By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
we have neil warnock in charge now,why not give it to him till the end of the season,why do you want to give J.F.H, the job,he is unproven,we could go down if this shambles contiues!
-1
sir les,what is your agenda? on 11:58 - Nov 23 with 2613 views
sir les,what is your agenda? on 11:40 - Nov 23 by Antti_Heinola
yeah that's why i said anecdotal evidence too - based on experiences from young black coaches. The fact that we're even debating it almost proves there's an issue - that some of our fans think Ramsey was appointed because he was black shows there's still an issue.
Anecdotal evidence is not evidence. It's an appeal to emotion.
It exists because we think it exists doesn't make sense and I think you know that.
That could be the case if not for the existence of affirmative action and the possibility that that might be true. If Ramsey was a legitimate candidate and the man who hired him wasn't very vocal on the subject and he was still being questioned then maybe you could argue that but there s certainly reason to believe that it influenced the decision. Can you say with 100% certainty that it didn't and that to believe otherwise indicates racism in someone?
As you know I think the most important factor is his personal relationship but I do think that he believes that he and Ramsey were held back from superior roles due to race.
You're constantly telling people that question you they are wrong because they haven't understood your point, so painfully make the same point in a different way. Reign in the condescension and stop taking yourself so seriously.
ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead
0
sir les,what is your agenda? on 12:18 - Nov 23 with 2578 views
sir les,what is your agenda? on 11:58 - Nov 23 by Mvpeter
Anecdotal evidence is not evidence. It's an appeal to emotion.
It exists because we think it exists doesn't make sense and I think you know that.
That could be the case if not for the existence of affirmative action and the possibility that that might be true. If Ramsey was a legitimate candidate and the man who hired him wasn't very vocal on the subject and he was still being questioned then maybe you could argue that but there s certainly reason to believe that it influenced the decision. Can you say with 100% certainty that it didn't and that to believe otherwise indicates racism in someone?
As you know I think the most important factor is his personal relationship but I do think that he believes that he and Ramsey were held back from superior roles due to race.
to 'believe' otherwise, yes, I certainly do think that indicates a form of racism in someone. To discuss it as a possibility, no. Personally, it didn't even cross my mind, but there you go.
Anecdotal evidence in something like this can't prove anything, but it is of course important. It can't simply be dismissed. You have to look at individual experiences.
Your figures are different to others I've seen too:
"According to a new report, conducted by Loughborough University’s Dr Steven Bradbury for the Sports People’s Think Tank, which was first revealed in the Observer last month, there has been “a systematic denial of talent and ambition”. Bradbury identified 552 senior coaching positions in English football and calculated that only 19 of them — 3.4% — were filled by BME candidates. This is a dismal return for a group that makes up 14% of the UK population."
And this is 'anecdotal evidence' of a sort, but no less important...
'Bradbury, a lecturer in young people and sport at Loughborough University, interviewed dozens of current and former players for his report... one, whom he prefers not to name, is a 40-something ex-pro who played more than 500 matches at Premier League and Championship level and now holds a Uefa Pro Licence, the highest coaching qualification. He has applied for 43 jobs in football clubs, but only received three interviews... “When he was a younger man and it was becoming apparent he wanted to go into coaching, some of the older black guys said to him: ‘You’re wasting your time, you won’t get an opportunity.’ And he was saying to these guys: ‘No, no, it’s different now.’ But now he’s in the same position and he was saying to me the other day: ‘I hate to say it, but they were right. I was naive. I didn’t think these barriers existed or were as strong as they are.’ The worst thing is when people are appointed to jobs with fewer qualifications and less experience than him and he’s not even granted an interview.”
Bare bones.
0
sir les,what is your agenda? on 13:09 - Nov 23 with 2537 views
This thread is something else. Started off repugnant and has descended from there into the most mind-blowing, ball-aching example of self-indulgent, totally irrelevant pedantry there has been outside an episode of QI.
6
sir les,what is your agenda? on 13:13 - Nov 23 with 2527 views
sir les,what is your agenda? on 12:10 - Nov 23 by simmo
FFS - Give it a rest, please!
You're constantly telling people that question you they are wrong because they haven't understood your point, so painfully make the same point in a different way. Reign in the condescension and stop taking yourself so seriously.
If they want to comment on my posts and tell me I'm wrong, I'll tell them why they are wrong.
I'm constantly told I'm wrong because of arguments I haven't made. So I point that out, if someone is unable to comprehend that it's not my fault is it?
sir les,what is your agenda? on 10:09 - Nov 22 by Antti_Heinola
Are we? Or is that fans projecting their own sense of desolation onto the club. We're just changing managers FFS. What's Les done? First of all, he's implementing and has implemented enormous change at a younger level, with loads of new scouts and coaches at all levels. We have a brand new facility for the youth. Second of all, he's brought in a policy of not paying expensive wages to has-been players. While many people have bizarrely written off several of our signings already, I believe the likes of Smithies, Luongo, Chery, Hall, Mackie, JET and hopefully Gladwin and hopefully Angella are/should be important players to this club in the medium term. Yes, bad signings too. Name me a club that ever makes 8 or 9 signings and they are all enormous successes. Ramsey was the wrong appointment. It was a risk, it backfired, sadly. But suggestions that Les appointed him because he was black are offensive. LF had worked with Ramsey for a while - he liked him, he felt he could work with him, and crucially he felt he was an excellent coach who perhaps had not had the opportunities he deserved. I don't think I'd have picked Ramsey, but then I've never met or worked with him. But it went wrong - that happens and happens at pretty much every club on earth. We're hardly unique there. So what *should* Les have done by now Blob? You know, in about 10 months of being in charge? How could we measure him a success or otherwise?
Laying the foundations at younger levels is important but their survival is somewhat contingent on 1st team success. Ultimately the 1st team is the bread and butter of the football club and hiring someone inexperienced and incompetent to lead that team just because they're mates and they've worked together in the past is poor decision making. Our directors need to put emotion to one side and make decisions that are in the best interests of a the football club.
1
sir les,what is your agenda? on 13:25 - Nov 23 with 2500 views
I like the idea of Jackett managing us too but you have perfectly captured the major flaw in that plan. Why would he come?
I'm thinking that given this, McDermott would be a good shout. RFA
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
0
sir les,what is your agenda? on 13:34 - Nov 23 with 2484 views
sir les,what is your agenda? on 13:09 - Nov 23 by Northernr
This thread is something else. Started off repugnant and has descended from there into the most mind-blowing, ball-aching example of self-indulgent, totally irrelevant pedantry there has been outside an episode of QI.
But it's all your fault, o overlord, for you hath smited Sexy Friday from the forum .
If we still had that thread fluttering its eyelids at us, we wouldn't be able to sustain this level of pedantry.
RFA PS: I know why you had to axe it...
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
sir les,what is your agenda? on 13:13 - Nov 23 by Mvpeter
If they want to comment on my posts and tell me I'm wrong, I'll tell them why they are wrong.
I'm constantly told I'm wrong because of arguments I haven't made. So I point that out, if someone is unable to comprehend that it's not my fault is it?
Yeah I know, everybody is an idiot except for you.
ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead
0
sir les,what is your agenda? on 13:43 - Nov 23 with 2470 views
sir les,what is your agenda? on 11:44 - Nov 23 by Mvpeter
'He is pro Rooney rule. He's not against discrimination at all.'
That is my original comment. How can my original post have been put there to hide my original mistake.
Clearly the confusion has arisen because you don't know what 'at all' means. Let me explain again. It means to any extent, under any circumstances, in any way. I should have written it the way I did as that is the correct English for what I wished to say. Writing statements so that you can disprove them is not my intention no matter how much you wish that was so.
'He is not against discrimination at all' means that there isn't one member, not even one, of the set of things called discrimination that he is not against'
No. Look up the term. 'He is not against discrimination at all' means that he is not against discrimination under any circumstances, he is against it under certain beneficial to him circumstances.
Hitler is not against murder at all even if he was against the murder of Germans because murder as a concept is something he employed.
[Post edited 23 Nov 2015 14:13]
"That is my original comment. How can my original post have been put there to hide my original mistake." Have a re-read of my last post. You'll see I was quoting from your 'explanation'.
I am comfortable that my definition of 'He is not against discrimination at all' is the correct logical definition.
Your retort isn't even syntactically intelligible.
When it comes down to it, I don't believe that you think that Les has no objection to discrimination. I think that your aim is to portray Les as a hypocrite. Then, what else might you think he'd do, above and beyond Rooney?
sir les,what is your agenda? on 12:18 - Nov 23 by Antti_Heinola
to 'believe' otherwise, yes, I certainly do think that indicates a form of racism in someone. To discuss it as a possibility, no. Personally, it didn't even cross my mind, but there you go.
Anecdotal evidence in something like this can't prove anything, but it is of course important. It can't simply be dismissed. You have to look at individual experiences.
Your figures are different to others I've seen too:
"According to a new report, conducted by Loughborough University’s Dr Steven Bradbury for the Sports People’s Think Tank, which was first revealed in the Observer last month, there has been “a systematic denial of talent and ambition”. Bradbury identified 552 senior coaching positions in English football and calculated that only 19 of them — 3.4% — were filled by BME candidates. This is a dismal return for a group that makes up 14% of the UK population."
And this is 'anecdotal evidence' of a sort, but no less important...
'Bradbury, a lecturer in young people and sport at Loughborough University, interviewed dozens of current and former players for his report... one, whom he prefers not to name, is a 40-something ex-pro who played more than 500 matches at Premier League and Championship level and now holds a Uefa Pro Licence, the highest coaching qualification. He has applied for 43 jobs in football clubs, but only received three interviews... “When he was a younger man and it was becoming apparent he wanted to go into coaching, some of the older black guys said to him: ‘You’re wasting your time, you won’t get an opportunity.’ And he was saying to these guys: ‘No, no, it’s different now.’ But now he’s in the same position and he was saying to me the other day: ‘I hate to say it, but they were right. I was naive. I didn’t think these barriers existed or were as strong as they are.’ The worst thing is when people are appointed to jobs with fewer qualifications and less experience than him and he’s not even granted an interview.”
To discuss it as a possibility is to accept it as a possibility. If it is possible and the evidence is enough to convince them then belief is not indicative of bias.
No you do not have to look at individual experiences as individual perception of experiences is anecdotal evidence. It can simply be dismissed if the evidence is contrary.
Your figures are for BME coaches of any kind + academy directors etc etc rather than just black managers which explains the difference.
I have to admit I'm quite shocked by that. While the methodology for that is very poor that's still a very low total and I doubt it's fully covered by that. (There's obvious mistakes such as what has been classed as a coaching role, assuming every club has just one first team coach when basic starting knowledge or research should have shown otherwise, assuming they all have an academy director) As I say I'd like to see what the levels are in all coaching as that's where I believe we will first see ethnic representation (BME youth and senior coaches as a % of coaches) but that doesn't bode too well. I thought it would be getting close to 10%.
That being said that anecdotal evidence is as poor a piece of evidence as you could hope to see. An alleged recital of an anonymous man's claim.
sir les,what is your agenda? on 13:34 - Nov 23 by R_from_afar
But it's all your fault, o overlord, for you hath smited Sexy Friday from the forum .
If we still had that thread fluttering its eyelids at us, we wouldn't be able to sustain this level of pedantry.
RFA PS: I know why you had to axe it...
Men leering over pictures of tits is high brow compared to five pages of this. Reading through it has been like taking my own eye out with a hot spoon and pouring drain cleaner into the empty socket.
I read a few of my angry posts from the match thread immediately after the Middlesbrough goal on Friday back on Saturday and thought "fck mate, you sound like a right cnt". I'd strongly advise other posters to do the same. There hasn't been a collection of arshole points of view like this in a non-Chelsea context for fcking years.
This post has been edited by an administrator
0
sir les,what is your agenda? on 14:07 - Nov 23 with 2403 views
sir les,what is your agenda? on 13:43 - Nov 23 by isawqpratwcity
"That is my original comment. How can my original post have been put there to hide my original mistake." Have a re-read of my last post. You'll see I was quoting from your 'explanation'.
I am comfortable that my definition of 'He is not against discrimination at all' is the correct logical definition.
Your retort isn't even syntactically intelligible.
When it comes down to it, I don't believe that you think that Les has no objection to discrimination. I think that your aim is to portray Les as a hypocrite. Then, what else might you think he'd do, above and beyond Rooney?
Your last post. 'What does at all mean in that sentence? Nothing. You only put it there to try to slip past your original mistake.'
You outright state that I put 'at all' in after the fact to hide a mistake. This is and has been shown to be demonstrably untrue. It was there originally.
Be comfortable but I'd avoid the dictionary if you'd like that to continue.
'Your retort isn't even syntactically intelligible.' Bland assertion.
I do believe that Les has no objection to discrimination when it suits him because he's stated that he is for a type of discrimination and to say he doesn't is false.
Even I'm bored as fck over this. I'll reply to Antii because he's at least talking about something of relevance.
And to add to all the fun Hitler gets a mention. It's at times like these when you start to ask yourself the serious question is it better to have an eco burial or trust to cremation?
sir les,what is your agenda? on 13:58 - Nov 23 by Mvpeter
To discuss it as a possibility is to accept it as a possibility. If it is possible and the evidence is enough to convince them then belief is not indicative of bias.
No you do not have to look at individual experiences as individual perception of experiences is anecdotal evidence. It can simply be dismissed if the evidence is contrary.
Your figures are for BME coaches of any kind + academy directors etc etc rather than just black managers which explains the difference.
I have to admit I'm quite shocked by that. While the methodology for that is very poor that's still a very low total and I doubt it's fully covered by that. (There's obvious mistakes such as what has been classed as a coaching role, assuming every club has just one first team coach when basic starting knowledge or research should have shown otherwise, assuming they all have an academy director) As I say I'd like to see what the levels are in all coaching as that's where I believe we will first see ethnic representation (BME youth and senior coaches as a % of coaches) but that doesn't bode too well. I thought it would be getting close to 10%.
That being said that anecdotal evidence is as poor a piece of evidence as you could hope to see. An alleged recital of an anonymous man's claim.
Definitely.
Bare bones.
1
(No subject) (n/t) on 15:59 - Nov 23 with 2285 views
I know almost nothing about the Premier League even though I try to catch the big games every now and then at the end of the season. But I will say this, Queens Park Rangers is just a fukking sick ass team name. Just sounds so cool.
0
sir les,what is your agenda? on 15:59 - Nov 23 with 2285 views
Ramsey got the gig as he was the only show in town.
I know almost nothing about the Premier League even though I try to catch the big games every now and then at the end of the season. But I will say this, Queens Park Rangers is just a fukking sick ass team name. Just sounds so cool.
0
sir les,what is your agenda? on 16:08 - Nov 23 with 2264 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
. 
