiocy. There's a range of guff that shouldn't come from the top of the FA, including lazy stereotyping (the south asian vs afro-carribean 'work/career ethic' and 'girls not liking a ball kicked at them hard'). Resignation is appropriate, in my view.

He’d turned up for an important meeting un-briefed (or hadn’t bothered to read his brief), totally unprepared, seemed to have no specialist knowledge, rambled on incoherently at length, was clearly just winging it, seemed completely out of touch with reality, then chucked in some glaringly offensive opinions and terms just for good measure

Perhaps he’d been briefed by David Davies after his stellar Brexit negotiations!

Sounded to me like a dinosaur has been put out of his misery for outdated choice if words, but clearly there is a history that I wasn't aware of with him.

I'll hold my hands up, correct language around race is a bloody nightmare for middle aged white guys, terms I was told to use 10-20 years ago are now apparently out of date and offensive. It's very hard to have an honest discussion around the issue when you are desperate not to use the wrong term.

Last football match I watched had loads of talented, well paid black footballers. Last IT department I worked in had loads of talented, well paid Asian software developers.

Do you believe that's due to an innate characteristic of their race?

A more relevant point would be that now he's resigned, who will replace him.

I'm guessing it'll be either

a) An old, white male wearing a blazer and an old school tie
b) An old, white male wearing a blazer and an old school tie
c) An old, white male wearing a blazer and an old school tie
d) An old, white male wearing a blazer and an old school tie
e) An old, white male wearing a blazer and an old school tie

or

f) An old, white male wearing a blazer and an old school tie

As above, not just the "coloured" thing, but a rich history of mildly offensive buffoonery.

Obviously it is no laughing matter, but I couldn't help chuckling that this had all happened in a parliamentary hearing on diversity in sport.

Armando Ianucci would have thought that was too obvious for a plotline in The Thick of It.

I’ll hold my hands up, correct language around race is a bloody nightmare for middle aged white guys

As a middle-aged white guy, it really isn't. These words and phrases aren't worked out by some secret committee who change them every week to keep everyone on their toes. All that is required is a modicum of awareness and sensibility

It's not hard at all. It certainly shouldn't be regarded as some kind of chore, as it seems to be to a lot of (middle-aged, white) people

I like to think there was some poor FA communications officer listening in, head in hands, having spent several fruitless hours the day before trying to get Greg Clarke to enter the 21st Century.

Do you believe that’s due to an innate characteristic of their race?

I haven't a clue and I really don't care. I merely posted it to point out that sometimes people can say things that reflect the realities of life, rather than them being overtly racist.

Clarke has previous for inappropriate and offensive comments; he comes from Leicester - 'the most diverse city in the UK' - which might suggest he should have some understanding of racial issues.

His preparation for appearing before the DCMS was woefully inadequate - as it was last time; he should have insisted the FA media team brief him thoroughly.
If he hadn't resigned would the FA have sacked him?
As for binners crystal ball prediction above^^^ that's what the FA have always done and I can't see them changing this time.

Racism, sexism and homophobia have been closely associated with football for decades and, regrettably, still are.
Clarke should have been fully aware go this and used every opportunity to demonstrate what the FA are doing to rid themselves, as far as possible, of these associations; to demonstrate what progress they're making.

Will FIFA do the right thing and show him the door?
I hope so but doubt it.

I haven’t a clue and I really don’t care. I merely posted it to point out that sometimes people can say things that reflect the realities of life, rather than them being overtly racist.

Has it occurred to you that the "realities of life" are due to racism? At the very least, I would expect the head of the FA to be reviewing his recruitment practices if it's the case that a department is dominated by one particular ethnic group. Maybe he didn't because, like you, he doesn't care. Good riddance.

An old, white male wearing a blazer and an old school tie

He used the word 'coloured'. That doesn't mean he is racist but it does mean he is hopelessly out of touch to be chairman of a body like the FA in 2020.

He described homosexuality as a 'lifestyle choice'. That doesn't mean he is homophobic but it does mean he is hopelessly out of touch to be chairman of a body like the FA in 2020.

He described black and asian people as having 'different career interests'. That may well be true. It definitely doesn't mean he is a racist. But it is only one point in a much more complex discussion about equality of opportunity, cultural norms, education and expectations of society at large. I wouldn't expect the chairman of a body like the FA to blunder into that minefield in a televised meeting of a parliamentary committee.

Has it occurred to you that the “realities of life” are due to racism?

Has it occurred to you that they're not?

I understand why people of a certain generationhave difficulty with terminology around race. Once upon a time people like my mother would have used the word coloured to describe black people in order to not cause offence, being rather uncomfortable using the word black.

She got with the plan sometime during the late 80's though. She was not however in charge of a national sporting body.

The answer to the question 'who should replace him? My No.1 candidate would be Les Ferdinand.

Has it occurred to you that they’re not?

Its pretty common knowledge racism and social mobility are a real thing and one causes the other and its very much a real thing.

It’s not hard at all. It certainly shouldn’t be regarded as some kind of chore, as it seems to be to a lot of (middle-aged, white) people

I assume you mean "people of whiteness". Consider me offended

Coulda bin worse - he could have talked about "picanninies" and "tank-topped bum boys".

He described homosexuality as a ‘lifestyle choice’. That doesn’t mean he is homophobic

That level of ignorance really isn't far away from it though is it.

She got with the plan sometime during the late 80’s though. She was not however in charge of a national sporting body.

Would she fancy a crack at it though?

Coulda bin worse – he could have talked about “picanninies” and “tank-topped bum boys”.

It's really an absolute mystery why theres such a lack of awareness on these issues when we have such strong, inclusive and progressive leadership in this country, isn't it?

I thought it was harsh, he was clumsy and should know better.

Then I read further. He has significant form. He referred to being gay as being a lifestyle choice! I strongly suspected the powers that be were delighted that he slipped up enough to be shoved. He is a dinosaur.

his views on Asians being better at IT than football and black people being better at football than IT

The quote I saw was:

"If you go to the IT department of the FA, there's a lot more South Asians than there are Afro-Caribbeans. They have different career interests".

which is a bit different and from my experience in IT is probably justified. India in particular has produced enormous numbers of very good IT professionals - I've worked with them and at at one time been rendered redundant by their existence!

"Would she fancy a crack at it though?"

Unfortunately she's not with us anymore, though not very sporty herself she was suffering from dementia, so at least in that respect she would have been well qualified for the job.

Also, whilst suffering dementia she managed not to return to the terminology of her youth, so whilst she may have struggled to boil a kettle, she still managed to keep 'on message' with regards not offending either black or gay people. So as others have pointed out, it's really not that difficult.

Yes I'm with franksinatra on this

I initially thought it was a bit harsh - he appeared to be trying not to use racist terms and then apologised.

But, in his position he should have been so well prepared - fully briefed before hand, rehearsing , dry running any replies with his team etc etc

To just blunder in and wing it, very badly, does kinda mean he's not fit for that position - especially as you read further into his previous history

As previously stated though, he'll probably just be replaced like with like.

He also made a statement that there are no good female keepers because "girls don't like having footballs kicked at them"

Clearly he hasn't watched any girls football. Which, you'd think, that as the head of the FA he might have actually got round to.

Could he actually be more patronising and condescending? He might as well have patted someone female on the head (or possibly arse) when he said it

My daughter is a pretty decent centre back and plays every week. If he'd ever actually watched it he'd know that it's just as competitive as the lads football, with the same commitment from the players who have no problem with having 'balls kicked at them'. Its also a massively growing area of a sport that he's apparently meant to represent

Don't let the door hit your arse on the way out, you dinosaur. The depressing thing is that we all know he'll just be replaced with a clone of himself, who's turn it is next

Has it occurred to you that they’re not?

Yes. Have you heard of the precautionary principle?

If he’d ever actually watched it he’d know that it’s just as competitive as the lads football, with the same commitment from the players who have no problem with having ‘balls kicked at them’. Its also a massively growing area of a sport that he’s apparently meant to represent

This. My daughters have started playing for their local club and there's no lack of commitment from what I've seen. My eldest plays left-back, and had a massive smile on her face after her robust tackle prevented a likely goal.

I think you have to recognise that Lazy ethics and institutional racism goes hand in hand with the 'Stale, Male and Pale' model of governance at work in the FA, which isn't unique to football.
But it is also something that's probably been left in place because with it comes a degree of incompetence and corruption that has actually become very useful to increasingly rich, top tier clubs who can easily exploit them.
The FA is an organisation who's remit has grown well beyond setting the rules and administering a simple game, and they're not really equipped for it at the top.

In fact that was actually the point of the hearing wasn't it?
To investigate why the FA seem to be helping a few premiership clubs steal more control/money with "project big picture", at the same time as offering a fraction of the financial support necessary for smaller clubs to survive the impact of CV19.

The press frenzy over Racism and Homophobia within the FA has sort of helped divert attention away from the original purpose of the hearings, which is a shame, because the two are intrinsically linked IMO...

Yes it's an old boys club, the reason it's been allowed to persist as one has probably been because it helps those making the most (money) out of the boom in football over the last couple of decades.
So it's not really been a priority for the most powerful clubs to fix the FA, it's certainly not a priority for the FA to fix the FA, and for many fans it's probably not a priority to fix the FA, so long as there's football for them to watch why would most of them care...

Except now maybe they have gone and shot themselves in the foot by trying to strong-arm the smaller clubs, using the pandemic as leverage, I can see a clear case them having reforms imposed. With that should come wider representation of the diversity of people playing and supporting the game.

The question would be can MP's actually do that?
Does the FA truly answer to parliament? Or can they just weather this particular PR storm, and then carry on like pigs at a trough Skimming the money, gifting it to the already wealthy and continuing to marginalise various groups? Anyone know?

Yes. Have you heard of the precautionary principle?

I'm very well aware of it, however in this situation it has no relevance.

I would hate to be any sort of public figure these days, seems too easy to trip yourself up with anything to do with race etc whether you mean it or not. Even writing this could be risky.

I'm totally fed up with all this tiptoeing around around using the right words to avoid causing sensitivity. Let's get back to what we've always called things and we'll all know where we stand.

"robust tackle" indeed.

That my friend, is, was and always will be 'a reducer'

seems too easy to trip yourself up with anything to do with race

Again... it really isn't. Its really easy to stay on top of what is and isn't acceptable. It should be glaringly obvious to anyone with a degree of empathy and even the remotest awareness of the society around them

It should be glaringly obvious to anyone with a degree of empathy and even the remotest awareness of the society around them

Not so obvious. What is the inherent difference between saying "coloured footballer" and "footballer of colour"? Some derogatory terms have clearly negative connotations, but word order?

Not so obvious

Again... it really is.

What is the inherent difference between saying “coloured footballer” and “footballer of colour”?

If you don't know the inherent difference between those two phrases then you're displaying a level of ignorance that means you shouldn't be within a million miles of a job like the one he was in.

All that is required here is a degree of cultural sensitivity and a cursory knowledge of history. Surely that shouldn't be too much to ask for someone in such a high profile position?

Most of us seem to manage it easily enough

I’m very well aware of it, however in this situation it has no relevance.

If you believe it has no relevance then you don't understand it.

Not so obvious. What is the inherent difference between saying “coloured footballer” and “footballer of colour”? Some derogatory terms have clearly negative connotations, but word order?

You'd have to have been living under a rock for the past thirty years to not know the difference. Regardless, if all he had done was misspeak on a single occasion, I think I would be much more sympathetic.

Again… it really isn’t. Its really easy to stay on top of what is and isn’t acceptable. It should be glaringly obvious to anyone with a degree of empathy and even the remotest awareness of the society around them

Sorry binners, but it isn't for some of us. I live in a 99% white area. I work in a 95% white environment. I'm not aware that I've ever said anything offensive at work, and my BAME line manager would certainly tell me if I had, but I'm certainly not confident I'm up to speed on what words are now unacceptable, because I'm not around an environment where those sort of things are discussed, and I'm not sure a quick Google every few months would be that helpful. Even the extra efforts the civil service has put in this year to raise our awareness of BLM related matters actually hasn't covered the topic of outdated language, and I'm actually feeding that back through the local diversity lead.

It's now clear to me that Clarke was out of order on way more than just race, and he should go, but for a lot of people in this country, sadly, these kind of issues don't arise in their normal everyday lives.

What is the inherent difference between saying “coloured footballer” and “footballer of colour”?

In this case he didn't need to say either. He should have said "high profile footballers who are abused for the colour of their skin". Quite easy to avoid a clumsy trip

I can understand it being easier for some than others depending on you environment.

As it stands, this man is ahead of the FA. Switch on any premiership football match. You'll notice the percentage of players who are 'of colour'. Probably higher than any other 'working environment' in the country. And you'll also have noticed all the players taking the knee as a mark of respect to the BLM movement, at the start of EVERY SINGLE MATCH. Then theres the 'Kick it out' graphics plastered everywhere round the stadiums

So, given those elements, what he said was absolutely beyond belief, and just goes to demonstrate the yawning chasm between those in the money-stuffed ivory towers at the top of the game and the grassroots and the actual players. As did pretty much everything else he had to say yesterday

Gutted, I thought this was going to be about Agents of SHIELD.

The life I lead means I have never met a black person, I would like to but I just don’t come into contact with anyone who is not white like me. It would hope it would enrich my life but I don’t see it happening anytime soon.

Binners - I absolutely agree with you about Clarke, but you've been very dismissive of some of us posting on here apparently because of our lack of life experience.

I would hate to be any sort of public figure these days, seems too easy to trip yourself up with anything to do with race etc

If you are as ignorant as those that get tripped up then yes I suppose so.

It would hope it would enrich my life but I don’t see it happening anytime soon.

I wouldn't get your hopes up too high - we are all just people.

but you’ve been very dismissive of some of us posting on here apparently because of our lack of life experience.

I'm not being dismissive. I just can't see how living in such a culturally diverse country, you can't have enough awareness of what is and isn't acceptable on this score. It's not hard to pick up on.

Unless you're the head of the FA, apparently.

What is the inherent difference between saying “coloured footballer” and “footballer of colour”?

The correct term in the context of his speech should have been "black footballer", according to the guy on Radio 4 this morning. (the one that said he used to be called "Chalky" by his coach).

Did all those accusing others of being ignorant know that?

I just can’t see how living in such a culturally diverse country, you can’t have enough awareness of what is and isn’t acceptable on this score. It’s not hard to pick up on.

Tend to agree but I will give you literally millions of pensioners who haven't managed to.

Did all those accusing others of being ignorant know that?

Its not a quiz

It may come as a shock to learn that there is more than one acceptable term. We have a whole host of non-racist language available to us. Who knew?

And 'the guy on Radio 4' was Andy Cole BTW

We have a whole host of non-racist language available to us.

And it such a shame some people can't discuss it without coming across as aggressive and arrogant.

If you believe it has no relevance then you don’t understand it.

Go on then, explain it to me, specifically in the context of what we've been talking about.

And it such a shame some people can’t discuss it without coming across as aggressive and arrogant.

I'm not being either. I'm just absolutely mystified by the lack of awareness when living in a society as multicultural as the modern day UK.

Its been quite eye-opening

If you don’t know the inherent difference between those two phrases then you’re displaying a level of ignorance that means you shouldn’t be within a million miles of a job like the one he was in.

Ok. You're probably right. But for my edification, please could you spell out the difference as it's something that has confused me for ages and I have never summoned up the courage to ask.

Genuine question BTW. Not taking the piss.

Been educating myself -

https://talkradio.co.uk/features/diane-abbott-debate-why-coloured-offensive-19030830185

If Amber Rudd and James Cleverly are on the opposite side, you know you're doing something right!

Edit: But - if you don't like "coloured person" because it assumes that white is the default colour (as opposed to not liking it because of the association with apartheid), then presumably you don't like "person of colour" either?

Go on then, explain it to me

I'm pretty sure that you're not interested in a good-faith debate, because:

I haven’t a clue and I really don’t care.

But for my edification, please could you spell out the difference as it’s something that has confused me for ages and I have never summoned up the courage to ask.

It's to do with the history of the expression 'coloured' and its associations with the slave trade, colonialism and segregation.

The use of the term 'of colour' subverts that and takes back possession and ownership of the word 'colour', in much the same way as the gay community did with the word queer. Subtle but important difference.

It's that simple. The head of the FA should know the difference

Deleted, as binners has answered exactly.

Thanks

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "person of colour" is an American-ism which is socially acceptable there but not widely used here.

"Coloured person" is archaic racist nan terminology, tainted by it's association with segregated America.

I had to look it up myself when Benedict Cumberbatch made a similar faux pas a few years ago, the BBC did a handy piece on it...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/30999175/warning-why-using-the-term-coloured-is-offensive

Presumably he's still working because he didn't have an extensive history of other gaffes and is reasonably good at his job.

Bloody hell, this thread, quite eye opening

He also made a statement that there are no good female keepers because “girls don’t like having footballs kicked at them”

He didn't say this.

He described homosexuality as a ‘lifestyle choice’

Or this.

Well, I'm feeling slightly better educated now.
Cheers

Some of the points in this thread chime with a really great essay written by Trevor Philips (ex Head of the EHRC) in last weekend's Times:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-march-of-wokeism-is-an-all-pervasive-new-oppression-s7dw3s5lr

Well worth a read if you can see beyond the Times paywall.

Do you believe that’s due to an innate characteristic of their race?

West Africans dominate some olympic disciplines whichever country the athletes might come from. That's just being objective. It's about the ACTN3 "sprint gene". Have a read:

https://www.france24.com/en/20120805-france-usain-bolt-black-sprinters-dominate-olympics

So noting athletes/footballers of different origins have different running ability shouldn't be taboo. However, using language you know you shouldn't isn't a good idea.

The life I lead means I have never met a black person, I would like to but I just don’t come into contact with anyone who is not white like me

I can totally see how this happens (but it still blows my mind) I moved to Wales when I was 12 from Hounslow and was absolutely amazed how everyone was white. I always remember my first day in school and asking one of the teachers why everyone was white they just laughed and said you are not in London any more.