I see both sides of this and thought it was an interesting discussion. Putting aside (as we should) the blatantly racist proportion of the issue, I do want to believe that everyone with a reasonable view wants to see the best candidate with the best chance of making your club successful, be appointed.
It's just how we get there. I bristle at the idea of quotas and the Rooney rule because they too are blatantly discriminatory. But, as Barnes says, what's the better proposal?
I think there is also a discussion or misunderstanding over the 4% black coaches in the game lining up with 4% or the British population being back so it's fair, versus 40% of the players in the top league being black compared to that 4% going into coaching.
We have to go with the 40% side as the indicator, in football. We have to. Those players are signed or successful because of ability. Luck, sure like any other player, but ability and stature. Kompany is considered a great defender on premier league history because of what he did, not his skin colour. How grateful are we that we got him for city when we could have had any number of white players who were never half the player?
Management should be on merit. That merit should be determined by specifics like past managerial career, but also by ability to motivate, develop players, get people onboard, tactical ability. The results are almost an irrelevant factor and who can guarantee results in football? I mean in the sense that no hiring board can say which candidate can get the results for sure, just which may give their club and set of players the best chance to get requests, develop, earn a big transfer fee... Whatever that clubs goals are.
For new managers getting into it, this is where black managers have to be listened to with more effort as there are so few with past experience let alone past success, which in itself is not suggestive or black managers are worse just that the weight of averages means less can succeed at the top because there are just less of them.
Clubs need to start thinking, if 40% of my players are potentially going to be black, how do I best motivate them both individually and as part of a group. Having a black manager could actually increase standards, it's just how we get there without disadvantaging another group. Two wrongs don't make a right, and I'm sure no black candidate wants to get a job offer, or even an interview, just because of the colour of their skin. Having worked for a company that tried address it's 'old white men' leadership issue by specifically employing younger, female and non whites ahead of the better or more capable candidates in some cases, I can testify that it causes much anger and further issues, ultimately undermining the leadership itself and the performance of the business.
There's a serious disconnect between the involvement of black players as players and as coaches. I think all this discussion does is highlight that, and ultimately it's the clubs who are losing out. But the issue of how to solve it remains.
Personally, I think that the only way it really changes is if we see the evidence and want to copy, just like Pep. If Vinny was to come over to the world biggest domestic league, win it and do things pep-like, then guess who will want to copy that blueprint for success. Everyone. You'll still have ye vast majority of black managers getting crap results, just like the majority of white managers, but what may change is the appointability of black managers and coaches depending on the circumstances of the hiring club and ideas and ability of the manager themselves.
Then there's also the whole discussion of do former players even make the best managers? Probably not in every case. For every Pep there are a hundred Rooneys.
Sorry for the long post, it's a complicated issue, bit one, I have to believe, that most fans realise isn't quite right as it is.
