But that's not what he's saying. He's saying that footballs governing body should, in some way, be reflective of the people who play the game. On that board (of 115 people) you might expect more than 4 women and 5 none white people, as well as a much younger average age. It doesn't read that white people are thick and should be usurped due to their skin colour, just that the board should have a bit more diversity about it.blue b4 the moon - No, my comment was not aimed at you. Just highlighting the double-standards in society. The individual who made the original statement to the media is probably too stupid to see how racist it is. The skills of an FA appointee, good or bad, are not a function of skin colour.
The BBC have a definite football agenda at the corporate level. Not entirely sure why though. I does smell like corruption though.Radio 5 live did the 9am phone in. It was headlined 'Old White men of the FA'. By caller number two the theme had changed to 'attack the Premier League'. Very rarely did it go back to the FA and what the original article was about, it was just centred on too much money in th PL, over paid foriegn players stopping british kids etc etc.
Now call me cynical but it was as if the BBC were deliberately moving the debate away from the FA, kind of protecting the corrupt hand that feeds you?
So by the same criteria you should have a problem that the cricket team has 4 muslims or 90% plus of prison inmates are men?But that's not what he's saying. He's saying that footballs governing body should, in some way, be reflective of the people who play the game. On that board (of 115 people) you might expect more than 4 women and 5 none white people, as well as a much younger average age. It doesn't read that white people are thick and should be usurped due to their skin colour, just that the board should have a bit more diversity about it.