[Football] The EFL have introduced the ‘Rooney rule’

[TheJasperCo]

I think this is the relevant bit of the EFL's regulations (for context). It basically ensures greater monitoring and transparency of the recruitment process. Can't honestly see what the fuss is about.

Section 10 & 11 - Association & Dual Interests & Additional Provisions

114 Minority Candidates

114.1 Subject to Regulation 114.7, any Academy Club seeking to appoint an individual to a Specified Role shall, as part of the recruitment process:

114.1.1 comply with any guidelines issued by The League from time to time regarding appropriate monitoring of applications including from Minority Candidates;

114.1.2 publicly advertise the vacancy for a period of not less than seven days, including on:

(a) the Club’s official website; and

(b) by passing a copy to The League for it to display on The League’s website and the Football Association’s ‘licensed coaching club website’;

114.1.3 where any application is received from any Minority Candidate(s), invite one or more Minority Candidate(s) to interview for that Specified Role.

114.2 Clubs must still comply with Regulation 23 (Club Employees / Relationships), but the refusal of another Club to grant permission to approach their Minority Candidate will not relieve the recruiting Club of its obligations under Regulation 114.1.

114.3 Invitations to interview any Minority Candidate for a Specified Role, whether accepted or declined, should be documented directly by the Club in a writing (which may be given by email) to the Minority Candidate, a copy of which must be retained by the Club.

114.4 Where an invitation to interview for a Specified Role is accepted, the Club must then interview the Minority Candidate.

114.5 Any refusal of a Minority Candidate to interview for a Specified Role should be recorded by the Club. Clubs should not accept a refusal by a Minority Candidate to interview that is conveyed by an Intermediary, but should obtain direct confirmation from the Minority Candidate themselves.

114.6 Nothing in this Regulation obliges a Club to offer the Specified Role to a Minority Candidate. Any appointment should be made on the basis of merit alone.

114.7 This Regulation will not apply where it is proposed to promote into the applicable Specified Role an internal candidate who is already fulfilling a different Specified Role at that Club, provided always that the Club then follows the process set out in this Regulation when recruiting for the vacancy created by that internal promotion.

114.8 Clubs shall provide reports in such format and at such times as The League requires relating to their compliance with the provisions of this Regulation (or any application of Regulation 114.7) in respect of each Specified Role, but to include the number of:

114.8.1 applications received; and

114.8.2 interviews offered, accepted and/or conducted,

in each case identifying the numbers relating to BAME Candidates and separately, all other candidates. The League shall be entitled to publish anonymised data derived from those reports.

 

[amexer]

Absolute tosh. Now hearing clubs are subconscious bias. West Brom, Middlesbrough and Swansea are looking for a manager .They are all desperate for success and am sure they dont care colour or nationality of who they appoint. Seem to get loads of stats on this subject so lets have some on those that think didnt get interview because of colour. Paul Ince always seems to have a chip on his shoulder about not having a managers job. This may be same in a year but at least he will be in demand for interviews.

 

[tiberious]

What I find interesting in all this is that the likes of John Barnes are moaning about the lack of BAME and when we sacked CH we were vilified but he does not moan that his Beloved Liverpool have never had a Black manager, A way to raise the profile of Black managers would be one of the top 6 clubs to hire one but they wont. This all seems to be about the smaller clubs having to hire from BAME but the top 6 are above it as they are too important.

 

[GT49er]

So, what would we have had to do post Hughton (I know this is EFL, not PL - but it will come). We didn't invite applicants - so no-one could actually apply. How would we have had to do it?

....and more to the point, if we'd interviewed, say, Paul Ince and Sol Campbell as well as Potter {who we have been 'watching' for a long time) would the outcome have been any different?

 

[ATFC Seagull]

Two things on this:

One, it's worked in the NFL, despite facing all the same initial skepticism we're seeing here.

Two, the majority of BAME coaches support it, so I understand. It's their time that people are claiming is going to be "wasted". They don't have a problem.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

What if Progressive Town and their arch rivals Racist City are both recruiting at a similar time,

I think it’s unlikely we will be recruiting at the same time as Burnley.

 

[dingodan]

I can't help but feel that, "skin color shouldn't matter" & "Please make sure you clearly state your skin color on your application", are somewhat incompatible.

 

[Perkino]

I'd like to know how this worked with our recent appointment. Obviously once we sacked CH we identified Potter as an excellent replacement, we pursued him and paid a release fee to Swansea City for his services. Did we have to interview other candidates? One specifically being from the BAME community? Many clubs have a replacement in mind when they sack a manager

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

I'd like to know how this worked with our recent appointment. Obviously once we sacked CH we identified Potter as an excellent replacement, we pursued him and paid a release fee to Swansea City for his services. Did we have to interview other candidates? One specifically being from the BAME community? Many clubs have a replacement in mind when they sack a manager

Isn't the rule a Football League one, not PL ?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Exactly. Club decides well in advance whom they want to appoint, so they contact that person and reach agreement. They just have to say 'hold on, we can't officially name you as manager until we've found some BAME candidate that we have to interview, before rejecting them through no fault of their own'. What a farce.

It isn't quite like that.

This is about dealing with unconscious bias, not racism. Of course no racist board will appoint a BAME manager no matter how many apply. But the supposition is that such boards are a thing of the past (Jack Hayward RIP), and that if BAME managers don't get interviewed after applying it is due to unconscious bias (or ignorance as it used to be called - a bit like how your old nan used to talk about LGBT folk and black people, never having ever knowingly met or spoken to one).

This is nowhere near as onerous as some appear to think. The idea is that if BAME applicants apply at least one must be interviewed. Given that boards are not racists, just burdoned with unconscious bias, the expectation is that if a BAME candidate happened to be the best performer on interview, he or she (ha ha, just kidding) would get the job.

OK so what about a situation where the board have already identified their target? Surely, by law, them must advertise the job and interview. It is the same in every walk of life, isn't it? OK, the board may have already identified their leading candidate, but there is a chance another person they interview may blow them away.

So this is where I have a problem. What is the evidence any club advertises and interviews at all? How many people were interviewed after CH was sacked? Can anyone post the job ad? How many were interviewed? Do clubs like us act illegally, then, or is it that it was always OK to interview just the one guy, and now they will have to interview two (the one they want plus a BAME guy if the one they want isn't BAME)? One thing this will do is slow up the appointment process - getting a guy in as quickly as we got Harry Potter in will be impossible. It will take weeks.

I don't have any problem with the Rooney rule on the face of it, but it seems to me like it is being introduced here a bit like Cameron set up the Brexit vote.

Edit I see [MENTION=15182]Perkino[/MENTION] has raised similar issues above

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

....and more to the point, if we'd interviewed, say, Paul Ince and Sol Campbell as well as Potter {who we have been 'watching' for a long time) would the outcome have been any different?

It may have been, it may not. But the value of interviewing other candidates is logical and fair and is explained in my post above.

 

[Super Steve Earle]

Where does this all end. Paul Ince is probably best described as past his use by date in management terms. But what if he applies for 5 jobs and gets 5 interviews without getting the job. Has he been discriminated against or has the club simply appointed their view of the best person for the job? Are there sanctions against the 5 clubs? Do they have to justify their choice to a BAME panel of experts? Does a 6th club feel under extra pressure to appoint Mr Ince for fear of the venom of Barnes, Rose and others?

 

[Stat Brother]

Where does this all end.

Ideally when the managers are more representative of the former players from which they have been taken.



I hope this helps.

 

[sjamesb3466]

Personally with the financial rewards to be gained from success I think the likelihood of a talented manager not being given a job due to skin colour is dubious. Further to that, if a club does have a bias against BAME individuals surely they will simply not appoint the BAME candidate that they have been forced to interview so it seems like this will solve nothing.

 

[Acker79]

Personally with the financial rewards to be gained from success I think the likelihood of a talented manager not being given a job due to skin colour is dubious. Further to that, if a club does have a bias against BAME individuals surely they will simply not appoint the BAME candidate that they have been forced to interview so it seems like this will solve nothing.

This goes back to my exchange of points with TwoChoices. Whether the problem is racist owners or subconscious bias. One of two things is going on:

1) Clubs/Owners/CEOs are consciously racist. They will go through the process of interviewing BAME applicants, then give the job to a white manager (even if it means passing on a better manager because he is BAME). Nothing changes, there's still poor representation in management roles, and the law has had no impact. Nothing good happens, nothing bad happens (as in nothing directly related to the law being implemented, obviously if a great managerial candidate misses out on a job because he is BAME and the interviewers are racist, that's bad, but it's not the fault of the law)

2) Clus/Owners/CEOs are subconscious biased. They don't consider BAME applicants as candidates because they've been poisoned by systemic attitudes, the reducing of BAME players to physical aspects of speed, power, etc, while the white players are intelligent, have vision and nous. This law forces them to look at the applicant list, pick the best BAME candidate(s) to sit down with (along with as many white applicants as they like). It gives the BAME manager a chance they wouldn't have had before - the opportunity to show that they are, in fact, the best candidate. In this instance the law has improved representation, improved recruitment for clubs, and has had a positive impact on all except the managers who only got the job because the better candidate didn't get an invite to the interview process.

Either the Rooney rule helps as intended, or it has no impact despite its good intentions. So why oppose it?

 

[Wilko]

Two things on this:

One, it's worked in the NFL, despite facing all the same initial skepticism we're seeing here.

Two, the majority of BAME coaches support it, so I understand. It's their time that people are claiming is going to be "wasted". They don't have a problem.

I was going to ask this, as someone that does not watch or follow NFL I am interested to know if it has been successful. If it has, then it seems a good model to follow.

 

[Stat Brother]

I was going to ask this, as someone that does not watch or follow NFL I am interested to know if it has been successful. If it has, then it seems a good model to follow.

Having more black coaches has opened up another can of worms (unsurprisingly)

Black coaches are now seen as defensive.
While white ones are offensive.

To put it very bluntly, the black coaches are the brawn compared to white coaches brains.