Deano6

I'm starting to think you guys don't really understand the Rooney Rule... Yes, hypo, I'm pretty sure Latinos and Asians are also considered minorities in the UK so would fall under it. Possibly women too, in the context of football - depends how it would be written. Only you have decided it is specifically for black men. Your biggest problem with it is the petrol costs of the trip? Is that it? I like you Turkish, I enjoy reading your posts and you often brutally expose the stupidity of others' posts. However this is a pretty silly line of reasoning. You do realise the Rooney Rule does not compel a black manager to apply for a job he doesn't want, or attend an interview he does not want to go to? If such a manager genuinely thinks he has a chance at a post that interests him (or her, I'll stick with him for ease) then he is at liberty to accept any interview offered to him. Otherwise he can decide not to waste his time. I do accept it's a sensitive subject and not a simple black and white (pun genuinely not intended, for once). It does make me uncomfortable on one level that any kind of affirmative action is being proposed, when the utopia is that race is not a differential in anyone's minds. But there does seem to be a case that very few managers are from minorities, and this seems a very benign way of attempting to remove any barriers that may be there. It's one of those policies that probably won't yield immediate results, and it will be very easy to point to an isolated example where it seems unnecessary (you have already imagined such hypotheticals for me) but seems on balance to be a step in the right direction with no real downside. More minorities will get interviews, perhaps more minorities will be hired as coaches, perhaps not. But at least then we'll know it wasn't due to unconscious biases against them based on racial preconceptions. And what's the downside? A person who wasn't the best candidate got an interview, along with a number of other applicants who weren't the best candidate? So what. It's all too easy to say "But there just aren't any good managers out there who aren't white men". And a cursory look down the list may suggest you are right. But I was struck recently by something that happened to me in my work. I work for a global firm and was at a "Town Hall" event where some of the leaders were there talking about their experiences and paths of how they got there. Every single one of the eight or so people up on stage were middle aged white men. I've never really considered that I would want to / be able to become a position of leadership like them. However as I listened to them all speak, I was struck by the thought "Wait a minute, these guys are all not so different to me. I'll be a middle aged white guy myself soon enough. If I keep on doing what I'm doing there's no reason I couldn't get there too, it's the natural path." This thought then led me on to think that if I were from a minority I would have the opposite take - that either I have to fight and smash through a glass ceiling here or just accept that I'm never going to make it. Being a natural coward I'm sure I would have opted for the latter. I believe it's exactly these subtle, unconscious moments that lead to a position where certain people in society feel their options are limited and get put off from every attempting to make it. If it takes a bit of active intervention for a period to start to lift this, then I welcome it. Anyway, that's my position laid out in a bit more detail, for others to pick apart. My primary response still remains: what's the downside in bringing in the Rooney Rule? Either it's a massive success, or else every job goes to exactly who it would have gone to anyway and a few people from minorities got interviews for jobs they applied to. Remind me the objection?

But I honestly don't see what the problem is. It's, what, an hour out of their day? And who knows one day it may actually lead to a hire.

Give them less money then and let the market figure out the new appropriate level. They won't even be worse off, just less will go to tyrants like Unbelievable Jeff.

As I understand the Rooney Rule, it only requires certain minorities to be interviewed. Not be offered the job. What's the problem? Are those extra couple of hours going to sink the club? If they are not the best candidate they won't get hired so then what's the harm. It's about opening people's minds to other possibilities they may have (subconsciously) ruled out. In time the likelihood is someone will get hired that would not have been considered under the current status quo. Call me a lefty liberal wooly tree-hugging hipster if you want, but I really don't see the issue with it. The only people who should feel threatened by it are those less qualified who are worried the competition will get stronger...if so, tough sh1t!

That German striker - coooey, yes please! That German keeper - coooey, no thanks! Well played JWP...similar to the Palace goal, without the keeper bothering to spill it this time. Thanks for the link ART!

As opposed to...his Dad!

Only stand once every 5 years?

They won too, 5-4 on pens!

I'd take a keeper with poor kicking over one who can't prevent goals going past him.

Fair play to Hodgson. Too easy to criticise, but he got selections right today.

Then we go for whomever he displaces at Arsenal of Liverpool. It's simple. The merry-go-round keeps turning until it reaches us.

Presumably he didn't know it had been deleted when he first started looking for it. I did the same (though didn't have Turks on ignore, as he's wonderful). Always interesting to see what gets pulled up for permaban (or tempoban in this case).

Ok sorry, my bad... --------------------Hart-------------------- Walker---Alderweireld---Fonte-------Bertrand -------Schneiderlin-----Wanyama------------ Sterling----------Rooney-------------Lallana ----------------Sturridge-------------------

Good question! --------------------Hart--------------------- Clyne----Alderweireld----Fonte-------Bertrand -------Schneiderlin-----Wanyama------------ Sterling----------Rooney-------------Lallana ----------------Sturridge-------------------

I've noticed "weird" and "odd" are used as the go-to perjoratives on this forum, as if they are in and of themselves the worst thing possible.

Hey pap, I am a racist.

I am now sad about losing another hot prospect, that I didn't even know we had before I opened the thread.

woah Just had a quick go at this...

OMG - you do sound like my sister! I guess we better put that sex we were planning on hold.

Yeah, me too.

You probably know my sister, she was at St Anne's and is same age as you (if I read the last page right). I also went to Imperial...so perhaps you are my sister!!

This is Day 3 and still no news of this guy having scouted or recruited anybody. ROSS WILSON OUT!!!

I'm disappointed! Nobody's taken this on and really given it a go. I think it just requires a bit of GCSE trigonometry! Thanks for your responses tho... I don't think this is completely right, Sarnie sir. I think it only depends on the ratio of the height to the diameter - you can make the actual diameter anything you want and it doesn't change the answer. That's why it's irrelevant that the barrel is small (2L), so I'm rejecting this answer as incomplete. Also volume is easily calculated if you know the diameter of the base and the height (if you assume the barrel is a cylinder), so that is not a separate consideration. Angels' share my arse...your mate was necking the stuff!! Thanks Norway old fella! She's a very lucky lady. Thanks ecuk268! Some good information here in your response. I'm less impressed by the link. It might contain the right answer, but to me it's just a fairly impenetrable page and I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be looking at. However, unfortunately your solution of "So the answer depends on how much you put in the barrel" is also marked as incomplete, since I've told you how much I put in it - it is a quarter full. Don't give up! There are two choices: (a) I could stand the barrel up, or not do that. (b) I could lay the barrel down, or not do that. ...the two are somewhat dependent on each other. I just made that up, not sure if I get away with it. I did! That was what their customer service people asked when I complained about the first spigot, but I had followed all the instructions given. I then cured it again when I got the second spigot, even though there was no real need to as it's the barrel you're curing not the spigot...but belt and braces. Nevertheless I still got a crack in the second spigot.