Academy news in conjunction with Premier League

[slack_pie]

Brilliant post Old_pie. You are quite right in questioning why you feel the need to make your statement.
I think that second merged post titled “Racism at Notts County” should have been more accurately titled “Racism amongst a few Notts County fans”.
Unfortunately there are some in society who have these views and we at Notts County are not immune.

I didn't see a single racist comment in this thread. Just people expressing concerns about whether it's OK to open job opportunities for certain demographics but not others. This is an important conversation to have, and shutting it down by saying anyone who disagrees with you is "racist" doesn't really help. Not everything is black and white.

[keldsyke]

I didn't see a single racist comment in this thread. Just people expressing concerns about whether it's OK to open job opportunities for certain demographics but not others. This is an important conversation to have, and shutting it down by saying anyone who disagrees with you is "racist" doesn't really help. Not everything is black and white.

Agree 110% .... again none as racist than those who cry racist themselves ... amazing how people want inclusivity but don't actually want it!

[BanjoPie]

Well, I would say that if applying for the role of Assistant Youth Development Phase Coach & Academy Analyst was restricted to wa*kers only, there are one or two posters on here that would be able to apply

[Mark_Ross]

A lot of surprisingly utopian posts on here!

Do you lot really believe it's always the best person that gets the job?

There are myriad ways that candidates are unfairly selected through:
Money, threats, influence, power, religion, politics, prestige, looks, nationality, nepotism, friendships, regionalism, privilege, class, gender, ethnicity, etc...

I've seen it happen. And even when the selection process is exemplary, you end up with several candidates who are equally suitable. Then the final choice is made by bias and prejudice!

[slack_pie]

A lot of surprisingly utopian posts on here!

Do you lot really believe it's always the best person that gets the job?

There are myriad ways that candidates are unfairly selected through:
Money, threats, influence, power, religion, politics, prestige, looks, nationality, nepotism, friendships, regionalism, privilege, class, gender, ethnicity, etc...

I've seen it happen. And even when the selection process is exemplary, you end up with several candidates who are equally suitable. Then the final choice is made by bias and prejudice!

I agree that there are potentially infinite reasons why one person might get a job over another. I just don't think that reducing it down to one or two factors - ethnicity and gender - shows a full understanding of the complexity we're talking about here.

Perhaps ethnicity and gender play a part, but if the answer is to block entire demographics from opportunities to fix that issue, then we'd also need to block anyone from middle/upper class backgrounds, straight people, able-bodied people, able-minded people, people who grew up in settled and loving homes, people who went to good schools, people with high IQs, good-looking people, people with friends or family in positions of power, and anyone else with an inherent advantage - because not doing so would be unfair, right?

[Mark_Ross]

I agree that there are potentially infinite reasons why one person might get a job over another. I just don't think that reducing it down to one or two factors - ethnicity and gender - shows a full understanding of the complexity we're talking about here.

Perhaps ethnicity and gender play a part, but if the answer is to block entire demographics from opportunities to fix that issue, then we'd also need to block anyone from middle/upper class backgrounds, straight people, able-bodied people, able-minded people, people who grew up in settled and loving homes, people who went to good schools, people with high IQs, good-looking people, people with friends or family in positions of power, and anyone else with an inherent advantage - because not doing so would be unfair, right?

Yes. I was just trying to say: "If you think about it, there's no such thing as (completely) fair job candidate selection".
Why are people getting so upset by attempts to redress a few imbalances?

FWIW I'm not convinced by such attempts. They're gifting 'ammo' to the populist right.
Anyway, it seems to me like tying oranges onto an apple tree.

[SwalePie]

Well, I would say that if applying for the role of Assistant Youth Development Phase Coach & Academy Analyst was restricted to wa*kers only, there are one or two posters on here that would be able to apply

Yes, we do seem to have a lot of pedestrians don't we?

[TedBovisPie]

Note that they need to have UEFA B licence so worse case Notts end up with a couple of free coaches can’t be that bad a thing even if it comes with the DEI nonsense.

[durhampie]

Note that they need to have UEFA B licence so worse case Notts end up with a couple of free coaches can’t be that bad a thing even if it comes with the DEI nonsense.

Doesn't Maynard only have a EUFA B Licence .. I recall JOB having the EUFA A Licence.. No wonder they got rid..

[LaxtonLad]

A lot of surprisingly utopian posts on here!

Do you lot really believe it's always the best person that gets the job?

There are myriad ways that candidates are unfairly selected through:
Money, threats, influence, power, religion, politics, prestige, looks, nationality, nepotism, friendships, regionalism, privilege, class, gender, ethnicity, etc...

I've seen it happen. And even when the selection process is exemplary, you end up with several candidates who are equally suitable. Then the final choice is made by bias and prejudice!

And tits.