Academy news in conjunction with Premier League

[caj85]

From the gist of the statement it sounds like this role wouldn't actually exist if it wasn't for the PL supporting it so nobody would have/be able to get the job, and maybe the PL are even paying for it as part of their patronising 'We're loaded you can have a few crumbs off the table' levelling up agenda.

It's coaching kids, keeping them off the streets and if not finding a future diamond, shaping them into decent people. We, along with PNE were the only two from the lower leagues who were chosen for this - shouldn't we be proud of this?

Exactly. A white male hasn't missed out on this as it wouldn't exist if the Premier League didn't create these chances for under represented people.

This might even create permeant roles at the clubs after the initial 23 months that could be open to everyone.

[Magpike]

Your white privilege is duly noted. Thank you.

Blah blah trotting out the old white privilege line. Pathetic cliche

[OchPie]

Agree, they might want to re-phrase that, recruitment should be based on the best person for the job that's it.

In my years recruiting, I've seldom if ever found there was only one "best person for the job". What has been very true though is that you can only hire people that apply, and I've found that, too often, certain demographics can be put off applying if they feel it is hopeless.

[OP67]

I'm mixed heritage, half Anglo-Saxon and half Celt where do I sign?

I do find it odd that only 2 EFL clubs are taking part in this, did all the others say "no thanks"?

[OchPie]

I do find it odd that only 2 EFL clubs are taking part in this, did all the others say "no thanks"?

The scheme has been running a few years.

Also I'm a bit confused by the "two clubs" claim since Leeds have a vacancy under the Coach Inclusion and Diversity Scheme too. I guess they could be in the EPL next season.

https://www.leedsunited.com/news/clu...versity-scheme

[keldsyke]

In my years recruiting, I've seldom if ever found there was only one "best person for the job". What has been very true though is that you can only hire people that apply, and I've found that, too often, certain demographics can be put off applying if they feel it is hopeless.

Ok, the best person from those that apply, if you feel that it's hopeless before you apply then you are probably the wrong person for the job anyway.

[queenslandpie]

This is hardly Dianne Abbot stuff is it. We are giving a chance to a Coach who otherwise might not get a chance. In an Academy Team which if memory serves me correct finished pretty much bottom. It's really not a big deal. Just let whoever comes in have a stab at it. You never know they might be quite good. If they are not it isn't going to make a lot of difference is it. it also means we have more money to spend on keeping Langstaff!

[OchPie]

Ok, the best person from those that apply, if you feel that it's hopeless before you apply then you are probably the wrong person for the job anyway.

I've also hired people that I had to talk into applying but who once in the recruitment process did amazingly, and who went on to do the job very well too. If you think a job is a closed shop, applying can feel like a massive waste of time.

[queenslandpie]

What a lot of fuss over this. To me it shows the unfortunate undertone of certain posters. I mean let a thousand blossoms bloom as far as I am concerned. If we get a free coach when we didn't have a coach and he happens to have to come from a certain portfolio that's fine by me. if we are giving someone a chance who otherwise might not get one that's also fine. if we save 60 grand on a wage or whatever it is that's also fine. Nobody is missing out because of this. There is only upside.

[Glad2BeAPie]

Who sacks them if they prove to be useless, do we keep them regardless.