It is very different. Supermarket products are not people. Nobody is discriminated against by a lower price on a product, because everyone has access to thay product regardless of ethnicity and sex. And thats the point.
Discounted Referee Courses
- Thread starter grey59
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
- Status
As was your benefits analogy since we are not attempting to increase the number of BAME groups accessing the welfare system. These are all just examples of the many ways that we see different groups treat differently.
As rusty has said you may not like it but it's factual that if positive action isn't taken representation for these groups remains low.
So, if you've got better ideas to increase representation of minority groups then I'm sure the FA, your employer and your MP would love to hear them..
Ive already said that I think sports are terrible at selling officiating to people. Alot of adult refs get in to it to 'give something back'. Like its a sacrifice. Same issue with cricket in the UK, which has a large Asian playing contingent but an incredibly low number who become umpires. It's not about financing the course, its about attracting people, all people, to become umpires.
We have an issue of attracting Asian participation into playing organised football, but the answer is not to provide free access to football teams, that wouldn't help and would be devisive across the demographic. I dont have an MP where I am, but there is an issue with attracting the increasing number of economic migrants into organised sports where I am, and I say that as an economic migrant myself. There are BAME refs here who i consider friends, and they share the same opinion as me on this matter. But its a small sample size.
You have managed to put across so many points that i failed to. Points well made. I'm not a great writer.
There are a lot of people who cannot afford the referee course easily, or at all, but they get no help at all because they are 99% male and white.
Others get if for free based or race or colour. Not fair and VERY divisive. How does that help cohesion? It only creates resentment.
If people want to referee they will come forward (if they can afford it). But the FA wants to tick boxes.
Why are people on here so keen to defend the increasing anti-white bias of the FA? This is my perception of what i am seeing.
Ben has a BAME friend who finds the status quo wrong. Tells you something, doesn't it?
Last edited:
Cricket another great example of an institution that’s old school. Playing a sport is easier because you require little to no interaction with the governing body that’s usually a few decades behind social change - officiating is the opposite. Have you got an actual better solution than positive action?
Sorry, but that is complete and utter claptrap. How can the FA have an anti-white bias when he percentage of ethnic minority referees is vastly lower than the overall percentage of the population. That is absolute fact, the data is out there publicly for all to see, the same as it is for the percentage of female referees versus the percentage of females in the population.
You can have an opinion, but you can't accuse an organisation of being anti-white just to support a political idealism. There are plenty of other forums to go to for that discussion should you want to.
Also a reminder that if you make a libellous comment, which accusing an organisation of being anti-white without evidence undoubtedly is, and their lawyers contact us you are not an anonymous person on a forum, we would be forced to hand over your actual identity if they have gone through the relevant process.
The cricket example is perfect though. Those of Asian heritage dont see Asian umpires which directly correlates to lower representation in that group.
If positive action was taken, and this might be reduced course fee, or some other initiative, then you would start to see representation rise. People, through subconscious affinity bias see the fact that umpiring is very under represented and this becomes a barrier. So action is needed to remove that barrier.
Of course there will always be people whom sit outside of these stereotypical scenarios, and they will feel that way because they didn't see the barrier or they had a role model that reduced the barrier or they were conditioned in a way that they want to break that barrier down. Again history shows us trail blazers whom break the norm - there is always a 1st woman, or 1st specific ethnic representative. Except for the moon landing we rarely hear the first male, the first white British, because we are privileged by history.
I can understand people resenting because they don't see a problem or unaware of biases or what they can do to combat them but thankfully the world, the government and our institutions are willing to accept the facts of bias and take positive action to make refereeing more accessible for those groups (which goes beyond financials)
Luckily we are in a country where people can state their perception of what they are seeing without being permanently shut down by people like you.
You know there is an agenda being driven by the FA that MOST (my opinion) will not agree with it.
Stating the FA have an agenda, for me, is not libellous. You can see from all their initiatives it's fact.
I can see that you feel strongly about it. Its not a case of shutting you down. But one of the ways in which we can reduce the impact of unconscious bias is to challenge and share our thoughts and opinions.
If you have other ideas on how to increase representation from minority groups let us know what they are.
This goes beyond money. It's not about making it cheap. It's about increasing participation through all minority groups.
The FA could reduce the cost of the course for everyone. But this would probably just increase the existing demographic and do nothing to increase participation amongst minority groups.
So I say again, apart from rehashing this same conversation over and over, what other ideas do you have, or do you not consider under representation of minority groups as an issue?
I'm not sure what the answer is but financial help is something a lot of people could do with but most are not entitled to.
There has to be a way to help those people too.
I'm just all for fairness and this is not. There has to be something better though i am sure.
But it also not fair that we have created a society that minority groups see as inaccessible. Not because it's costs money but because they dont see people who look the same as them doing it. So the idea, which is a proven concept, is to increase the range of demographics within the society which in time will lead to a more diverse workforce as those from the represented groups see that it so possible.
The reduced fees won't last forever. There will come a time where positive action is not needed and so it won't be legal to use it.
I think if you reframed this away from minority groups to general cost for all you'd perhaps get a warmer reception although I still think we we have differing opinions there.
bester
RefChat Addict
On average roughly 30% of participants in cricket are Asian. In some areas significantly more.
How would it be viewed if there was positive action only available to whites to encourage more participants from white backgrounds so we have equal representation?
Many fast food restaurants are 90% non-white staff. Have you ever seen a white only advertisement or any calls for equal representation?
How would it be viewed if there was positive action only available to whites to encourage more participants from white backgrounds so we have equal representation?
Many fast food restaurants are 90% non-white staff. Have you ever seen a white only advertisement or any calls for equal representation?
Let's be clear, I'm not shutting anyone down. You said, I quote directly "the increasing anti-white bias of the FA", that isn't stating your perception, it is effectively accusing an organisation of discriminating against white people. That isn't you having an opinion or perception, it is making a statement that you cannot provide evidence for, which is the very definition of libel.
As others have said, what would you do differently to increase participation across groups that are clearly underrepresented in football? Or are you happy that refereeing remains a mainly white, English, male domain despite the vastly different demographic of the nation?
sorry but i stand by my view of the fa based on the continual initiatives aimed at a very small percentage of the population.a
on a broader point bester makes an excellent point. i noted you have made no comment.
do you think positive action should be taken in this regard? my local cricket team is about 50%(asian bame) but my area is about 8% bame. shall we let positive action be taken? how silly.
That's one team. So obviously not. One team is not a representative sample.
In this country, and certainly basing this off the demographic of the national team (1 Asian 1 black) white British males still dominate the sport despite some areas having a greater level of diversity. Therefore, there is unlikely a case for positive action towards white people here.
But the top of cricket is 99% white, playing at grassroots is accessible. Accessing the sport beyond club level administration (basically once you start to interact with those very white institutions like ECB or CFAs) is much harder and that shows by the fact BAME people and women make up a good chunk of players in most sports but a tiny proportion of referees, coaches and leadership.
But it absolutely is about making it cheap. Thats literally what its about, because thats what they've done to tey and increase participation from BAME people.
I dont look at this in the same way as you. You say that making it cheap for everyone just increases existing demographics. 1. More deprived areas have a higher % of BAME people, so targeting them areas with economic incentives for all people will naturally increase BAME participation, and do so without discriminating against white people. 2. When targeting one demographic above another, and as you say, looking to change the demographic, what is happening there is 'quota's'. And quotas in sport have a rather chequered history.
bester
RefChat Addict
Don't disagree, although the use of stats is switched between general population demographics and demographics of playing participants depending on which one makes diversity look worse.
It's around 6% of South Asian heritage at the top level which is similar to the population level of South Asians.
At the top level black football players are over represented compared to the general population and grass root participants.
You didn't address the fact "positive action" will never be considered in favour of whites.
We would have positive action in favour of white people if there were any evidence of them being a disadvantaged group that faces barriers BASED ON THEIR RACE.
- Status